U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR
GARFIELD AND WHIITON COUNTIES
WASHINGTON
EPA REGION X
WORKING PAPER No, 876
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
t^G.P.O. 699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
LOWER GRANITI RESERVOIR
GARFIELD AND WHITEN COUNTIES
WASHINGTON
EPA REGION X
WORKING PAPER No, 876
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
AND THE
WASHINGTON NATIONAL GUARD
JULY, 1977
-------
REPORT ON LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR
GARFIELD AND WHITMAN COUNTIES, WASHINGTON
EPA REGION X
by
National Eutrophication Survey
Water and Land Quality Branch
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring & Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada
and
Special Studies Branch
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon
Working Paper No. 876
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
July 1977
-------
I
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword
List of iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake Characteristics 3
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
V. Literature Reviewed 10
VI. Appendices 11
-------
ii
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated In 1972 in
response to an Administration comitment 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, concen-
trations, 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 nonpoint source pollution abatement in lake water-
sheds.
ANALYTIC APPROACH
The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for the
Surveys 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
watershed 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 [ 3O3(e)], water quality criteria/standards review
[ 3O3(c)], clean lakes [ 3l4(a,b)], and water quality monitoring
{ 1O6 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 concentrations (and loading) and trophic condition
are being made to advance the rationale and data base for refine-
ment of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nations freshwater
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 the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Washington Department of
Ecology for professional involvement, to the Washington National
Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey,
and to those Washington wastewater treatment plant operators who
provided effluent samples and flow data.
Ms. Barbara Blau, Lake Restoration Program, and the staff
of the Washington Department of Ecology, Lake Restoration Program,
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.
Major General Howard S. McGee, Adjutant General of Washington,
and Project Officer Colonel Clinton C. Johnson, who directed the
volunteer efforts of the Washington National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF WASHINGTON
LAKE NAME COUNTY
American Lake Pierce
Banks Lake Grant, Douglas
Chelan Lake Chelan
Diamond Lake Pend Oreille
Green Lake King
Keechelus Lake Kittitas
Mayfield Lake Lewis
Medical Lake Spokane
Moses Lake Grant
Ozette Lake Clallam
Sammamish Lake King
Lake Whatcom Whatcom
Lower Granite Reservoir Garfield, Whatcom
-------
LOWER
-I .
LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR
X lake Sampling Site
0
GRANITE
.7...
.4
,0 )
-... :
-------
REPORT ON LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR, WASHINGTON
STORET NO. 5313
I. INTRODUCTION
Lower Granite Reservoir was included in the National Eutrophi-
cation Survey (NES) as a water body of special interest to the
Washington Department of Ecology. Tributaries and nutrient sources
were not sampled, and this report relates only to the data obtained
from lake sampling.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:*
Based upon Survey data Lower Granite Reservoir is consid-
ered eutrophic, i.e., nutrient rich and highly productive.
Whether such nutrient enrichment is to be considered beneficial
or deleterious is determined by its actual or potential impact
upon designated beneficial water uses of each lake.
Potential for primary productivity as measured by algal
assay control yield was high in the lake on both sampling
occasions. Secchi disc visibility was only about 1.5 m (60
inches) throughout the lake except at Station 06 where it was
substantially higher. Of the 13 Washington lakes sampled in
1975, 2 had higher median total phosphorus levels (0.033 mg/l)
3 had higher median inorganic nitrogen values (0.150 mg/l) and
*See Appendix C.
-------
2
2 had higher median orthophosphorus levels (0.022 my/i) than Lower
Granite Reservoir.
Survey limnologists did not observe any problem conditions
during their visits to the lake.
B. Rate-Limitng Nutrient:
Algal assay results indicate nitrogen limitation in Lower
Granite Reservoir during July sampling and phosphorus limitation
in September. The lake data suggest primary limitation by nitrogen
on both sampling rounds.
-------
3
III. LAKE CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry:*
1. Surface area: 36.42 km 2 .
2. Mean depth: 13.7 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 41.2 meters.
4. Volume: 498.954 x m 3 .
B. Precipitation:
1. Year of sampling: 67.0 cm.
2. Mean annual: 53.1 cm.
*Lake surface area and maximum depth were provided by the Washington
Department of Ecology (1973). Mean depth and volume were estimated
on the basis of National utrophication Survey (tIES) data.
.Lbrtjti(Y
Ii S Environment I Prot.ction Aq.ncy
Corv [ hs EnvIronmGntaI Re.. rch Lab.
200 5 W 35th Streei
O ηon 97330
-------
4
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lower Granite Reservoir 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 six stations on the lake and from a number of depths at each
station (see map, page v). During each visit, depth-integrated
samples were collected from each station for chlorophyll a analysis
and phytoplankton identification and enumeration. During both visits,
18.9-liter depth-integrated samples were composited for algal assays.
Maximum depths sampled were 36.9 meters at Station 01, 28.4 meters
at Station 02, 26.5 meters at Station 03, 10.7 meters at Station 04,
9.8 meters at Station 05, and 7.9 meters at Station 06. For a more
detailed explanation of NES methods, see NES Working Paper No. 175.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B and
are sumarized in Ill-A for waters at the surface and at the maximum
depth for each site. Results of the phytoplankton counts and chloro-
phyll a determinations are included in Ill-B. Results of the limtting
nutrient study are presented in Ill-C.
-------
0 N = NO. (iF SAMPLES
C 7/23/75
MAX
500 = DEPTh
LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR
STORET CODE 5313
PHYSICAL
AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
PARAMETER NO
RANGE
MEDIAN
RANGE
(METERS)
N°
9/12/75 P
S = 6
RANGE MEDIAN
MAX
DEPTH
RANGE
(METERS)
TEMPERATUPE (DEG CENT)
O.1.S N DEPTH 12
MAX DEPTH0 0 6
16.4 19.8
16.3 18.5
18.5
18.0
0.0 1.5
7.9 34.7
12
6
12.7 17.1 16.0
12.6 16.6 14.9
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
DISSOLVED OXYGEN (MG/I)
O.1.5 i DETii 12
MAX OEPTH** 6
8.4 9.4
8.0 9.0
8.6
8.6
0.0 1.5
7.9 34.7
12
6
8.0 9.4 8.8
7.8 8.8 8.5
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
CONDUCTIVITY (UMMOS)
O.1.5 N DEPTH 12
MAX DEPTH°° 6
23. 158.
25.- 154.
130.
126.
0.0 1.5
7.9 34.7
12
6
13. 358. 241.
13. 356. 223.
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
PH (STANDARD UNITS)
O.1.5 M DEPTH 12
MAX DEPTH 0 6
7.7 8.4
7.6 8.3
8.2
8.1
0.0 1.5
7,9 34.7
12
6
8.2 8.3 8.3
8.0 8.3 8.2
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
TOTAL ALKALINITY (MG/L)
O.1.S N DEPTH 12
MAX DEPTH** 6
13. 68.
16. 69.
57.
53.
0.0 1.5
7.9 34.7
12
6
14. 132. 97.
15. 122. 81.
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
TOTAL P (MG/L)
0.1.S M DEPTH 12
MAX OEPTH** 6
0.0130.038
0.0150.036
0.028
0.030
0.0 1.5
7.9 34.7
12
6
0.0140.061 0.041
0.0130.051 0.039
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
DISSOLVED ORTHO P (MG/U
O .1.5 N DEPTH 12
MAX DEPTH0 0 6
0.0060.024
0.0100.026
0.019
0.022
0.0 1.5
7.9 34.7
12
6
0.0070.039 0.023
0.0080.040 0.023
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
N02.N03 (MG/U
O .1.S M DEPTH 12
MAX DEPTH** 6
0.0200.120
0.0200.130
0.100
0.100
0.0 1.5
7.9 34,7
12
6
0.0300.400 0.225
0.0200.410 0.200
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
AMMONIA (MG/I)
O.1.5 M DEPTH 12
MAX DEPIH° 0 6
0.0200.020
0.0200.040
O.0?0
0,025
0.0 1.5
7.9 34.7
12
6
0.0200.040 0.020
0.0200.040 0.020
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
Ic.JELDAHL N (MG/L)
o.1.S DEPTH 12
MAX DEPTH°° 6
0.2000.300
0.2000.300
0.200
0.200
0.0 1.5
7.9 34,7
12
6
0.2000.500 0.300
0.2000.300 0.200
0.0 1.5
6.4 36.9
SECCHI DISC (METERS)
5
1.2 3.4
1.4
6
1.5 2.7 1.8
00 MAXIMUM DEPTH SAMPLED AT EACH SITE
** S = NO. OF SITES SAMPLED ON THIS DATE
-------
6
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Al gal
Sampling Dominant Units
Date Genera per ml
07/23/75 1. Skeletonema 630
2. Centric Diatoms 540
3. Fragilaria 210
4. Chroomonas 60
5. Nitzschia 60
Other genera 150
Total 1 ,650
09/12/75 1. Melosira 810
2. Chroomonas 778
3. Skeletonema 195
4. Cyclotella 162
5. Nitzschia 130
Other genera 812
Total 2,887
-------
7
2. Chlorophyll a -
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a
Date Number ( p 9/ 1 )
07/23/75 01 9.6
02 4.5
03 4.2
04 2.5
05 2.6
06 5.1
09/12/75 01 5.1
02 3.7
03 4.5
04 4.9
05 5.3
06 7.5
-------
8
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autociaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
a. 07/23/75 Stations 01-04
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum Yield
Spike (mg/i) Conc. (mg/i) Conc. (mg/i) ( mg/i-dry wt. )
Controi 0.008 0.080 3.9
0.05 p 0.058 0.080 4.i
0.05 p + 1.0 N 0.058 1.080 17.2
1.00 N 0.008 1.080 16.0
Stations 05, 06
Controi 0.015 0.055 2.8
0.05 p 0.065 0.055 2.9
0.05 P + 1.0 N 0.065 1.055 27.6
1.00 N 0.015 1.055 5.6
b. 09/12/75 Stations 01-03
Control 0.020 0.230 1.1
0.05 P 0.070 0.230 9.7
0.05 p + 1.0 N 0.070 i.230 20.6
1.00 N 0.020 1.230 1.1
Stations 04-06
Control 0.020 0.240 1.6
0.05 P 0.070 0.240 9.4
0.05 p + 1.0 N 0.070 1.240 13.0
1.00 N 0.020 1.240 2.1
-------
9
2. Discussion -
The control yields of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum , indicate that the potential for primary production in
Lower Granite Reservoir was high on both sampling occasions
(07/23/75, 09/12/75). During July sampling, the addition of
nitrogen spikes produced a substantial increase in yield over that
of the control, indicating nitrogen limitation. During September
sampling, a significant increase in yield accompanied the addition
of orthophosphorus, indicating phosphorus limitation at that time.
In all assays the maximum growth response over that of the control
was achieved with the simultaneous addition of both nutrients.
The mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratio (N/P) in
the lake data were approximately 6/1 and 10/1 in July and October,
respectively, suggesting nitrogen limitation in Lower Granite
Reservoir on both lake sampling occasions.
-------
10
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. National Eutrophica-
tion Survey Methods 19731976. Working Paper No. 175. National
Environmental Research Center, Las Vegas, Nevada, and Pacific
Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon.
Washington Department of Ecology. 1973. Lakes of Washington,
Volume II. Washington State Water Program, Olympia, Washington.
-------
11
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FA(;TORS
Hectares x 2.471 acres
Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles
Meters x 3.281 = feet
Cubic meters x 8.107 x l0 = 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 lbs/square mile
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL DATA
-------
cTO. CT 2 T. JEV4 JAIF 7 /1I/l
ATi uT O 1C&TTO 5. vE
E ALAS vFG . S
7 /07/2l (19 45 000A
flQ 45 0005
09 65 0016
o 45 0036
09 45 0075
(19 45 n 114
75/OQ/12 09 30 000n
09 30 0005
09 30 0036
(19 30 0071
09 10 0121
0.030
0.033
o
0.031
0.031
0.035
0.04?
0.0 1
0.031
o .032
0 037
531301
45 30 03.0 117 25 03.0 3
LO EP GRANITF ESEPvOTP
53)23 4AS IN( TU
11E ALES 7L0114
r lo FEET r Fp)T,.4
2111202
CLASS 00
(10010
00300
00o7 7
1fll) 4
00400
00410
00610
00625
00510
00571
DATE
TIME
DEPT-
i A1EP
00
T 4AJSP
CNDUCTVY
H
I AL
Nr$3N
TOT (JFL
NO .N03
P OS DI
OF
VP
E.CCiI
F IEIJ)
CACO3
TOTAL
N
NTOTAL
OPTMO
TO
DAY
FEET
η T
%lG/L
TNC ES
MICPOMhO
c i
MG/L
4G/L
MG/L
MG/L
MC,/L
75/07,23
n9 as noon
19.1
9 4
60
11Q
0.30
51
0.070
0.300
0.fl2fl,(
0.011
0 45 (IOOS
19.0
9.2
116
p.40
49
0.02 1 )
0.300
0.030
0.010
(9 45 ff15
10.7
8.6
116
8.30
50
0.020
0 .?0O
0.040
0.010
09 45 n03
17.9
.4
120
PQO
52
0.020
0.200K
0.090
0.022
09 45 0075
17.4
0.2
119
0.00
53
0.050
O.700
0.110
0.022
09 45 114
17.1
0.0
122
7 95
54
0.040
0.200
0.110
0.019
75/09/1
n9 30 0000
16.1
0.9
60
227
8.20
og
0.040
0.600
n . sn
.oio
09 10 0005
16.?
0.5
263
0.20
94
0.020K
0.100
0.170
p.019
09 30 fb i 6
15.7
8.4
223
8.00
01
0.030
0.?00
0.190
0.027
09 30 007fl
15.3
8.0
216
7.95
79
0.010
0.200
0.190
0.023
09 30 0121
14.7
7.8
225
0.10
76
0.040
0.200
0.100
0.022
00665
32217
00031
DATF
FPO
TO
TIME 0EPT P 1- 106TOT
OF
DAY FEET MG/L P
TNCDT LI
OF MN ING
PERCENT
CHLPP IIYL
4
5.1
K VALUE IO(OWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
ZTO ET ; ET TFvAL OATF 7- /11/1
.A T i S- vEV
FCALAS vE .AS
75/n7/. 3 10 30 0000
10 30 00O
10 30 oclIc
10 30 0030
10 30 00S
10 30 0091
75/09/17 10 100000
10 1 o 0 c
10 10 0070
10 10 0045
10 10 00 i
32217
Pt-loS-TOT CNLl PHYL
A
1G/L P UG/L
0.02P
0 .0?
O oll
fl.03t
0.029
o .036
O 0 3f
0 037
0 034
0.035
00031
INCDT LT
QFPiN!NC,
DFi CENT
31 30.?
6 32 55.0 1l 1 05.fl 3
LC E GPANTTE ESE VOI
51075 ASkINGTON
I1EPALES 7601.14
0097 FEET OEPT-t
ii 12
CLASS 00
DAIF
T1- E
OE T-
O
OF
TO
DAY
FEET
7c,r tl,23
10 30
10 10
10 3t)
10 30
10 10
10 30
fl000
flOO
0015
0030
0o6
oo
7(,/09/1?
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 1.0
000
00fl
0020
flfl4
0O 3l
DATE
liME
OFUTH
FPr
OF
(tAY
FFET
00010
00300
0007
00096
00400
00410
00610
wATF
00
14A S 0
CP DUCTVv
PH
T ALK
. H3-N
TOT JFL
NO? NO3
ECCHT
FIELD
CACO3
TOTAL
NTOTAL
O T .4O
CFNT
G/L
lNC 4ES
MICPOMI-l0
SU
MG/I .
M(/L
MG/L
MG/p
,/L
l .6
48
130
P.10
57
0.020
0.200
0.1fl
0.015
10.4
8.6
124
. 2 O
56
0.020
0.200K
0.100
18.4
8.6
130
0.?0
56
0.020
0.200K
0.100
10.4
.6
130
8.20
59
0.030
O. flfl
0.090
17.0
8.6
128
8.10
56
0.010
0.200
0.100
0.025
17.9
8.4
130
0.00
57
0.010
0.700
0.100
0.024
15.9
9.0
96
241
0 .25
82
0.020K
0.200
0.170
15.9
.2
240
.20
86
0.020K
0.700
0.220
0.023
15.9
8.4
238
8.20
86
0.020K
fl.?00
0.220
0.024
15.7
8.2
236
8.10
86
0.010
0.200
0.220
0.024
15.1.
8.0
2?0
0.20
47
0.020K
0.200
0.220
0.023
4.5
3.7
. VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
cTrRET ET T /AL : TE 7A/ ) ), )
AT cIjT. ,rS 4IrATJ 1 SII i (
c AL. S vE( ,AS
75/07/23 10 55 0fl0
10 56 fl0O
if) S 00)6
lo cs ooir
10 55 0060
10 55 f)f)R7
75/09/1? 10 30 0000
10 10 000
if) 10 0020
10 30 0050
if) 30 0000
0 024
0.024
0 0?6
o 027
0.011
0.020
0 (17
0 040
0 04t)
0 016
0.041
0003)
PJCOT LT
FMNIN(
9 CENT
531303
46 27 05.0 117 1? 45.0 3
LOWEP AI1TE ESEOv0T
53001 WASHINGTON
DATF
F 0
TO
ir F OEPT
t-w
fA ? FEET
IIEPALES 760114
0P91 FEET OF. T
7)11202
CLASS no
7S,o7 23 10 55 000
10 55 non
10 5 c n1
10 55 (030
tO 55 0060
10 5
7S/fl /12 10 30 000
10 30 00n
10 30 0020
10 30 005
10 30 0000
10.3
18.2
10.7
10.1
18.1
18.1
15.9
15.9
15.0
15.7
nob
00300
0007w
t)fl 0Q 4
00400
00410
00610
00625
00610
00671
,.ATEi
00
T.. ANSP
CNF)UCTVV
PH
1 ALK
NH3N
TOT JEL
NO 6Nn1
HI)S0JS
T )4P
SECCHT
FIELD
CACO3
TOTAL
N
hTOTAL
OPTHO
C JT
/L
INCNIc
UjC OMHO
SI)
M(,/L
Mr,/L
MG/L
C /L
M(/L P
q n
54
129
0.20
SM
0.070K
0.?00
0.100
0.02 )
8.6
131
0.10
c
0.020
0.?00
0.090
0.02?
8.0
128
8.15
57
0.020
0.200<
0.090
0.020
10.2
129
0.15
55
0.020
0.?00
0.OQO
0.020
9.
129
0.20
57
0.020 1<
0.200
0.090
0.020
0.6
130
8.25
S
0.0 0
0.100
0.021
.2
237
0.25
84
0.070K
0.300
°.220
007?
0.4
236
0.30
84
0.0201<
0.400
0.710
0.024
8.6
238
0.20
86
0.020
0.200 (
0.740
0.025
8.8
236
0.30
86
0.020
0.2001<
0.740
0.027
o.
234
8.25
86
0.0201<
0.2001<
0.240
0.025
32217
DATE
FP OM
1 )
TIME DEPTH P l0STOT
OF
fla FEET M( /L P
C HL - I YL
A
JG/L
4.2
4.5
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
STO FT ET 2 1FV4L )AT 7-/1 /1
iI TL uT. 1°-1rAT1c, SJ vEY
rCA_LAS J ,Ac
7 /07/23 11 30 0000
11 10 fl0O
11 30 0015
11 10 0030
7 /0Q/I? 10 55 0000
10 55 flflflC
10 5S 0020
10 sc ooi
0066 5 32217
P 4OST0T C 4LP 4VL
A
MG/L P
0.028
I) .027
0.031
0.03?
0 050
0 O c R?
(,.035
0 041
00011
1 CDT LT
PFMNI
P P C F I
531304
4 25 20.0 117 04 p0.0 3
LO E GPANITE ESEPv0T
53003 S-ij i.1()N
LIEPALES 76011
0 35 FEd PE T-
2111202
CLASc no
DAT
Tf4E
DEPT -
F. fl.4
OF
ro
DAY
FEET
75/07/23
ii 30
11 30
11 30
11 30
0000
0fl0
flOlS
003
75/09/12
10 55
10 55
10 cc
10 55
0000
fl00
oo s
oo lc
DATF
TIME
OEPTk
FPr)M
OF
TO
1)AY
FEET
00010
00100
00o7
()0 04
00600
00410
00610
0)625
00610
00671
wATE
DO
T ANSP
CNOIJCTVv
PM
T ALK
NH3N
TOT KJEL
NO?LN03
PMO5f S
TE 1P
ECCM1
FIELD
CACO l
TOTAL
N
NTOTAL
O Ts O
CENT
MC,/L
TNc-tEc
MICPO O
SU
MG/C
MC,/L
G/L
UG/L
Mr./L
13.7
4
158
R. 0
64
0.070k
0.200K
0.110
0.023
18.1
140
8.35
57
0.020K
O.200
0.100
0.021
18.?
124
P.30
51
0.070
0.200K
0.OQO
fl.021
1g.?
122
8.30
52
0.020K
O .?00K
0 .0Q0
0.021
17.1
346
8.30
115
0.0 20K
0.200
0.lAn
0.034
16.7
312
8.30
10
0.070K
0.700K
0.140
0.037
15.?
?04
8.30
71
0.020K
0.200K
.7flO
fl.0?3
14.7
159
8.30
67
0.070K
0.200K
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
CT1 E! PET. TEIAL 7 -/l1/l5
T L UT iTVATIO st vEy
E ALAS vEG c
DATE
F p
To
00665 32217
DEPTH PHOSTOT CHLQP IYL
A
MG/L P UG/L
00031
TNCDT LI
RE N T
FPCENT
b3130
45 25 05.0 117 0? 00.0 3
LOWE. GRANITE RESEPVOIP
16060 ,ASH1N(,T)N
75/fl7/ 3 11 50 0000
11 50 nonc
i i sn nnt
ii 50 0032
75/00/1? ii is 0000
11 15 00O
i i is ooi
Ii iS 0030
0. 034
0.013
0.040
o 014
0. n5
0 0 53
O 053
0 051
IIEPALES 760114
003 FEET OE T-
2111202
CLASS 00
onnin
00100
00077
0009.
00400
00410
00610
0n 25
000
DATE
TIE
0EPT
4ATEP
00
TkANSP
CrsjOIJCTvY
PH
T ALK
NH3N
TOT K.IFL
NO? o3
o 4nS()Ic
F Ou
OF
T P
SECCHT
FIELD
CACO3
TOTAL
N
NTOTAL
OPT-b
TD
AY
Ff T
CENT
U /L
TNCMFS
U1 PQMp J
Si
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
M(/L P
75/07/21
ii so noon
19.8
8.6
153
8.30
66
0.020K
fl.200
0.120
0.018
ii 5) 000
19.5
8.6
153
8.30
68
0.020K
0.200
0.1?0
0.024
11 50 0015
18.6
8.6
359
8.30
67
0.020
0.200
0.120
0.010
i i 50 0032
l .c
8 . 8
154
.30
60
0.030
0.200
0.130
0.076
75/09/12
11 15 0000
16.6
0.0
60
344
8.30
117
0.020K
0.200
0.320
0.032
i i is 0005
16.6
0.0
3 50
8.25
132
0.070K
0.300
0.400
ii 15 0010
16.6
9.4
156
R 30
12?
0.020
0.400
0.400
0.041
i i iS 0030
i6.f
8.4
356
8.2S
12?
0.020K
0.300
0.410
fl fl4fl
TIME
OF
DAY FEET
2.6
5.3
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
ST ET DET 1EVAL DATE U/16
,fTI FIlTQO _I( AT1r .I vFY
ERALAS VEGAS
7 /fl7/2 12 15 0000
1? is nooc
12 15 0015
12 15 0026
75/09/12 11 40 0000
11 41) onoc
11 40 0021
0.014
0.013
0.015
0.015
0. 061
0.014
0.013
00031
TP lCDT LT
MNI NG
PFRCENT
53131)6
46 25 40.0 117 01 08.0 3
LO EQ C,QA 1TE ESE9VOTP
16069 S 4INCTr
DATE
F
To
T1 E 0F PT
flAb FEET
WATEQ
00
TI.AMSP
Cf\JOUCTVY
TM
cZECCr4T
FIELD
CE 1T
MG/L
TNCrES
MICPO HO
I1FPALEc 76 1I4
0031) FEET flE -T
00400 00410
P 1 - I 7 ALK
CACO3
SI MG/L
?1 1 1202
CLASS no
132
11)8
75n7,23 12 iS 1)001 16.9 8.7
1? 15 oooc 16.4 9.0
12 15 fl01 16.4
12 15 0026 16. 1 9.0
75/09/12 11 40 000fl 12.7 94
11 40 oo 0 12.7 9.6
11 41 0021 1?.6
1)0665 32217
DATE TIME DEDTI-( PhiSTOT CHLRP1-4YL
FQOv OF A
TO DAY FEET Mc./L P UG/L
24 P.05
23 7.70
22 7.60
25 7.60
17 R 25
13 9 .2S
13 9.00
00610
NH 3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0 020 1c
0.070
0.020
0 020
0 0201<
0 0201<
0
if
13
16
16
114
14
15
00625
TOT KJFL
N
0.200
0 700
0.?00(
O .?OOK
0.300
0.11)0
O 300
00f , O
NO2 NO3
NTOTAL
MG/L
0. 1 )20
0 020K
0 .0201<
0 (1201<
o 380
0 fl lfl
0 020K
flflp 7i
P 14fl5_f) IS
OPT 4O
M(j/
0. 00
0.009
0.011
0.010
o 17
0.007
0. OOM
7.5
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
APPENDIX C
PARAMETRIC RANKINGS OF LAKES
SAMPLED BY NES IN 1975
STATE OF WASHINGTON
Mean or median values for six of the key parameters evaluated
in establishing the trophic conditions of Washington lakes sampled
are presented to allow direct comparison of the ranking, by parameter,
of each lake relative to the others. Median total phosphorus, median
inorganic nitrogen and median dissolved orthophosphorus levels are
expressed in mg/l. Chlorophyll a values are expressed in pg/i.
To maintain consistent rank order with the preceding parameters,
the mean Secchi disc depth, in inches, is subtracted from 500.
Similarly, minimum dissolved oxygen values are subtracted from 15
to create table entries.
-------
.AKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
.AKE
ODE
LAKE NAME
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
MEDIAN
INORC, N
500
MEAN SEC
MEAN
CHLORA
15
P4IN DO
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO P
5301
AMEPICAN LAKE
0.027
0.105
343.000
4.822
15.000
0.007
5302
BANKS LAKE
0.021
0.040
364.533
7.373
10.800
0.007
,303
CHELAW LAKE
0.005
0.070
111.900
0.905
6.400
0.003
5304
DIAMOND LAKE
0.014
0.060
303,667
14.537
14.200
0.010
5305
GREEN LAKE
0.027
0.050
415.000
2.983
10.600
0.009
5306
KEECHELUS LAKE
0.007
0.040
280.250
1.400
9.200
0.002
5307
HAYFIELD LAKE
0.016
0.100
402.000
4.250
10.600
0.007
5308
MEDICAL LAKE
0.275
0.225
401.714
16.425
15.000
0.1A6
5309
MOSES LAKE
0.115
0.150
463.600
29.060
14.600
0.038
,310
O7ETTE LAKE
0.010
0.110
403.333
1.225
7.200
0.009
311
SAMMAMISH LAKE
0.015
0.210
374.000
7.290
14.600
0.OOA
312
WHATCO4 LAKE
0.009
0.320
288.000
3.422
10.800
0.009
5313
LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR
0.033
0.150
435.500
4.875
7.200
0.022
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBFR OF LAKES WITH HTGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE
LA(E NAME
MEnIAN
TOTAL P
MEDIAN
INORG
N
500
MEAN SEC
MEAN
CHLORA
15
MIN DO
DISS
MEDIAN
ORT O P
5301
AMERICAN LAKE
29 C
3)
50 C
6)
67 C
8)
50 C
6)
4 C 0)
58
7)
5302
BANKS LAKE
42 C
5)
100
12)
58 C
7)
25 C
3)
46 C 5)
71
C 8)
531)3
CHELAN LAKE
100
12)
67 C
8)
100 C
12)
100 C
12)
100 C 12)
92
( 11)
5304
DIAMOND LAKE
6? (
7)
75 C
9)
75 C
9)
17 C
2)
33 C 4)
?5
C 3)
5305
GQFN LAKE
2Q
3)
83 C
10)
17 C 2)
75 C
9)
6? C 7)
46
( 5)
53fl
KEECHELIIS LAKE
92 C
11)
92 C
11)
92 ( 11)
83 C
10)
75 C 9
100
C 1?)
5307
HAYFIELD LAKE
62 C
7)
58 C
7)
33 C 4)
58 C
7)
62 C 7)
71
( 8)
5308
MEDICAL LAKE
0 C
0)
8 C
1)
4? C 5)
8 C
1)
4 ( 0)
0
C 0)
530w
MOSES LAKE
8 C
1)
29 C
3)
0 C 0)
0 C
0)
21 2)
8
1)
5310
O7ETTE LAKE
75 C
9)
42 C
5)
25 C 3)
92 C
11)
87 C 10)
33
C 4)
5311
SAMMAMISH LAKE
50 (
6)
17 C
2)
50 C 6)
33 (
4)
21 2)
83
C 1C )
5312
WHATCOM LA(E
83 C
10)
0 C
0)
83 C 10)
67 C
8)
46
( 5)
46
C 5)
5313 LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR
17 C 2) 29 C 3) 8 C 1)
42 C 5) 87 C 10) 17 C 2)
------- |