U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LAKE lOTHREWGOG
STATE OF VERMONT, U, S, A,,
AND
THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC, CANADA
EPA REGION I
WORKING PAPER No, 19
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
U\KE tWHREWGOG
STATE OF VERMONT, U, S, A,,
AND
THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC, CANADA
EPA REGION I
WORKING PAPER No, 19
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
VERMONT AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
AND THE
VERMONT NATIONAL GUARD
AUGUST, 1974
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Vermont Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Conclusions i
II. Introduction 4
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 6
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 8
V. Nutrient Loadings 14
VI. Literature Reviewed 26
VII. Appendices 27
-------
ii
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 as a
research project in response to an Administration commitment to
investigate the nationwide threat of accelerated eutrophication to
fresh water 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 [ S303(e)],
water quality criteria/standards review [ 3O3(c)], clean lakes
[ 53l4(a,b)], and water quality monitoring [ lO6 and §305(b)] acti-
vities 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 refinement of nutrient water-quality criteria for the Nation’s
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 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 Vermont Agency of Environmental
Conservation for professional involvement and to the Vermont National
Guard for conduct of the tributary sampling phase of the Survey.
Martin L. Johnson, Secretary of the Vermont Agency of Environmental
Conservation; Gordon R. Ryper, Commissioner of the Water Quality
Division; David L. Clough, Director, James W. Morse II, Biologist, and
Wally McLean, Sanitary Engineer, of the Water Quality Division, provided
invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the study. Reginald
A. LaRosa, Director of the Water Supply and Pollution Control Division,
and James F. Agan, Chief of the Operations Section, Environmental
Engineering Division, were most helpful in arranging for the sampling
of wastewater treatment plants involved in the Survey.
Major General Reginald N. Cram, the Adjutant General of Vermont,
and Project Officer Major Howard Buxton, who directed the volunteer
efforts of the Vermont National Guardsmen, are also gratefully
acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
LAKE NAME
Arrowhead Mountain Lake
Clyde Pond
Harriman Reservoir
Lake Champlain
Lake Lamoille
Lake Memphremagog
Waterbury Reservoir
COUNTY
Chittenden, Franklin
Orleans
Wi ndham
Addison, Chittenden,
Franklin
Lamoille
Orleans
Washington, Lamoille
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF VERMONT
-------
‘I
LAKE
MEMPHREMAGOG
x 800303
LAKE
MEMPHREMAGOG
Tributary Sampling Ste
Lake Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
-------
LAKE MEMPHREMAGOG*
STORET NO. 5008
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Lake Memphremagog exhibits progressive improvement in trophic
condition from the south (Vermont) end to the north (Quebec) end.
Survey data and data from previous studies indicate the Vermont
portion of the lake is eutrophic, while at least the north half
of the lake is as yet oligotrophic with a mesotrophic zone of
transition presumably occurring between the two extremes.
Troublesome blue-green algae blooms have been increasingly
frequent in the Vermont portion during the past few years, and
a general deterioration of water quality has been noted; rooted
aquatic vegetation is quite sparse in the main lake and approaches
nuisance levels only in South Bay, Vermont, and Fitch Bay, Quebec
(dough, 1973).
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The results of the algal assay show that the Vermont portion
of Lake Memphremagog was phosphorus limited at the time the sample
was collected in May, 1973 (see page 8).
The 1972 lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in June
but nitrogen limitation in July and October of that year. Some
may question point-source phosphorus control when the lake may be
* A table of factors for conversion of English units to metric
equivalents is given in Appendix D of this report.
-------
2
nitrogen limited at times; note, however, that even in October,
1972, when the N/P ratio was 7/1 , a reduction in mean dissolved
phosphorus of only 6 micrograms per liter would have resulted in
phosphorus limitation (an N/P ratio >14/1).
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1 . Point sources--During the sampling year, Lake Memphre-
magog received a total phosphorus load at a rate less than that
proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as “dangerous” (i.e., a
eutrophic rate; see page 22) but well in excess of his “permis-
sible” or oligotrophic rate. Of this load, it is calculated that
Vermont point sources contributed about 42%. •The amount of phos-
phorus contributed by Quebec point sources is not known, but if
these sources contributed only 0.7 lbs/acre/yr (0.08 g/m 2 /yr),
a dangerous loading rate would have resulted.
It is concluded that 80 to 90 percent removal of phosphorus
at Vermont and Quebec point sources would reduce the loading to
a rate approximating an oligotrophic rate and should result in
a marked improvement in the trophic condition of the Vermont por-
tion of Lake Memphremagog as well as provide adequate protection
of the existing water quality elsewhere in the lake.
2. Non-point sources--The mean annual phosphorus exports
of the Clyde and Johns rivers compared favorably with the exports
-------
3
of unimpacted Vermont streams studied elsewhere (see pages 21
and 24), but the mean phosphorus exports of the Barton and
Black rivers were significantly higher. These higher exports
are believed to be due to more intensive agricultural uses in
the Barton and Black river drainages and perhaps also to the
extensive wetlands adjacent to these two streams.
-------
4
II. INTRODUCTION
Among the 220-plus water bodies included in the National Eutrophication
Survey in 1972, Lake Memphremagog is unique in that 73 percent of the lake
area and 91 percent of the lake volume are in the Province of Quebec,
Canada; and, therefore, only a very small portion of this water body was
subject to study during the Survey. Because of this, reliance on the lake
data obtained by other investigators has been necessary in the assessment
of trophic conditions elsewhere in the lake. Conversely, 71 percent of
the Mernphremagog drainage basin is in Vermont, and the Survey assessment
of point and areal sources of nutrients to the lake is much more complete.
However, little is known about Quebec sources of nutrients.
Recreational uses of Lake Memphremagog include fishing, boating, swim-
ming, and aesthetics. The lake is also used as a water supply for camps
and resorts along the shores.
Fishing is reported to be excellent in the Vermont portion, particularly
for rainbow trout in spring and early sumer and for brown trout in the
fall (dough, 1973). Fishing for landlocked salmon formerly was excellent,
but the construction of dams on the major spawning streams, particularly
the Clyde River, has virtually eliminated this fishery in the Vermont part
of the lake. Residual populations of salmon are still found in the Quebec
portion of the lake, and fishing for the deep-water lake trout continues
to be good there.
-------
5
By international treaty, water level fluctuations are maintained within
specific limits by the operation of the Dominion Textile Company, Ltd.,
hydroelectric dam at Magog, Quebec, Canada.
-------
6
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry*:
1. Entire Lake -
a. Surface area: 23,369 acres.
b. Mean depth: 51 feet.
c. Maximum depth: 351 feet.
d. Volume: 1,191,819 acre/feet.
e. Mean hydraulic retention time: 1.7 years.
2. U. S. Portion -
a. Surface area: 6,269 acres.
b. Mean depth: 21 feet.
c. Maximum depth: 39 feet.
d. Volume: 131,649 acre/feet.
e. Mean hydraulic retention time: 0.26 years.
B. Tributaries and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for U.S. flow data)
1. Tributaries in U.S. -
Drainage areat Mean flowt
Barton River 174.0 mi 237.6 cfs
Black River 134.0 mi 2 204.1 cfs
Clyde River 142.0 mi 2 216.1 cfs
Johns River 9.9 mi 15.0 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage in Vermont 17.2 mi 26.2 cfs
* Morse and Flanders, 1971.
I Drainage areas are accurate within ±1%; gaged flows are accurate within
±15%, and ungaged flows are accurate within ±20%.
tt Estimated using the runoff coefficient used by U.S.G.S. in determining
major U.S. tributary flows.
-------
7
2. All tributaries & immediate
drainage in Quebec _________ _________
Totals
3. Outlet (in Quebec) -
Magog River
C. Preclpitation**:
11 Year of sampling: 47.4 inches.
2. Mean annual: 36.9 inches.
1- Drainage areas are accurate within ±1%; gaged flows are accurate within
±15%, and ungaged flows are accurate within ±20%.
tt Estimated using the runoff coefficient used by U.S.G.S. in determining
major U.S. tributary flows.
* Includes area of lake.
** See Working Paper No.1, “Survey’Methods”.
Drainage area Mean flowt
173.4 mi 2 264.0 cfstl
650.5 mi 2 963.0 cfs
687.0 mi 2 * 963.0 cfs
-------
8
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Memphrernagog 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
three stations on the lake and from a number of depths at each station
(see map, page v), except for station 3 at which the July sample could
not be collected because of a helicopter fuel shortage. During each
visit, a single depth—integrated (15 feet or near bottom to surface)
sample was composited from the stations for phytoplankton identification
and enumeration, and a depth-integrated sample was collected from each
of the stations for chlorophyll a analysis. The maximum depths sampled
were 30 feet at station 1 , 7 feet at station 2, and 24 feet at station 3.
During the October, 1972 sampling period, a single five-gallon depth-
integrated sample was composited from the three stations for algal assays;
however, this sample was lost in shipment, and a similar sample was pro-
vided by personnel of the Vermont Department of Water Resources in May
of 1973.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B, and the
data for the fall sampling period, when the lake was essentially 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.
-------
9
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
(10/05/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 13.8 13.9 13.9 14.0
Dissolved oxygen (mg/i) 9.2 9.7 9.8 10.2
Conductivity (wnhos) 138 175 164 228
pH (units) 7.3 7.5 7.5 7.8
Alkalinity (mg/i) 28 62 62 96
Total P (mg/i) 0.015 0.030 0.021 0.060
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.006 0.012 0.008 0.027
NO + NO (mg/i) 0.010 0.029 0.025 0.050
AnU onia mg/1) 0.030 0.057 0.055 0.100
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 60 78 79 100
-------
10
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
06/03/72 1. Dinobryon 1,092
2. Fragilaria 1,005
3. Anabaena 260
4. Asterionella 202
5. Melosira 159
Other genera 124
Total 2,842
07/31/72 1. Dinobryon 1,036
2. Fragilaria 325
3. Cryptomonas 277
4. Polycystis 169
5. Rhizosolenia 157
Other genera 795
Total 2,759
10/05/72 1. Anabaena 3,057
2. Melosira 943
3. Flagellates 906
4. Synedra 717
5. Chroococcus 340
Other genera 1 ,622
Total 7,585
-------
11
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
Date
06/03/ 72
Station
Number
01
02
03
Chlorophyll
( p 9/ 1 )
16.6
13.8
7.8
07/31/72
10/05/72
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
01
02
03
01
02
03
17.1
17.9
(not done)
3 3
11.0
24.5
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Spike (mg/l )
Ortho P
Conc. (mg/i )
Inorganic N
Conc. (mg/i )
Maximum yield
( mg/i-dry wt. )
Control
o.oio P
0.020 p
0.050 P
0.050 P + 5.0 N
0.050 P + 10.0 N
10.0 N
0.012
0.022
0.032
0.062
0.062
0.062
0.012
0.300
0.300
0.300
0.300
5.300
10.300
10.300
2.5
5.1
6.3
6.7
18.5
21.1
1.6
Spike (mg/i )
Ortho P
Conc. (mg/i )
Inorganic N
Conc. (mg/l )
Maximum yield
( mg/i-dry wt. )
Control
0.010 p
0.020 P
0.050 P
0.050 P + 5.0 N
0.050 P + 10.0 N
10.0 N
0.009
0.019
0.029
0.059
0.059
0.059
0.009
0.250
0.250
0.250
0.250
5.250
10. 250
10 . 250
1 .4
3.8
4.8
5.5
12.4
13.4
1.1
a
2. Filtered and nutrient spiked -
-------
12
3. Discussion -
The control yields of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum , show that the potential primary productivity of
the Vermont portion of Lake Memphremagog was moderate at
the time the sample was collected (May, 1973). Also, the
significantly increased yields with increased levels of
orthophosphorus (to about 0.030 mg/i) show that the lake
was phosphorus limited (note that the addition of only
nitrogen produced yields no greater than the control yields).
The 1972 lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in the
Vermont portion of the lake in June (N/P ratio - 36/1) but
nitrogen limitation in July (N/P = il/i) and October (N/P =
7/1) of that year.
It may be questioned whether point-source phosphorus
control would be effective when at least the Vermont por-
tion of the lake may be nitrogen limited at times. Note,
however, that in October, 1972, when the N/P ratio was 7/1
a reduction in mean dissolved phosphorus of only 6 micrograms
per liter would have resulted in phosphorus limitation (N/P
ratio >14/1); and likewise, a reduction of only 4 pg/l in
July would have resulted in phosphorus limitation (N/P = 14/1).
-------
13
D. Trophic Condition:
The increasing occurrence of troublesome blooms of blue-
green algae is the best indication of the 1 eutrophic state of
the Vermont portion of the lake. The Survey data support this
assessment in that mean chlorophyll a and mean total phosphorus
values for the Vermont portion of the lake are the highest of
all Vermont water bodies studied, including Lake Champlain.
Studies previously conducted by personnel of the Vermont Depart-
ment of Water Resources (Morse and Flanders, 1971) support this
conclusion.
-------
14
V. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Vermont National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the tribu-
tary sites indicated on the map (page v), except for the high runoff
months of April and May when two samples were collected. Sampling was
begun in July, 1972, and was completed in July, 1973.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the year
of sampling and a “normalized” or average year were provided by the New
England District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the Vermont
tributary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled Vermont tributaries were
calculated using mean annual concentrations and mean annual flows. Nu-
trient loadings for unsampled Vermont “minor tributaries and immediate
drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S) and Quebec tributaries and immediate drainage
were estimated by using the nutrient loads, in lbs/mi 2 /year, in the Johns
River at station 51 and multiplying by the respective Vermont ZZ and Quebec
drainage areas in mi 2 .
The operator of the Newport wastewater treatment plant provided
monthly effluent samples and corresponding flow data; however, the
untreated discharges of the villages of Albany, Barton, Derby Center,
Glover, Island Pond, and Orleans were not sampled during the Survey, and
-------
15
nutrient loads attributed to these sources were estimated*. Nutrient
contributions from Quebec point sources are not known.
The wastes from the villages of Derby Center and Island Pond are
intercepted by Clyde Pond, and the estimated nutrient loads attributed
to these two sources were adjusted for the calculated retention in Clyde
Pond (15% of the phosphorus and none of the nitrogen; see Working Paper
No. 15, “Report on Clyde Pond”).
In this report, the nutrient loads attributed to the various tribu-
taries are those measured at the respective sampling stations minus up-
stream point-source loads, if any. Note, however, that the Clyde River
loads were measured at station 22 upstream from the Newport discharge,
and only the loads attributed to the villages of Derby Center and Island
Pond were subtracted from the measured Clyde Pond loads.
The total phosphorus outlet load in the Magog River in Quebec was
estimated on the basis of phosphorus data obtained in a study by per-
sonnel of the Vermont Department of Water Resources (Morse and Flanders,
op. cit.; at their station 19) and the estimated outlet flow. Comparable
data for nitrogen were not available, and no estimate of the outlet
nitrogen load could be made.
* See Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
16
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known Vermont municipal -
Name
Pop.
Served* Treatment
Mean
Flow (mgd )
Receiving
Water
2. Vermont industrial - There are no known separate industrial
discharges of nutrient significance.
Newport
5,000
primary
1.361
Clyde
River
Derby Center
430
none
0.043*
Clyde
River
Island
Pond
300
none
0.030*
Cylde
River
Barton
1,170
none
0.117*
Barton
River
Glover
240
none
0.024*
Barton
River
Orleans
1,890
none
0.189*
Barton
River
Albany
120
none
0.012*
Black
River
* Estimated; see Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
17
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
lbs P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Vermont tributaries (non-point
load) -
Barton River 19,780 18.8
Black River 16,050 15.2
Clyde River 9,850 9.4
Johns River 560 0.5
b. Minor tributaries & immediate drainage
in Vermont (non-point load) - 980 0.9
c. All tributaries & immediate drainage
in Quebec (non-point load) - 9,880 9.4
d. Known Vermont municipal -
Newport STP 30,470 29.0
Derby Center 1,280 1.2
Island Pond 360 0.3
Barton 4,100 3.9
Glover 840 0.8
Orleans 6,620 6.3
Albany 420 0.4
e. Septic tanks (entire lake)* - 380 0.4
f. Known industrial - None -
g. Direct precipitation (entire
lake)** - 3,650 3.5
Total 105,220 100.0
* Estimated 1 ,500 persons served; see Working Paper No. 1.
** Estimated; see Working Paper No. 1.
-------
18
2. Outputs -
Magog River, Quebec 60,670*
3. Net annual P accumulation - 44,550 pounds
* Estimated; see page 15.
-------
19
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
lbsN/ %of
Source yr total
a. Vermont tributaries (non-point
load) -
Barton River 483,490 20.8
Black River 432,010 18.6
Clyde River 385,430 16.6
Johns River 32,690 1.4
b. Minor tributaries & immediate drainage
in Vermont (non-point load) - 56,790 2.4
c. All tributaries & immediate drainage
in Quebec (non-point load) - 572,570 24.6
d. Known Vermont municipal -
Newport SIP 84,300 3.6
Derby Center 4,040 0.2
Island Pond 2,540 0.1
Barton 11,000 0.5
Glover 2,260 <0.1
Orleans 17,770 0.8
Albany 1,130 <0.1
e. Septic tanks (entire lake)* - 14,100 0.6
f. Known industrial - None -
g. Direct precipitation (entire
lake)** - 225,140 9.7
Total 2,325,260 100.0
* Estimated 1,500 persons served; see Working Paper No. 1.
** Estimated; see Working Paper No. 1.
-------
20
2. Outputs -
Magog River, Quebec Unknown
3. Net annual N accumulation - Unknown
-------
21
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/mi 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr
Barton River 114 2,779
Black River 120 3,224
Clyde River 69 2,714
Johns River 57 3,302
E. Yearly Loading Rates - Entire Lake:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loading
rates, exclusive of Quebec point sources, 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 re-
maining oligotrophic or becoming oligotrophic if morphometry
perinitted. A mesotrophic rate would be considered one between
“dangerous” and “permissible”.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
lbs/acr /yr 4.5 1.9 99.5 ?
grams/rn /yr 0.50 0.21 11.2 -
Volle weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Lake Memphremagog:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 0.58
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 0.29
-------
22
F. Controllability of Nutrients:
1. Point sources--During the Survey sampling year, Lake
Memphremagog received a total phosphorus load at a rate a
little less than Vollenweider’s dangerous rate but well in
excess of the permissible rate. Of this load, it is calculated
that Vermont point sources contributed about 42%. The amount of
phosphorus contributed by Quebec point sources is not known, but
note that if these sources contributed only 0.7 lbs/acre/yr, or
0.08 g/m 2 /yr, a dangerous loading rate would have resulted.
In the following table, the total phosphorus loading rates
that can be achieved by the specified levels of phosphorus
removal at the seven Vermont point sources are compared to Vol-
lenweider’s suggested rates.
Total P Loading 2
%of P Removal lbs/acre/yr g/m fyr
Existing 4.5 0.50
50 3.6 0.40
70 3.2 0.36
80 3.0 0.34
90 2.8 0.31
100 2.6 0.29
Vollenweider:
“Dangerous”
(eutrophic
rate)
0.58
“Permissible”
(oligotrophic rate)
0.29
-------
23
It is evident that any of the indicated levels of phosphorus
removal would significantly reduce the loading rate, but only
complete removal would result in a permissible or oligotrophic
rate.
As noted before, the existing phosphorus loading rate does
not account for Quebec point-source loads. Had these loads been
included, the loading rate would have been higher to some degree,
of course, and it follows that phosphorus reduction at Quebec
point sources comparable to that provided at Vermont point sources
would be necessary to achieve a favorable loading rate.
It is quite unlikely that the 100 percent removal of phos-
phorus required to reduce the calculated loading rate to the
permissible or oligotrophic rate is feasible or even possible.
However, 80 to 9Opercent removal would approximate the oligotro-
phic rate and should result in a marked improvement in the trophic
condition of the Vermont portion of Lake Memphremagog as well as
provide adequate protection of existing water quality elsewhere
in the lake.
Previous studies (Morse and Flanders, op. cit.) have shown
that, except for Fitch Bay in Quebec, aerobic conditions persist
throughout the lake in even the deepest portions; and, therefore,
-------
24
recycling of sedimented phosphorus should be minimal: This should
enhance the effectiveness of phosphorus removal at the levels sug-
gested above.
At the time of preparation of this report, active planning
for phosphorus removal at the City of Newport is underway; plans
have been approved for treatment facilities at the villages of
Island Pond (Brighton Town) and Orleans; preliminary engineering
plans have been approved for the villages of Albany, Barton, and
Derby Center; and a regional waste treatment facility to serve
the villages of Barton, Glover, and Orleans is still under active
consideration by the Vermont Agency of Environmental Conservation
(Morse, 1974). Phosphorus removal ultimately will be provided
at each of these waste-treatment facilities, but timing is depen-
dent on other construction priorities and availability of con-
struction grant funds (dough, 1974).
2. Non-point sources--During the Survey sampling year,
the mean annual phosphorus exports of the Clyde River and the
Johns River (see page 21) compared favorably with the exports of
unimpacted Vermont streams studied elsewhere in which the mean
phosphorus export was 52 lbs/mi 2 /yr and the range was from 30
to 65 lbs/mi 2 /yr.
In part, the relatively low Clyde River export probably is
due to the ponds and lakes in the course of the river in which
-------
25
sedimentation and/or biological assimilation of phosphorus can
occur, while the low export of the Johns River is likely due to
the small watershed and comparative lack of cultural influences.
The significantly higher mean phosphorus exports of the Barton
and Black rivers may have been due to underestimation of point-
sources loads. However, the only point source known in the Black
River drainage is the small community of Albany (estimated con-
tributing population of 120), and it is hardly conceivable that
underestimation of that load resulted in the higher export attri-
buted to the Black River. It is much more likely that the higher
phosphorus export of these two rivers is due to the more intensive
agricultural uses in the drainages and perhaps also the occurrence
of extensive wetlands adjacent to both streams, particularly in the
Black River system.
-------
26
VI. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1970. Report on water quality and pollution control of
the Lake Memphremagog and international stream basins. VT Dept.
Water Resources, Montpelier.
dough, David L., 1973. Personal communication (aquatic weeds; uses
of Lake Memphremagog; salmon and trout fishery; industries in
drainage). VT Dept. Water Resources, Montpelier.
__________ 1974. Personal comunication (phosphorus control poli-
cies). VT Dept. Water Resources, Montpelier.
Gormsen, Paul J., 1973. Personal cormiunication (point sources in
drainage; estimates of Newport flows and loads). VT Dept.
Water Resources, Montpelier.
Ketelle, Martha J., and Paul D. Uttormark, 1971. Problem lakes in the
United States. EPA Water Poll. Contr. Res. Ser., Proj. 16010 EHR,
Wash., D.C.
Leggett, William, 1972. Personal comunication (productivity in Quebec
portion of Lake Memphremagog). McGill U. Water Res. Unit; Montreal,
Quebec, Canada.
Morse, James W., II, 1974. Personal comunication (status of Vermont
water pollution control facilities, Jan., 1974). Dept. Water
Resources, Montpel i er.
______________ and P. Howard Flanders, 1971. Primary productivity
study of three Vermont lakes. Water Qual. Surv. Ser. Rept. No. 2,
VT Agency of Environmental Conservation, Montpelier.
Vollenweider, Richard A., (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz
A. Hydrol.
-------
27
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR VE HONT 8/8/74
LAKE CODE 5008 LAKE MEMPHREMAGOG
TOTAL OPAINAGE AREA OF LAKE 0.0
SUB—DRAINAGE NORMALIZED FLOWS
TRIBUTARY AREA JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MEAN
5 00BZZ 17.20 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
500823 142.00 120.00 116.00 237.00 843.00 305.00 160.00 91.70 94.80 96.40 148.00 204.00 182.00 216.12
500831 174.00 132.00 127.00 261.00 927.00 335.00 176.00 101.00 104.00 106.00 162.00 225.00 200.00 237.59
500841 134.00 114.00 109.00 224.00 796.00 288.00 151.00 86.60 89.50 91.10 139.00 193.00 172.00 204.09
500851 9.87 8.37 8.05 16.50 58.60 21.20 11.20 6.38 6.59 6.71 10.30 14.20 12.60 15.03
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE = 0.0 TOTAL FLOW IN = 8087.77
SUM OF SUB—DRAINAGE AREAS = 477.07 TOTAL FLOW OUT = 0.0
NOTE *** TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE AND DATA FOR TRIB ZZ NOT KNOWN
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
500823 7 72 194.00 15 116.00
8 72 132.00 12 126.00
9 72 55.80 19 49.00
10 72 102.00 15 75.80
11 72 221.00 9 577.00
12 72 207.00 7 602.00
1 73 241.00 24 849.00
2 73 202.00 21 141.00
3 73 499.00 21 802.00
4 73 623.00 17 674.00 23 581.00
5 73 482.00 6 503.00 23 1035.00
6 73 359.00
7 73 466.00 7 604.00
500831 7 72 214.00 15 128.00
8 72 145.00 12 138.00
9 72 61.50 19 53.70
10 72 112.00 15 83.10
11 72 243.00 9 633.00
12 72 228.00 7 663.00
1 73 264.00 24 933.00
73 222.00 21 155.00
3 73 548.00 21 880.00
4 73 685.00 17 741.00 23 638.00
5 73 529.00 5 580.00 23 1137.00
6 73 394.00
7 73 513.00 6 744.00
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
J* Value known to be in error
K* Value known to be less than indicated
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOE INFORMATION FOR VERMONT 8/8/74
LA’ E CODE 5008 LAKE IIEMPHREMAGOG
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
500841 7 72 184.00 15 110.00
8 72 124.00 12 119.00
9 72 52.80 19 46.10
10 72 96.20 15 71.40
11 72 208.00 9 544.00
12 72 196.00 7 570.00
1 73 228.00 24 801.00
2 73 191.00 21 133.00
3 73 470.00 21 756.00
4 73 588.00 17 636.00 23 548.00
5 73 455.00 5 498.00 23 977.00
6 73 338.00
7 73 440.00 6 639.00
500851 7 72 13.50 15 8.10
8 72 9.20 12 8.70
9 72 3.90 19 3.40
10 72 7.10 15 5.30
11 72 15.30 9 40.10
12 72 14.40 7 41.90
1 73 16.70 24 59.00
2 73 14.10 21 9.80
3 73 34.60 21 55.70
4 73 43.30 17 46.90 23 40.40
5 73 33.50 6 34.90 23 72.00
6 73 25.10
7 73 32.40 7 42.00
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
K* Value known to be less than indicated
-------
STJ ET ET21EVAL D T 74/07/0?
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME DEPT,1
OF
DAY FEET
32217
C ML P PH V L
A
UG/L
rj0 bU I
55 10.0 13 00.0
LAI
-------
STOPET ET IEVaL DATE 74/07/02
500822 LS500822
44 56 30.0 072 11 30.0
CLYDE RIVER
50 15/MEMPHREMOGOG
I/LAKE MEMPHREMAGOG
GROG BELO GAGE STN ABOv NEWPORT STP
1 IEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO2 .NO3 TOT KJEL NH3—N PIlOS-DIS PHOS—Tol
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/07/15 10 35 0.093 0.400 0.020 0.010 0.020
72/08/12 10 56 0.062 0.500 0.010 0.005K* 0.032
72/09/19 10 10 0.121 0.600 0.076 0.007 0.024
72/10/15 12 10 0.180 0.450 0.092 0.005K 0.028
72/11/09 12 15 0.200 0.660 0.044 0.010 0.063
72/12/07 09 45 0.250 0.290 0.026 0.008 0.011
73/01/24 10 35 0.410 0.500 0.056 0.010 0.045
73/02/21 09 25 0.399 0.480 0.154 0.006 0.0 IS
73/03/21 10 25 0.360 0.960 0.370 0.008 0.035
73/04/17 10 10 0.280 0.330 0.034 0.005K 0.020
3/Q4/23 14 05 0.240 1.150 0.030 0.005K 0.015
73/05/06 09 45 0.198 0.360 0.034 0.005K 0.025
73/05/23 11 00 0.189 0.400 0.036 0.007 0.025
73/07/07 10 00 0.110 2.510 1.630 0.005K 0.025
K* Value known to be less than indicated
-------
ST3 ET PET’ IEVaL O4TE 74/07/02
DATE
FROM
TO
72/06/03
7 2/0 7/3 1
72/I 0/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
r)AY FEET
18 00 0000
16 40 0000
10 10 0000
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
13. 8J
I 7 • 9J
1I. OJ
500 02
44 55 10.0 37? 13 0O.C
L E • 1E,- IAC,O ,
50019 VEPMO T
I 1E’ ALES
S
2111202
0006 FEET )E-’T-
00010
00300
00077
00094
00400
00’+1O
O0 30
00510
00665
0fl ”6
DATE
TIME
DE°T 4
WATER
00
TRANSP
CNDUCTVY
PH
1
ALK
N07&N03
N’-i3—N
P-lOS—TOT
P-iOS-flIS
FRO i
OF
TEMP
SECCHI
FIELD
CACO3
N-TOTAL
TOTAL
TO
JAY
FEET
CENT
M(/L
INCHES
MICRO’*lO
SO
MG/L
Mf ,/L
M6/L
M6/L P
1 (,/L P
72/06/03
18 00 0000
18.3
10.2
90
160
thOU
4
0.OHO
0.020
0.0?!
O.u(”-,
18 00 0007
13.7
10.5
140
7.70
,2
0.160
0.020
0.02 9
0.006
72/07/31
16 40 0000
72
160
7. 0
60
0.070
0.100
0.047
0.02
16 40 0005
22.9
160
7.5 )
L.9
0.080
O.0R0
0.036
0.01
72/I0/0
10 10 0000
60
190
7.3fl
77
0.050
0.100
0.0S
J.0?7
10 10 0004
13.9
9.2
200
7.30
72
).050
0.0 O
). 06)
-------
ST34ET ETQ1EVAL DATE 74/07/02
500803
44 ¶ , 30.0 ) 2 13
MEMP’-’ FMAGC)G LAKE
50 14 /E e ONT
I 1E LES
2111202
0009 FELT DEPT—
32217
DEPTH CHLRPHYL
A
FEET UG/L
30 • C
00010
00300
00077
0004
00400
00410
00630
00610
00
00 66
DATE
TIME
DEPTH
WATER
DO
T’ ANSP
CNDUCTVY
PH
T ALK
N02 NO3
NH3-N
P9OS—TOT
PHOS- 1S
FROM
OF
TEMP
SECCHL
FIELD
CACO3
‘J-1OTAL
TOTAL
TO
DAY
FEET
CENT
MG/L
INCHES
MICPOMHO
SU
4G/L
MG/L
1G/L
-‘G/L P
M /L i-
72/06/03
18 15 0000
17.7
9.5
82
180
A.I’
l
0.090
0.010
0.014
0.003
18 15 0006
18.3
9.7
170
8.00
bO
0.100
0.040
0.024
0.001
72/10/OS
09 50 0000
60
138
7.75
52
0.020
0.050
0.022
0. O OP
09 50 0004
14.0
10.2
138
7.75
50
0.020
0.060
0.015
0.o0t
09 50 0015
13.9
10.0
138
7.70
28
0.010
0.010
0.026
0.006
09 50 0024
13.
9.4
138
7.40
25
0.020
0.030
U.01b
0.006
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME
OF
DAY
72/06/03 18 15 0000 7.Bu
72/10/05 09 50 0000 24.5J
-------
STOPET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/07/02
500823 LS500 823
44 56 30.0 072 12 30.0
CLYDE RIVER
50 15/MEMPHREMAGOG
I/LAKE MEMPHREMAGOG
AT GLEN ROAD BROG BELOWNEWPORT STP
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL NH3—N PhOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L NG/L MG/L P MG/L P
7107/15 10 19 0.019 0.450 0.017 0.009 0.029
72/08/12 10 47 0.020 0.650 0.010 0.00 5K 0.038
72/09/19 10 00 0.048 1.050 0.074 0.017 0.052
72/10/15 12 05 0.117 0.500 0.105 0.007 0.048
72/11/09 12 10 0.182 0.660 0.052 0.008 0.026
72/12/07 09 40 0.310 0.360 0.037 0.008 0.015
73/01/24 10 40 0.370 0.750 0.260 0.014 0.030
73/03/21 10 35 0.370 0.355 0.078 0.005K 0.020
73/04/17 10 00 0.320 0.350 0.050 0.006 0.025
73/Q4/23 14 00 0.180 0.480 0.024 0.006 0.025
73/05/06 10 40 0.168 0.330 0.029 0.005K 0.035
73/05/23 10 00 0.130 0.560 0.030 0.010 0.040
73/07/07 09 20 0.120 2.300 1.700 0.019 0.030
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/07/02
500831 LS500831
44 52 30.0 072 12 00.0
BARTON RIVER
50 1S/P4EMPI-IREMAGOG
I/LAKE NEMPHREMAGOG
COVENTRY STATION BROG
1 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
MG/L
MG/L
HG/L P
MG/L P
72/07/15
10 57
0.185
0.300
0.036
0.015
0.038
72/08/12
10 27
0.143
0.760
0.039
0.017
0.060
72/09/1Q
09 48
0.290
0.500
0.080
0.014
0,052
72/10/15
11 40
0.182
0.400
0.097
0.013
0.039
72/11/09
11 55
0.234
0.860
0.069
0.016
0.210
72/12/07
09 20
0.410
0.720
0.066
0.026
0.176
73/01/24
10 15
0.370
0.690
0.170
0.014
0.055
73/03/21
10 00
0.400
0.520
0.130
0.006
0.035
73/04/17
10 50
0.294
0.630
0.082
0.007
0.035
73/04/23
13 20
0.230
1.150
0.029
0.009
0.045
73/05/05
09 00
0.250
2.000
0.080
0.008
0.035
73/05/23
10 00
0.110
1.200
0.126
0.014
0.050
73/07/06
08 20
0.150
1.320
0.690
0.011
0.040
-------
STORET RETR!EVAL DATE 74/07/02
500841 LS 500841
44 55 10.0 072 13 30.0
BLACK RIVER
SO 1S/MEUPHREMAGOG
I/LAKE MEMPI-(REMAGOG
NEWPORT AIRPORT D BRDG
1LEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL NH3-N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L HG/L P MG/L P
72/07/15 12 39 0.114 0.650 0.040 0.009 0.038
72/09/19 09 50 0.100 0.500 0.056 0.010 0.030
72/10/15 11 45 0.182 0.350 0.075 0.005K 0.021
72/11/09 12 05 0.234 0.650 0.061 0.011 0.056
73/01/24 10 05 0.360 0.540 0.046 0.014 0.065
73/03/21 10 15 0.430 0.820 0.252 0.008 0.030
73/04/17 10 30 0.270 0.500 0.054 0.007 0.055
73/04/23 13 45 0.230 2.200 0.063 0.005K 0.025
73/05/05 10 50 0.168 1.180 0.048 0.008 0.041
73/05/23 10 15 0.120 0.460 0.060 0.019 0.050
73/07/06 09 00 0.115 1.680 0.860 0.007 0.040
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/07/02
500851 LS500851
44 59 30.0 072 11 00.0
JOI 1NS RIVER
50 15/P4EMPHREMAGOG
1/LAKE MEMPHREMAGOG
CULVERT E OF QUEBEC CENTRALRR BROG
1 IEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPT s N02&N03 TOT KJEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L P4G/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/07/15 13 51 0.411 0.400 0.024 0.014 0.019
72/08/12 11 55 0.460 0.530 0.033 0.005K 0.023
72/10/15 13 18 0.590 0.300 0.088 0.006 0.019
72/11/09 13 30 0.450 0.690 0.078 0.022 0.139
73/01/24 07 30 0.740 0.920 0.330 0.009 0.030
73/03/21 07 30 1.200 0,520 0.150 0.007 0.015
73/04/17 07 30 0.580 0.690 0.210 0.005K 0.015
73/04/23 13 30 0.670 0.310 0.038 0.005K 0.010
73/05/06 11 30 0.590 0.230 0.015 0.005K 0.015
73/05/23 09 30 0.440 0.460 0.020 0.011 0.020
73/07/07 07 00 0.580 0.420 0.080 0.008 0.025
-------
STOPET ETPIEVAL DATE 7 ./09/04
5008S1 PR SOO8S1 P005000
44 56 30.0 072 12 00.0
NEWPORT
50 15 MEMPHREMAGOG
T/MEMPHREMAGO(
CLYDE RIVER
11E ALES 2141204
‘4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630
00625
00610
00671
00665
50051
50053
DATE
TIME DEPTH
N02&N03
TOT KJEL
N113—P4
PHOS—DIS
PHOS—TOT
FLOW
CONDUIT
FROM
OF
N—TOTAL
N
TOTAL
OPTHO
RATE
FLOW—MGD
TO
DAY
FEET
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/L P
INST MGO
MONTHLY
73/02/06
08
00
CP(T )—
0.350
21.000
4.000
2.800
7.300
1.230
1.200
73/02/Of,
16
00
73/04/23
08
00
CPU)—
0.330
26.000
4.700
3.500
8.500
1.160
1.200
73/04/23
16
00
73/09/18
0.220
26.200
4.200
8.100
12.500
1.330
1.140
73/09/21
0.189
29.700
3.700
3.100
7.500
1.220
1.210
73/10/17
08
00
CP(T)—
0.189
17.000
0.287
6.600
9.800
1.190
1.060
73/10/17
if,
00
73/11/06
0.110
26.000
4.000
6.800
10.500
1.170
1.120
73/11/2!
08
00
CP(T)—
0.120
22.000
2.900
4.900
8.600
1.030
1.090
73/11/21
14
00
71/12/13
0.240
19.500
1.500
5.600
9.400
1.090
1.360
74/02/26
07
45
0.400
20.000
1.000
6.000
7.400
1.450
1.760
74/Q3/27
16
00
(1.240
27.000
4.800
3.500
7.800
1.470
1.400
74/04/24
09
42
0.600
5.200
0.340
0.330
1.100
2.060
1.970
74/05/21
08
35
0.280
13.000
0.490
1.300
3.800
1.790
1.820
-------
APPENDIX D
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
acres x 0.4047 = hectares
feet x 0.3048 = meters
acre-feet x 1 ,233.49 = cubic meters
square miles x 2.590 = square kilometers
cubic feet/second x 0.02832 = cubic iiieters/second
inches x 2.540 = centimeters
gallons x 3.785 = liters
pounds x 0.45352 = kilograms
pounds/acre/year x 0.112084 = grams/square meter/year
------- |