U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
SUPERIOR BAY
ST, LOUIS COUNTY, MINNESOTA, AND
DOUGLAS COUNT/, WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 128
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
SUPERIOR BAY
ST, LOUIS COUNTY, MINNESOTA, AND
DOUGLAS COUNTY, WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 128
WlTH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
AND THE
MINNESOTA NATIONAL GUARD
HAY, 1975
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Minnesota Study Lakes iv, v
Lake and Drainage Area Map vi
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 4
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 5
IV. Nutrient Loadings 9
V. Literature Reviewed 15
VI. Appendices 16
-------
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 fresh water lakes and
reservoirs.
OBJ ECTI VES
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 [ 5303(e)], water
quality criteria/standards review [ 5303(c)], clean lakes [ 5314(a,b)],
and water quality monitoring [ 5106 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 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 foriiiulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA
and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency for professional involvement and to the Minnesota National
Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey.
Grant J. Merritt, Director of the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, John F. McGuire, Chief, and Joel 6. Schilling, Biologist,
of the Section of Surface and Groundwater, Division of Water Quality,
provided invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the course
of the Survey; and the staff of the Section of Municipal Works, Divi-
sion of Water Quality, were most helpful in identifying point sources
and soliciting municipal participation in the Survey.
Major General Chester J. Moeglein, the Adjutant General of
Minnesota, and Project Officer Major Adrian Beltrand, who directed
the volunteer efforts of the Minnesota National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF MINNESOTA
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Albert Lea Freeborn
Andrusia Beltranil
Badger Polk
Bartlett Koochiching
Bear Freeborn
Bemidji Beltrami
Big Stearns
Big Stone Big Stone, MN; Roberts,
Grant, SD
Birch Cass
Blackduck Beltrami
Blackhoof Crow Wing
Budd Martin
Buffalo Wright
Calhoun Hennepin
Carlos Douglas
Carrigan Wright
Cass Beltrami, Cass
Clearwater Wright, Stearns
Cokato Wright
Cranberry Crow Wing
Darling Douglas
Elbow St. Louis
Embarass St. Louis
Fall Lake
Forest Washington
Green Kandiyohi
Gull Cass
Heron Jackson
Leech Cass
Le Honime Dieu Douglas
Lily Blue Earth
Little Grant
Lost St. Louis
-------
V
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Madison Blue Earth
Malmedal Pope
Mashkenode St. Louis
McQuade St. Louis
Minnetonka Hennepin
Minnewaska Pope
Mud Itasca
Nest Kandiyohi
Pelican St. Louis
Pepin Goodhue, Wabasha, MN;
Pierce, Pepin, WI
Rabbit Crow Wing
Sakatah Le Sueur
Shagawa St. Louis
Silver McLeod
Six Mile St. Louis
Spring Washington, Dakota
St. Croix Washington, MN; St. Croix,
Pierce, WI
St. Louis Bay St. Louis, MN; Douglas, WI
Superior Bay St. Louis, MN; Douglas, WI
Swan Itasca
Trace Todd
Trout Itasca
Wagonga Kandiyohi
Walimark Chisago
White Bear Washington
Winoria Douglas
Wolf Beltrami, Hubbard
Woodcock Kandiyohi
Zumbro Olinstead, Wabasha
-------
_________ ST. LOUIS CO .
CARLTON CO.
Map Location
LAKE
SUPERIOR
St. LOUIS
AND
SUPERIOR BAY
® Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
-------
SUPERIOR BAY
STORET NO. 2786
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data show that Superior Bay is eutrophic. Of the 60
Minnesota lakes surveyed in the fall of 1972, when essentially
all were well-mixed, 27 had less mean total phosphorus, 25 had
less mean dissolved phosphorus, and 38 had less mean inorganic
nitrogen. For all Minnesota data, 43 lakes had greater Secchi
disc transparency, and only six had less mean chlorophyll a.
The lack of light penetration (reflected in very low Secchi disc
transparency) probably limited algal growth.
Survey limnologists did not note any phytoplankton nuisances;
however, much discoloration, floating debris, floating and suspended
solids, as well as oil films, were seen on all sampling visits.
B. Rate—Limiting Nutrient:
Because of a significant loss in nitrogen (28%) between the
time the sample was collected and the assay was begun, the results
of the algal assay are not representative of conditions in the
bay at the time the sample was taken. Field data indicate nitro-
gen limitation in July and September but phosphorus limitation in
October.
-------
2
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—-During the sampling year, Superior
Bay received a total phosphorus load at a rate about nine
times that proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as udangerousu;
i.e., a eutrophic rate (see page 14). However, Vollenweider’s
model probably is not applicable to water bodies with short
hydraulic retention times, and the mean hydraulic retention
time of Superior Bay is a very short eight days. Nonetheless,
the existing water quality in the bay is evidence of excessive
nutrient loads.
It is calculated that the municipal point sources considered
in this study contributed 42% of the total phosphorus input to
the bay during the sampling year. Industries and port traffic
are believed to have contributed nutrients also, but the signifi-
cance of these sources was not determined (see page 11).
At this time, the City of Superior, Wisconsin, wastewater
treatment plant is being expanded to include secondary treatment
plus phosphorus removal and is designed to meet the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources’ mean effluent phosphorus limit
of 1 mg/l (ca. 85% removal). Also, in regard to the Minnesota
indirect point sources, the Western Lake Superior Sanitary
District, organized in 1974, will ultimately construct a tertiary
-------
3
wastewater treatment plant at the site of the existing Duluth
main plant (McGuire, 1975). The new plant will provide treat-
ment for all of the Minnesota point sources considered in this
report, as well as a few additional small discharges, and will
be required to meet the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s
mean effluent phosphorus limitation of 1 mg/i total phosphorus.
It is calculated that when the new Minnesota and Wisconsin
wastewater treatment plants become operative, the overall total
phosphorus load to Superior Bay will be reduced by 35%. This
reduction should result in a significant improvement in the
water quality of the bay as well as provide protection for the
high-quality waters of Lake Superior.
2. Non-point sources (see page 14)--During the sampling
year, the phosphorus export rates of the four Wisconsin tribu-
taries to Superior Bay ranged from three to nine times the
export rate of the St. Louis Bay outlet and from over two to
more than six times the export rate of the St. Louis River at
the inlet to St. Louis Bay (96 lbs P/mi 2 /yr). It is not known
whether these high phosphorus exports are due to urban runoff,
storm drains, unknown point sources, or insufficient sampling,
but a need for further study is indicated.
-------
4
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry t :
1. Surface area: 3,630 acres.
2. Mean depth: 12.5 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 30 feet.
4. Volume: 45,375 acre-feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 8 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area* Mean fiow*
St. Louis Bay outlet 3,690.0 mi 2,396.4 cfs
Nemadji River 444.0 mi 2 472.8 cfs
Bluff Creek 19.6 mi 2 20.3 cfs
Bear Creek 6.9 mi 2 7.0 cfs
Unnamed Stream (C-i) 4.9 ml 4.1 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 9.8 mi 16.0 cfs
Totals 4,175.2 mi 2 2,916.6 cfs
2. Outlet -
Superior Bay - Lake Superior 2
Ship Channels 4,180.9 mi ** 2,916.6 cfs
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 25.5 inches.
2. Mean annual: 25.0 inches.
t Pianimetered from U.S.G.S. map (1954); mean depth by random-dot method.
* Drainage areas are accurate within ±5%; mean daily flows are accurate
within ±10%; and ungaged flows are accurate within ±10 to 25% for
drainage areas greater than 10 mi 2 .
** Includes area of lake; total drainage area adjusted to equal sum of
subdrai nage areas.
*** See Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods, 1972”.
-------
5
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Superior Bay was sampled three times during the open-water season
of 1972 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each time,
samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected from two
stations on the bay and from a number of depths at each station (see
map, page vi). During each visit, a single depth-integrated (15 feet
to surface) sample was composited from the two stations for phyto-
plankton identification and enumeration; and during the last visit,
a single five—gallon 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 25 feet at station 1 and 26 feet at station 2.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B, and the
data for the fall sampling period, when the bay essentially was well—
mixed, are summarized below. Note, however, the Secchi disc summary
is based on all values.
For differences in the various parameters at the other sampling
times, refer to Appendix B.
-------
6
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
(10/18/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 6.1 6.3 6.3 6.5
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) 8.8 9.6 9.7 10.2
Conductivity (pmhos) 120 128 130 140
pH (units) 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.6
Alkalintiy (mg/i) 41 46 47 49
Total P (mg/i) 0.035 0.051 0.051 0.070
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.013 0.024 0.026 0.032
NO + NO (mg/i) 0.180 0.207 0.205 0.240
Ani onia ?mg/i) 0.090 0.174 0.180 0.250
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 12 22 24 32
-------
7
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
07/13/72 1. Melosira 1,646
2. Achnanthes 633
3. Ulothrix 434
4. Anabaena 380
5. Cryptomonas 362
Other genera 722
Total 4,177
09/07/72 1 . Flagellates 85
2. Dinobryon 67
3. Cryptomonas 20
4. Chroococcus 18
5. Synedra 18
Other genera 81
Total 289
10/18/72 1. Flagellates 2,340
2. Dinobryon 2,260
3. Anabaena 755
4. Fragilaria 528
5. Kirchneriella 490
Other genera 2,495
Total 8,868
-------
8
2. Chlorophyll a -
(Because of instrumentation problems during the 1972 sampling,
the following values may be in error by plus or minus 20 percent.)
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a
Date Number ( ig/l )
07/13/72 01 8.9
02 22.7
09/07/72 01 0.7
02 0.8
10/18/72 01 1.7
02 2.4
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
There was a 28% loss of nitrogen in the assay sample between
the time of collection to the beginning of the assay; consequently,
the results are not representative of conditions in the bay at the
time the sample was taken. However, the field data indicate nitro-
gen limitation in July (N/P = 9/1) and September (N/P 8/1) and
phosphorus limitation in October (N/P = 16/1).
-------
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Minnesota National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the tribu-
tary sites indicated on the map (page vi), except for the high runoff
month of June when two samples were collected. Sampling was begun in
October, 1972, and was completed in September, 1973.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the year
of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by the
Minnesota District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the tribu-
tary sites nearest the lake.
Except for the two outlet channels, nutrient loads for sampled
tributaries were determined by using a modification of a U.S. Geological
Survey computer program for calculating stream loadings*. The outlet
flow provided by U.S.G.S. is the combined flow of the Duluth channel
at station 86A-1 and the Superior channel at station 86G-1; the portion
of the total flow carried by each channel was not determined. Therefore,
the outlet nutrient loads were calculated using the mean of the nutrient
concentrations in the samples from both channels and the mean total flow.
Nutrient loadings for unsampled "minor tributaries and immediate
drainage" ("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated by using the means of the
2
nutrient loads, in Ibs/mi /year, in Bluff Creek at station E-l and
2
multiplying the means by the ZZ area in mi .
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
10
In the following tables, the nutrient loads given for the St.
Louis Bay outlet and the Nemadji River are those measured minus
upstream point-source loads.
It is noted that there was an apparent high degree of retention
of phosphorus (59%) and nitrogen (31%) in Superior Bay during the
sampling year. This probably was due to periodic dilution of the
outlet samples by high-quality Lake Superior waters when on-shore
winds occurred. This resulted in lower calculated outlet nutrient
loads and, conversely, greater apparent nutrient retention.
The City of Superior and the Village of Superior, Wisconsin, did
not participate in the Survey, and nutrient loads were estimated at
2.5 lbs P and 7.5 lbs N/capita/year. The indirect Minnesota point
sources impact upstream St. Louis Bay. The nutrient loads attributed
to these sources are the measured or estimated loads reduced by the
amount of phosphorus retention (29%) and nitrogen retention (1%) in
St. Louis Bay (see Working Paper No. 123, “Report on St. Louis Bay”).
-------
11
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal± -
Pop. Mean Receiving
Name Served Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
City of 32,237 prim. 3.224* Superior Bay
Superior, WI clarifier
Vill. of 476 stab. pond 0.476* Nemadji River
Superior, WI
Indirect sources in Minnesota** :
Duluth Main 100,578 prim. 16.125 St. Louis Bay
clarifier
Cloquet 8,699 prim. 1.649 St. Louis River
clarifier
Duluth West 11,490 prim. 1.149 St. Louis Bay
plants clarifier
Scanlan 1,132 Imhoff tank 0.113* St. Louis River
Canton 844 prim. 0.084* St. Louis River
clarifier
Thompson 159 act. sludge 0.016* St. Louis River
Township
Wrenshall 147 stab. pond 0.015* Silver Creek
2. Industrial - A number of industries discharge wastes either
directly to Superior Bay, to St. Louis Bay, to the St. Louis
River, or to municipal wastewater treatment plants impacting
those waters (Anonymous, 1969a); because of Survey constraints***
nutrient contributions from these sources were not evaluated.
Also, nutrients may be contributed by ships in port (Miller,
1965), but the significance of these sources was not assessed.
t Schraufnagel, et al., 1966; Anonymous, 1974.
tt 1970 Census.
* Estimated at 100 gal/capita/day.
** See Working Paper No. 123, “Report on St. Louis Bay”.
*** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
12
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
lbsP/ %of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non—point load)
St. Louis Bay outlet 254,110 32.6
Unnamed Stream (C-l) 1,330 0.2
Nemadji River 184,130 23.7
Bluff Creek 4,570 0.6
Bear Creek 4,270 0.5
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non—point load) - 2,280 0.3
c. Known municipal STP’s -
City of Superior 80,590 10.4
Village of Superior 1,190 0.2
Port traffic* - Unknown ? -
Indirect sources:
Duluth Main 192,520 24.7
Cloquet 32,380 4.2
Duluth West plants 16,490 2.1
Scanlan 2,010 0.3
Canton 1,500 0.2
Thompson Township 280 <0.1
Wrenshall 260 <0.1
d. Septic tanks - Unknown ?
e. Industrial - Unknown ? -
f. Direct precipitation** - 570 < 0.1
Total 778,480 100.0
2. Outputs —
Lake outlet — Lake Superior 318,090
3. Net annual P accumulation - 460,390 pounds
* Wastes discharged from ships in port.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
13
Tributaries (non-point load) -
St. Louis Bay outlet 6,458,790
Unnamed Stream (C-l) 11,780
Nemadji River 1 ,231 ,730
Bluff Creek 52,490
Bear Creek 17,910
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 26,240
c. Known municipal STP’s -
City of Superior
Village of Superior
Port traffic* - Unknown
Indirect sources:
Duluth Main
Cloquet
Duluth West plants
Scani an
Carl ton
Thompson Township
Wrenshal 1
d. Septic tanks - Unknown
e. Industrial — Unknown
f. Direct precipitation** -
Total
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Lake Superior 6,373,290
3. Net annual N accumulation - 2,892,760 pounds
* Wastes discharged from ships in port.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1 . Inputs —
Source
a.
lbs NI
yr
241 ,780
3,570
% of
total
69.7
0.1
13.3
0.6
0.2
0.3
2.6
<0.1
10.2
1.6
1.0
0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
0.4
100.0
944,040
135,210
90,590
8,410
6,270
1,180
1 ,090
7
34,970
9,266,050
-------
14
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/mi 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr
St. Louis Bay outlet 69 1,750
Unnamed Stream (C-i) 271 2,404
Nemadji River 415 2,774
Bluff Creek 233 2,678
Bear Creek 619 2,596
E. Yearly Loading Rates:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loading
rates are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (in press).
Essentially, his “dangerous” rate is the rate at which the
receiving waters would become eutrophic or remain eutrophic; his
“permissible” rate is that which would result in the receiving
water remaining oligotrophic or becoming oligotrophic if mor-
phometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate would be considered one
between “dangerous” and “permissible”.
Note than Vollenweider’s model may not be applicable to
water bodies with very short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated* Total Accumulated*
lbs/acre/yr 214.5 126.8 2,552.6 796.9
grams/mr/yr 24.04 14.22 286.1 89.3
Vollenweider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m 2 /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Superior Bay:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 2.60
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 1.30
* The apparent high degree of accumulation (retention) of phosphorus (59%) and
nitrogen (31%) during the sampling year is attributed to periodic dilution
of outlet samples by high-quality Lake Superior waters (see page 10).
-------
15
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1969a. An appraisal of water pollution in the Lake
Superior basin. FWPCA, U.S. Dept. Interior, Great Lakes
Region, Chicago.
Anonymous, 1969b. Proceedings of the Conference in the Matter
of Pollution of the Waters of Lake Superior and its Tributary
Basin, Minnesota - Wisconsin - Michigan, Vols. 1-4. FWPCA,
U.S. Dept. Interior, Wash., D.C.
Anonymous, 1974. Wastewater disposal facilities inventory. MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Kiester, C. E., S. C. Castagna, and Kenneth Mackenthun, 1961.
Report on investigation of pollution of the St. Louis River,
St. Louis Bay, and Superior Bay. MN Dept. of Health and
WI State Board of Health.
McGuire, John F., 1975. Personal communication (treatment require-
ments in the St. Louis Bay area). MPCA, Minneapolis.
Miller, R. D., 1965. Report on investigation of pollution of
the seaway Port of Duluth. MPCA, Minneapolis.
Schraufnagel , F. H., 1975. Personal communication (treatment
requirements in the Superior Bay area). WI Dept. Nat. Resources,
Madison.
___________ L. A. Montie, Lloyd A. Lueschow, and Keith Glasshof;
1966. Report on an investigation of the pollution in the Lake
Superior drainage basin made during 1965 and early 1966. WI
Comm. on Water Poll., Madison.
Vollenweider, Richard A. (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz.
Z. Hydrol.
-------
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIB1JTA Y FLOW INFOPHATION FOR MINNESOTA
10/30/74
LAKE CODE 2786
SUPERIOR BAY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE 4180.00
NOTE *** TRIB 868176A1
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR
MEAN FLOW DAY
FLOW DAY
FLOW DAY FLOW
10 72 3480.00
11 72 3970.00
12 72 1710.00
73 1920.00
2 73 1890.00
1 73 3320.00
4 73 4440.00
5 73 7140.00
6 73 3530.00
7 73 1650.00
8 73 2450.00
9 73 2460.00
10 72 27?0.00
11 72 3300.00
12 72 2710.00
1 73 1800.00
P 73 1790.00
3 73 3230.00
4 73 3830.00
5 73 5690.00
6 73 2780.00
7 73 1640.00
8 73 2430.00
9 73 ‘430.00
14 3130.00
4 5720.00
2 1740.00
3 2020.00
7 3150.00
20 11570.00
21 2440.00
28 275.00
25 2210.00
23 1570.00
14 2450.00
4 4750.03
2 2760.00
4 1890.00
7 2730.00
20 9250.00
24 2180.00
SUB-DR A IN AGE
TRIBUTARY AREA
278646
278681
2786C 1
278601
2786E 1
2786F I
2786ZZ
JAN FEB MAR APP MAY
4180.00
1690.00
4.91
444.00
19.60
6.86
15.50
1229.40
1004.00
0.26
215.00
4.30
1.21
3.40
1169.30
988.00
0.16
173.00
3.20
0.82
P. 53
NORMALIZED FLOWS
JUN JUL AUG
1609.20
1395.00
0.97
200.00
6.10
1.95
4.82
6546.60
5656.00
8.34
810.00
35.20
11 • 80
27.80
SEP OCT
4917.40
3873.00
12.80
925.00
49.00
17.80
38.70
2788.50
2306.00
3.76
437.00
18.20
6.46
14.40
6976.30
5553.00
13.70
1276.00
64.00
22.50
50.60
4180.00
4180.86
NOV DEC MEAN
2088.90
1798.00
1.32
275.00
9.55
3.24
7.54
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SUM OF SUB—DRAINAGE AREAS =
2228.80
1797.00
3.21
395.00
17.20
6.82
13.60
2288.80
1785.00
2.61
458.00
19.30
6.26
15.20
SUMMARY
1719.10
1420.00
1.21
274.00
9.74
3.00
7.69
1389.30
1148.00
0.62
223.00
6.91
2.23
S • 46
2916.65
2396.45
4.09
472.79
20.28
7.03
16.02
TOTAL FLOW IN =
TOTAL FLOW OUT =
278646
27F36B1
34951.39
34951.59
24 2790.00
25 1900.00
?3 1560.00
-------
r’I 3 rA- Y LU ( ‘jFO,IAEION FOM ‘I lNNL jTA
10/30/74
LA E CODE 77-16
SI’t. —’ T O - ’ -lAY
MF t.J MONT -4LY FL OwS ANI LIAILY Ft OwS
TQ!BIJTAPY ‘ -IONTH Y’ MEAN FLOW DAY
10 7?
11 7?
12 7—’ 0.7’- ,
73 0. ’S
2 73 0.0 - i
1 71 0.4?
4 71
5 71 14.30
6 73 9. ’?
7 73 7. 1-17
9 73 1.79
9 7 ’ 4.33
10 7’
I I 7? 613.33
17 72 274.00
71 120.00
73 95.20
1 71 146.30
4 73 551.00
5 71 1300.00
6 71
7 73 31 0.uO
9 73 371.00
9 7 1 533.00
10 7? 29.30
77 72.90
I ? 72
I 71 2.41
2 73 1.75
1 73
4 73
5 71 “5.10
71 39.10
7 71 12.90
14 73 I?. 0
1 71 ‘3.20
10 77 Q.51
11 7’ 6.03
I? 7? 7•74
I I )
71 1.45
1 71
6 73
5 71 21 .C0
1-. 71 I7.MC
7 71
7’ 6.17
71
FLOW DAY FLOW DAY
16 3.60
6 4.00
2 0.140
3 0.10
3 0.40
7 4.00
20 23.00
24 7.30
214 2.10
25 1.40
23 2.90
1 .
4 fll.00
2140.00
1 100.00
I O.O0
7 191.00
‘110.00
24 526.00
29 251.00
25 d 99.00
2’ 341.00
14
4 32.00
2
.50
C • 90
17.00
.70
3 • 4,)
FL OW
?7141-,C I
275601
779 1 SF I
?7149V I
1.20
2.P0
I oe..00
?U • 00
10.50
10.10
14.140
10.00
2.90
3
3
7€
74
79
25
?3
14
6
2
1
-3
21
2 7
21
-------
TP1dJTA Y FLOW IN O - MATION FOP MJNNLSOTtt
10/30/74
LA’(F CODE 27R
MEAN MONTHLY
TPTRIJTARY MONT-I
?7 86ZZ 10
11
12
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
SIJPE 1OP r3AY
FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
YF A MEAN FLOW DAY
72 23,10 14
72 17.80 4
72 f 77 2
73 1.90
71 1.49 3
73 2.01
73 18.90 7
73 51.60 20
73 27.90 21
73 10.? ) 28
73 10.20 25
73 18.40 23
FLOW DA
21 .0’)
26.00
6. 0
1 .50
13.00
84.00
19.00 24
. 30
8.00
11.80
FLOW DAY
22.00
FLOW
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
32217
CHLP HYL
4
UG/L
278601
46 45 33.0 092 05 30.0
SUPERIOR BAY
27 MINNESOTA
I1EPALES 2111202
0024 FEET
72/07/13
7?/09/07
7?/10/IR
06 35 0000
09 35 0000
16 20 0000
R.9J
0 .7J
I .7J
3
DEPTH
00010
00300
00077
00094
00400
00410
00630
00610
00665
00666
DATE
TIME
DEPTH
WATER
DO
TRANSP
CNOUCTVY
PH
T ALP(
N02&N03
*$3—M
PHOS—TOT
PHOS—DIS
FROM
OF
TEMP
SECCI-4 1
FIELD
CACO3
N—TOTAL
TOTAL
TO
DAY
FEET
CENT
MG/L
INCHES
MICROMMO
SU
MG/L
MG/I
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/I P
72/07/13
06 35 0000
32
150
6.60
46
0.240
0.420
0.103
0.080
06 35 0004
17.4
6.0
150
6.60
46
0.240
0.420
0.111
0.083
06 35 0015
17.1
4.2
150
6.50
46
0.230
0.410
0.115
0.086
06 35 0020
15.7
7.4
140
6.40
45
0.240
0.290
0.088
0.054
72/09/07
09 35 0000
18
137
7.00
26
0.130
0.340
0.083
0.065
09 35 0004
16.4
5.3
117
7.00
27
0.120
0.330
0.082
0.064
09 35 0015
16.4
5.3
124
7.00
30
0.130
0.330
0.089
0.064
09 35 0020
16.1
4.2
120
7.00
31
0.140
0.350
0.085
0.062
09 35 0025
15.6
5.4
7.00
33
0.160
0.260
0.078
0.045
72/10/18
16 20 0000
30
140
7.35
41
0.240
0.100
0.040
0.016
16 20 0004
6.4
10.0
120
7.35
43
0.230
0.090
0.035
0.013
16 20 0015
6.5
9.2
120
7.25
47
0.230
0.110
0.041
0.017
16 20 0025
6.5
10.1
120
7.40
45
0.220
0.140
0.047
0.021
m
J V4L’J - “ I
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/10
278602
46 42 18.0 09? 01
SUPERIOR AY
27 MINNESOTA
2111202
0026 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/07/13
7?/09/07
7/ 10/18
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
06 50 0000
10 05 0000
15 50 0000
32217
C HL R P H YL
A
UC,/L
2.7J
0 • ‘Li
2.4J
18.0
1 1EPALES
3
00010
00300
00077
00094
00400
00410
00630
00610
00665
00666
DATE
TIME
DEPTH
WATER
no
TRANSP
CNDUCTVY
PH
T ALi
NO2 NO3
Nr13—N
PHOS-TOT
PHOS—DIS
FROM
OF
TEMP
SECCHI
FIELD
CACO3
N—TOTAL
TOTAL
TO
DAY
FEET
CENT
iC./L
INCHES
MICROMHO
SO
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/L P
7?/07/13
06 50 0000
30
140
6.80
39
0.220
0.160
0.099
0.043
06 50 0004
17.8
5.2
140
6.70
44
0.220
0.160
0.087
0.039
06 50 0015
15.8
9.0
140
6.70
44
0.220
0.130
0.042
0.032
72/09/07
06 50 0020
15.5
P.6
140
6.70
44
0.220
0.120
0.050
0.023
10 05 0000
12
125
7.20
39
0.180
0.270
0.079
0.056
10 05 0004
15.7
6.8
128
7.20
28
0.200
0.300
0.079
0.053
10 05 0015
15.6
6.3
123
7.20
32
0.210
0.310
0.080
0.053
10 05 0022
15.5
6.9
123
7.10
33
0.200
0.260
0.080
0.049
10 05 0026
14.1
7•4
118
7.20
32
0.220
0.230
0.059
0.038
72/10/18
15 50 0000
12
130
7.40
47
0.180
0.250
0.056
0.032
15 50 0004
6.1
8.8
130
7.40
48
0.180
0.240
0.058
0.031
15 50 0015
6.’
9.4
130
7.40
‘+9
0.190
0.240
0.070
0.031
15 50 0021
6.1
10.2
130
7.60
49
0.190
0.220
0.063
0.031
J VALIU <-JO’ ’ 1 ( :
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
?7 6AI LS278 6A 1
46 ‘.7 00.0 092 05 30.0
Si-UP CANAL BETW DULUTH . MINN PT
27005 15 DULUTH
0/SIIPERION BAY
AT AERIAL BRIDGE
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 006 S 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME r)EPTH NO?&W03 TOT KJEL NH3-N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L ‘IG/L MG/L MC /L P MG/L P
72/10/14 13 30 0.29Q 0. S0 0.054 0.005K 0.012
72/11/04 13 70 0.2s0 0.390 0.046 0.014 0.058
7?/12/0? 0.l9’ 0. #S0 0.091 0.018 0.050
73/03/0? 10 00 0. ?Q() 0.210 0.034 0.02? 0.022
73/04/07 1? 30 0.?30 0.780 0.044 0.012 0.065
73/05/20 1? 50 0.250 o.con 0.005K 0.025
73/06/24 11 30 0.160 ?.730 0.154 0.015 0.040
73/07/28 1? 00 0.273 0. B0 0.044 0.026 0.065
73/08/25 10 45 0.750 0.’.40 0.039 0.006 0.020
K VALUE KNO.’N TO 8E LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET P TPJEVAt )AIcT 74/it / t)
7 ->Rl LS27 H1
46 4 00.0 0 2 06 00.0
ST LOUIS 3AY/SUPEPIOR kAY CONNFC
27 15 OIJLIJTI1/SLJF’RIP
1/SUPEPIOR I-SAY
AT 1)5 63 BkOG RET ‘ IC S & CONNORS PTS
1iE)- ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH
00 - 30 u06? 00610 00671
DATE TIME DFPTH JO?è NO3 T( T KJEL JH3—N f- iOS—i)IS PHOS-TJT
EPOM OF N—T1)TAL N TOTAL OPTHO
TO DAY FFET MG/L iO ”L MG/L MG/L P MG/L
72/10/141230 0.11) 1.300 0.310 0.035 0.115
72/11/04 10 00 0.2’-0 0. 0 J.054 0.014 0.06 4
72/12/0? 10 30 0.115 1.290 0.176 0.036 0.1? -.
73/03/02 OP 30 0.190 0.903 (I.?1O 0.040 0.075
73/05/20 08 30 0.066 2.700 0.i1 0.033 0.113
73/06/24 11 00 0.140 3.200 0.115 ( 1.048 0.07 5
73/07/28 08 45 0.315 1.2- () 0.300 0.09? 0.145
73/08/25 13 00 0.210 1.100 0.3W) 0.075 u.il
73/09/23 08 flU 0.260 l. 00 0.240 0.072
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
27i 6C1 LS278 6C1
46 43 30.0 092 04 00.0
UNNAMED STPE4M
27 IS SUPERIOR
T/SUPEPIO BAY
2ND AVE 3RDG NE LINCOLN SCHOOL
I IEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO2 .NO3 TOT KJEL NH3-N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L r46/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/10/14 13 00 0.170 1.400 0.336 0.O6
12/11/04 10 30 0.250 1.?00 O.?94 0.058 0.170
72/12/02 0.176 1.300 0.150 0.064
73/03/03 09 30 0.027 1. 00 0.510 0.273 0.400
73/04/07 09 00 0.176 1.150 0.085 O.06 0.160
73/05/20 10 00 0.0 17 ‘ .co 0.Ob2 0.012 0.145
73/07/28 09 00 0.154 0. 60 0.120 O.07 0.125
73/08/25 15 00 0.120 1.540 0.075 0.069 0.19
73/09/23 07 30 0. IA O 1.000 0.086 0.056 0.150
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
?7 h01 LS 7b DI
4 00.0 0 ’ Od 00.0
t MA 1 JJ1 ‘ ! /L’
IS SJPFL’1O
T/JPI !O ? hAY
AF US 53 ? l)G EAST E’il) F ALLOVFL
) (FP LES 2 1 1 120’+
1 0000 F ET I), - (
u0&3
0fl6
00610
0fl671
DATE
TIMF
DEPT -
‘ U? ’ NIfl
Tut K JELL
NH3—N
P1-tOS—OIS
Pp-iOS—t0T
FPOM
OF
N-TOTAL
N
TOTAI
OUTHO
TO
DAY
FEET
MG/L
1G/L
MG/I
Mr,/L
M( ,/L ?
72/10/14
13
15
0.092
0.650
(‘.150
0.009
0.05’+
72/11/04
10
00
0.219
1.200
(s.1&
(‘.027
0.260
72/12/02
09
20
0,126
0.600
3.011
0.O 1Z
0.066
73/03/03
10
00
0.9”0
1.500
0.720
0. 40
1.100
71/04/07
10
45
0.0’2
?.100
0.017
0.025
0.155
73/05/20
10
15
0.010K
0.960
0.013
0.006
0.UPS
73/06/24
09
00
0.044
0.775
0.063
Q.00E
0.040
73/Q7/2R
09
3d
0.054
0.420
0.040
0.031
0.055
73/08/25
OR
30
0.120
1.150
0.066
fl.06’
0.1S S
73/09/23
08
45
0.076
0.4 0
0.030
o.C77
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET PETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
7R E1 LS 278 E1
46 41 00.0 392 01 00.0
iLijFF CRE E c
27 15 SUPEPIOR
r,s’;PERIOR HAY
tic -,3 F , 2 f-3R06 BETWEEN ALLOVEZ
I1EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET
& ITASCA
DEPTH
DATE
TIME
DEPTH
NO2F NO3
TOT KJEL
NI-13-N
PHOS-DIS
PHOS-TOT
FROM
OF
N—TOTAL
N
TOTAL
OPTHO
TO
DAY
FEET
MG/L
M(/L
MG/1
MG/L ‘
MG/L P
72/10/14
13
30
0.120
0.950
0.160
0.013
0.115
72/11/04
11
30
0.110
1.500
0.273
0.013
0.05
72/12/02
10
00
0.130
1.3 0
0.126
0.081
0.210
73/05/20
13
45
0.011
7.310
0.005 K
0.0’ l
0.120
73/06/24
09
00
0.044
0.R 0
0.03f
0. 05f
0.1?5
73/07/28
10
30
0.025
0.980
0.069
0.060
u.110
73/08/25
08
45
0.083
0.850
0.038
0.02
0.070
73/09/23
08
15
0.180
1.150
0.071
0.056
0.135
K VALUE KNOWN TO RE LEES
THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 7 ’ ./l0/30
2 7 fr] LS?7 16F1
‘.0 0.0 0 )? 00 30.0
F- L\r C cEE’
27 15 S(JPEPIO
T/SLJPF-UOP t 3 l
AT US .3 . 2 DG JUST SE OF ITASCA
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH
0063(, 00675 00610 00671
DATE TIME DEPTH NO ? NO3 roT KJEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS HOS-TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL UQTH()
TO DAY FEET MG/L ¼11,/L MG/L HG/L P 116/L
7?/1O/14 13 45 0.470 1.280 0.231 0.13k
7?/11/04 1100 0.105 1.470 0.?20 0.010 0.071
73/05/20 11 00 0.094 ‘.100 0.470 j.f ?O
73/07/28 11 00 0.040 1.100 0.078 i.066 0.105
73/Oq/2c 09 00 0.O 3? O. 70 0.017 0.022 0.070
73/09/23 07 00 0.04? 1.200 0.04 0.031
-------
STORET RETRIFVAL DATF 74/10/30
2786G1 LS278 G1
‘+6 42 30.0 092 01 00.0
SUPEP IO ENT Y TO SUP HR 3R BASIN
27 1 SUPERIOP
0/SUPERIOR BAY
AT E TP ME END OF MINNESUTAPOINT
11E ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00f 25 00610 00671 0066’
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT JEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MC /L P MG/L P
72/10/14 14 00 0.160 1.150 0.250 O.03e 0.09f
72/11/04 0.200 0.?52 0.025 0.15’ .
73/05/20 1 ‘+5 0.240 0.580 0.160 0.0 10 0.015
73/07/28 13 00 O.?80 1.050 0.154 0.070 0.115
73/08/25 10 15 0.240 0.980 0.023 0.031 0.060
73/09/23 07 45 0.231 0.160 0.120 0.019 0.032
------- |