U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
GRAND LAKE
GREN LAKE GOINTY
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 38
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
GRAND LAKE
GREN [AYE COUNTY
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 38
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND THE
WISCONSIN NATIONAL GUARD
OCTOBER, IS74
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Wisconsin Study Lakes iv, v
Lake and Drainage Area Map vi
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Introduction 2
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
V. Nutrient Loadings 9
VI. Literature Reviewed 14
VII. Appendices 15
-------
11
FOREWO RD
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
reservoi rs.
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.
ANAL YTI C 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 [ g303(e)], water
quality criteria/standards review [ 3O3(c)], clean lakes [ 3l4(a,b)],
and water quality monitoring [ lO6 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 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 Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources for professional involvement and to the Wis-
consin National Guard for conduct of the tributary sampling
phase of the Survey.
Francis H. Schraufnagel , Acting Assistant Director, and Joseph
R. Ball of the Bureau of Water Quality, and Donald R. Winter, Lake
Rehabilitation Program, provided invaluable lake documentation and
counsel during the Survey. Central Office and District Office per-
sonnel of the Department of Natural Resources reviewed the prelim-
inary reports and provided critiques most useful in the preparation
of this Working Paper series.
Major General James J. Lison, Jr., the Adjutant General of
Wisconsin, and Project Officer CW-4 Donald D. Erickson, who directed
the volunteer efforts of the Wisconsin National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF WISCONSIN
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Altoona Eau Claire
Beaver Darn Barron
Beaver Darn Dodge
Big Eau Pleine Marathon
Browns Racine
Butte des Morts Winnebago
Butternut Price, Ashland
Castle Rock Flowage Juneau
Como Walworth
Crystal Vilas
Delavan Walworth
Eau Claire Eau Claire
Elk Price
Geneva Walworth
Grand Green Lake
Green Green Lake
Kegonsa Dane
Koshkonong Jefferson, Rock, Dane
Lac La Belle Waukesha
Long Price
Middle Walworth
Nagawicka Waukesha
Ocononiowoc Waukesha
Okauchee Waukesha
Petenwell Flowage Juneau
Pewaukee Waukesha
Pigeon Waupaca
Pine Waukesha
Poygan Winnebago, Waushara
Rock Jefferson
Rome Pond Jefferson, Waukesha
Round Waupaca
Shawano Shawano
-------
V
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Sinnissippi Dodge
Swan Columbia
Tainter Dunn
Tichigan Racine
Townline Oneida
Trout Vilas
Wapogassett Polk
Wausau Marathon
Willow Oneida
Winnebago Winnebago, Fond Du Lac,
Cal umet
Wisconsin Columbia
Wissota Chippewa
Yellow Burnett
-------
GRAND LAKE
Lake Sampling Site ® Tributary Sampling Site
? Sewage Treatment Facility
Direct Drainage Area Indirect Drainage Area
0 1 2
Scale
1 •
)
ci
Wisconsin
\
-------
GRAND LAKE
STORET NO. 5570
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Grand Lake is eutrophic.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate the rate-limiting nutrient
in Grand Lake is phosphorus. Nitrogen to phosphorus ratios
observed during lake sampling support this conclusion.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources--During the sampling year, Grand Lake re-
ceived a total phosphorus load at a rate about seven times greater
than the rate proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as “dangerous”;
i.e., a eutrophic rate (see page 13). It is estimated that only
about 20% of this load is attributable to point sources, and it
is considered unlikely that point-source control would improve the
trophic condition of Grand Lake to any significant degree.
2. Non-point sources (see page l3)--The phosphorus export of
the unnamed creek (B-i) was somewhat higher than unimpacted Wis-
consin streams studied elsewhere. However, there are no known
point sources impacting the stream, and the load probably results
from agricultural practices in the drainage.
The estimated nutrient exports of the Grand River are about
the same as the unnamed creek which indicates the point-source
estimates are about right.
-------
2
II. INTRODUCTION
Grand Lake is a small impoundment in the Upper Fox River Basin. The
drainage is in a glaciated area of Wisconsin and is completely covered
with glacial drift. The drainage is used primarily for agricultural
purposes--mostly dairy farming and the growing of canning crops.
Recreational uses of the lake include boating and fishing. Game
fish present include northern pike, largemouth bass, walleyes, and
panfish.
-------
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry:
1. Surface area: 234 acres.
2. Mean depth: 4 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 7 feet.
4. Volume: 936 acre/feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 11 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area* Mean flow*
Grand River 73.7 mi2 32.8 cfs
Unnamed Creek (B-l) 18.7 mi2 6.7 cfs
Minor tributaries & ?
immediate drainage - 5.0 mi 1 .6 cfs
Totals 97.4 mi2 41.1 cfs
2. Outlet -
Grand River 97.8 mi2** 41.1 cfs
C. Precipitation^:
1. Year of sampling: 44.6 inches.
2. Mean annual: 26.5 inches.
* Drainage areas are accurate within ±0.5%; mean daily flows are accurate
within ±40%; mean monthly flows are accurate within ±35%; and normalized
monthly flows are accurate within ±35%.
** Includes area of lake.
t See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods".
-------
4
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
By means of a Huey helicopter, Grand Lake was sampled three times
at station 1 and twice at station 2 during the open—water season of
1972 (see map, page vi). Each time, surface samples for physical and
chemical parameters were collected. During each visit, a single sam-
ple was composited from the two sites for phytoplankton identification
and enumeration; and, during the last visit, a single five-gallon sam-
ple was collected for algal assays. Also each time, a sample was col-
lected from each station for chlorophyll a analysis. Lack of depth at
the sampling sites permitted only surface samples.
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.
-------
5
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
(11/08/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) (not determined)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) (not determined)
Conductivity (iimhos) 650 700 700 750
pH (units) 8.0 8.1 8.1 8.2
Alkalinity (mg/i) 270 285 285 300
Total P (mg/i) 0.044 0.092 0.092 0.140
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.024 0.043 0.043 0.063
NO + NO (mg/i) 2.840 3.770 3.770 4.700
Am onia mg/l) 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 16 22 24 24
-------
6
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampi i ng Dorni nant Number
Date Genera per ml
06/22/72 1. Dinobryon 1,719
2. Cyclotella 1,358
3. Anabaena 1,312
4. Melosira 860
5. Oocystis 814
Other genera 3,485
Total 9,548
08/21/72 1. Cryptomonas 561
2. Cyclotella 470
3. Scenedesmus 266
4. Flagellates 190
5. Chroococcus 154
Other genera 800
Total 2,441
11/08/72 1 . Stephanodiscus 5,542
2. Fragilaria 1 ,386
3. Cylindrocystis 783
4. Flagellates 693
5. Dinobryon 663
Other genera 2,469
Total 11,536
-------
7
8.1
270.0
24.0
Maximum yield
( mg/i-dry wt. )
13.8
17.4
21 .3
27.8
51 .3
52.1
14.6
08/21/72
01
11/08/ 72
02
01
02
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 ( pg/l )
06/22/72 01 13.4
02 11.1
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1 . Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N
Spike (mg/l) Conc. (mqIl) Conc. (mq/l ) ____________
Control 0.031 3.700
0.006 P 0.037 3.700
0.012 P 0.043 3.700
0.024 P 0.055 3.700
0.060 P 0.091 3.700
0.060 P + 10.0 N 0.091 13.700
10.0 N 0.031 13.700
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrurn capri-
cornutum , indicates the potential primary productivity of
Grand Lake was high at the time the sample was taken. Also,
the increased yields with increased levels of orthophosphorus
(to about 0.090 mg/l) indicate that the lake was phosphorus
-------
8
limited. Note that the addition of only nitrogen resulted
in a yield not significantly different than that of the
control
D. Trophic Condition:
Grand Lake is eutrophic as indicated by high nutrient and
chlorophyll a levels and low secchi disc transparencies. Algal
assay results indicate the potential primary productivity in
Grand Lake was high, and algal blooms were present during late
summer and fall sampling periods. Also, heavy growths of aquatic
vegetation were noted by Survey limnologists.
The lake morphometry is also indicative of a eutrophic water
body.
-------
9
V. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Wisconsin 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
months of April and May when two samples were collected. Sampling was
begun in September, 1972, and was completed in August, 1973.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the year
of sampling and a “normalized” or average year were provided by the Wis-
consin District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the tributary
sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were deter-
mined by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey computer pro-
gram for calculating stream loadings*. Nutrient loadings for unsampled
“minor tributaries and immediate drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S.) were esti-
mated by using the means of the nutrient loads, in lbs/mi 2 /year, in the
unnamed creek at station 8-1 and mulitplying the means by the ZZ area
in mi 2 .
The operator of the Markesan wastewater treatment plant provided
too few samples to permit direct calculation of nutrient loadings from
that source. Therefore, nutrient loads were estimated on the basis of
2.5 lbs of phosphorus and 7.5 lbs of nitrogen per capita per year.
* See Working Paper No. 1
-------
10
The comunity of Manchester is served by individual septic tanks,
and nutrient loads there were estimated using 0.25 lbs of phosphorus
and 9.4 lbs of nitrogen per capita per year.
In the nutrient loading tables which follow, the loads attributed
to the Grand River are those measured at station A-2 minus the loads
attributed to Markesan and Manchester.
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal -
Pop. Mean Receiving
Name Served* Treatment Flow (rngd) Water
Markesan 1 ,378 secondary 0.138* Grand River
Manchester 777 septic tanks 7 Grand River
drainage
2. Known industrial** -
Mean Receiving
Name Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Markesan (Markesan ? Grand River
Dairy SIP)
Precision (Markesan ? Grand River
Metaismiths STP)
I nc.
* 1970 Census; flow estimated at 100 gal/capita/day.
** Schraufnagel , et al ., 1967.
-------
11
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1 . Inputs -
lbs P / %of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Grand River 10,440 58.3
Unnamed Creek (8-1) 2,960 16.5
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 790 4.4
c. Known municipal -
Markesan SIP 3,450 19.3
Manchester (septic tanks) i90 1.1
d. Septic tanks* - 30 0.2
e. Known industrial - None known -
f. Direct precipitation** - 40 0.2
Total 17,900 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Grand River 15,080
3. Net annual P accumulation - 2,820 pounds
* Two resorts and 35 dwellings on lakeshore (Fassvender and Weber, 1971);
see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
12
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1 . Inputs -
lbs NI % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Grand River 271 ,360 73.6
Unnamed Creek (B-i) 60,060 16.3
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 16,060 4.4
c. Known municipal -
Markesan SIP 10,340 2.8
Manchester (septic tanks) 7,300 2.0
d. Septic tanks* - 1,180 0.3
e. Industrial - None known - -
f. Direct precipitation** - 2,250 0.6
Total 368,550 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Grand River 371,400
3. Net annual N loss - 2,850 pounds
* Two resorts and 35 dwellings on lakeshore (Fassvender and Weber, 1971);
see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
13
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/m1 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr
Grand River 142 3,682
Unnamed Creek (B-i) 158 3,212
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”.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
ibs/acr /yr 76.5 12.1 1,575.0 loss*
grams/rn /yr 8.57 1.35 176.5 -
Volle weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Grand Lake:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 1.20
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 0.60
* The apparent loss of nitrogen during the sampling year may have been due
to nitrogen fixation in the lake, solubilization of previously sedimented
nitrogen, recharge with nitrogen-rich ground water, or (probably) insuf-
ficient sampling. Whatever the cause, a similar loss of nitrogen has
occurred at Shagawa Lake, Minnesota, which has been intensively studied
by EPA’s National Eutrophication Research and Lake Restoration Branch.
-------
14
VI. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1972. Wisconsin lakes. Pubi. 218-72, Dept. of Natural
Resources, Madison.
Fassvender, Ronald L., and John J. Weber, 1971. Surface water
resources of Green Lake County. Dept. of Natural Resources,
Madison.
Schraufnagel, F. H., L. A. Montie, J. R. McKersie, and Donald Winter,
1967. Report on an investigation of the pollution in the Upper
Fox River basin made during 1966 and early 1967. Dept. of Natural
Resources, Madison.
Vollenweider, Richard A., (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz.
A. Hydrol.
-------
15
VI I. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR WISCONSIN 9/30/74
LAKE CODE 5570 GRAHD LAKE
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE 97.R0
SUB—DRAINAGE NORMALIZED FLOWS
TRIBUTARY AREA JAN FEB MAP APR NAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MEAN
5570A1 97.80 18.10 19.90 90.50 99.60 57.00 57.90 29.00 21.70 23.50 24.40 34.40 17.20 41.13
5570A2 73.70 14.00 15.00 76.00 77.00 46.00 48.00 23.00 17.00 18.00 19.00 27.00 13.00 32.79
S 7OB1 18.70 2.30 2.60 18.00 17.00 9.40 11.00 4.30 2.90 3.10 3.10 5.10 1.90 6.73
5570 17 5.40 0.50 0.50 4.90 4.20 2.30 3.00 0.90 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.10 0.30 1.63
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE = 97.80 TOTAL FLOW IN = 493.20
SUM OF SUB—DRAINAGE AREAS = 97.80 TOTAL FLOW OUT = 493.20
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRI8IJTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
557041 9 72 120.00 24 140.00
10 72 140.00 22 160.00
11 72 110.00
1 72 82.00 23 74.00
1 73 170.00
2 73 120.00 4 270.00
3 73 350.00 3 430.00
4 73 230.00 1 150.00 15 230.00
5 73 270.00 6 250.00 15 190.00
6 73 130.00 16 140.00
7 73 56.00 8 58.00
- 8 73 50.00 4 43.00
5570A2 9 72 86.00 24 100.00
10 72 95.00 22 110.00
11 72 78.00
12 72 55.00 7 54.00 23 50.00
1 73 130.00
P 73 92.00 4 200.00
3 73 260.00 3 320.00
4 73 168.00 I 108.00 15 170.00
5 73 194.00 6 183.00 15 139.00
6 73 93.00 16 107.00
7 73 40.00 8 42.00
8 73 35.00 4 30.00
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOP WISCONSIN 9/30/74
LA (F CODE 5570 GRAND LAKE
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
5 70B1 9 72 14.00 24 17.00
10 72 16.00 22 18.00
II 72 15.00
1 72 8.30 7 8.10 23 7.50
1 73 30.00
2 73 22.00 4 48.00
3 73 62.00 3 76.00
4 73 31.00 1 24.00 15 37.00
5 73 34.00 6 38.00 15 28.00
6 73 23.00 16 25.00
7 73 6.30 8 7.90
73 4.30 4 4.30
5570Z 1 9 72 2.80 24 3.30
10 72 3.00 22 3.70
11 72 3.30
12 72 1.50 7 1.40 23 1.30
1 73 8.20
2 73 5.90 4 13.00
3 73 17.00 3 21.00
4 73 7.80 1 5.80 15 9.20
5 73 8.10 6 9.00 15 6.80
6 73 6.20 16 6.60
7 73 1.40 8 1.70
A 73 0.90 4 0.90
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/09/30
557001
43 41 18.0 089 06 54.0
GRAND LAKE
55 WISCONSIN
1 IEPALES 2111202
3 0003 FEET DEPTH
00010 00300 00077 00094 00400 00410 00630 00610 00665 00666
DATE TIME DEPTH WATER 00 TRANSP CNDUCTVY PH T ALK N02&P403 NH3—N PHOS—TOT PHOS—DIS
FROM OF TEMP SECCHI FIELD CACO3 N—TOTAL TOTAL
TO DAY FEET CENT MG/L I CHFS MIcRoMHo SU MGi MG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/06/22 10 00 0000 18.8 11.6 24 510 8.70 265 0.450 0.220 0.218 0.180
72/08/21 11 45 0000 25.6 5.8 24 500 8.00 196 0.070 0.130 0.264 0.227
72/11/08 15 40 0000 16 750 8.00 270 2.840 0.050 0.140 0.063
32217
DATE TIME DEPTH CI-4LRPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET UG/L
7/06/2? 10 00 0000 13.4J
72/08/21 11 45 0000 8.1J
7?/)1/0 15 40 0000 270.OJ
J- VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/09/30
557002
43 41 12.0 089 07 36.0
GRAND LAKE
55 WISCONSIN
11EPALES 2111202
3 0001 FEET DEPTH
00010 00300 00077 00094 00400 00410 00630 00610 00665 00666
DATE TIME DEPTH WATER DO TRANSP CNDUCTVY PH T ALK NO2&N03 NH3—N P 1405-TOT PHOS—DIS
FROM OF TEMP SECCHI FIELD CACO3 N—TOTAL TOTAL
TO DAY FEET CENT MG/L INCHES MICPOMHO SU NG/L MG/I MG/I MG/L P MG/L P
7?/06/2? 10 40 0000 19.3 9.4 24 430 8.90 210 0.050 0.140 0.190 0.150
7?/11/0M 15 50 0000 24 650 8.20 300 4.700 0.050 0.044 0.024
32217
DATE TIME DEPTH CHLRPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET UG/L
7?/06/2? 10 40 0000 11.LJ
7?/11/0 15 50 0000 24.OJ
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
5570A1 LS5 S7 OA1
43 42 00.0 089 07 30.0
GRAND RIVER
55 15 RANDOLPH
O/(,RANO LAKE
ST HWY 44 RPDG NE OF KINGSTON
1 IEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO2 NO3 TOT KJEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS PP-iOS—TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L G/L MG/I MG/L P MG/L P
72/09/24 09 25 0.430 2.000 0.150 0.195 0.252
72/10/?? 13 50 3.700 1.750 0.390 0.015 0.030
72/11/07 15 50 3.500 0.120 0.066 0.015 0.048
72/12/21 10 10 4.200 0.120 0.120 0.031 0.054
73/01/14 10 35 6.700 0.100K 0.052 0.037 0.050
73/02/04 14 30 3.000 3.3M) 0.690 0.780 0.410
73/03/03 14 15 3.200 4.600 1. 90 0.330 0.460
73/04/01 11 09 3.200 0.910 0.017 0.039 0.090
71/04/15 13 20 2.600 1.050 0.026 0.044 0.085
73/05/06 13 25 0.350 1.600 0.037 0.062 0.095
73/05/15 14 30 4.600 0.960 0.021 0.028 0.065
73/06/16 11 00 0.960 2.000 0.210 0.140 0.195
73/07/08 08 00 0.033 1.380 0.189 0.273 0.370
73/08/04 14 ‘+5 1.880 ‘.200 0.113 0.032 0.105
K VALUE KNOWN TO E LESS
Ti-IAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
657042 LSS57OA2
43 41 00.0 09 05 00.0
GRAND RIVER
55 15 RANDOLPH
1/GRAND LAKE
CO D XING 2 MI Q .25 MI S OF MANCHESTER
I IEP4LES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO? NO3 TOT KJEL NHI-N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L ‘IG/L MG/L MG/L P PIG/L P
7?/09/?4 09 40 0.460 1.250 0.139 0.225 0.280
7?/10/27 14 05 3.600 1.450 0.056 0.092 0.160
7?/1?/07 16 05 4.800 0.105 0.105 0.044 0.083
7?/I2/23 10 17 4.300 0.190 0.13k 0.050 0.100
71/O?/04 14 40 3.400 3.500 0.680 0.300 0.430
71/03/03 14 ?0 3.000 5.000 2.100 0.430 0.610
71/04/01 11 14 1.900 1.100 0.078 0.050 0.100
71/04/15 13 40 3.100 1.400 0.073 0.042 0.08S
71/05/0 13 40 0.063 0.740 0.016 0.042 0.070
71/05/15 14 00 3.300 0.880 0.016 0.015 0.045
71/06/16 11 15 1.640 1.500 0.082 0.176 0.275
71/07/OS 08 30 1.040 0.800 0.054 0.189 0.250
71/08/04 14 30 1.920 2.520 0.078 0.010 0.070
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
557043 LS5570A3
43 42 00.0 0R9 01 30.0
G A’JD RIVEk
55 15 RANDOLPII
I/GHAND L4tcE
Co PD E OF MANCHESTER BELO MARKESAN SIP
1 1EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH N07 NO3 TOT KJEL NH3-N HOS—flIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/I MG/L P MG/L P
7?/09/24 10 00 0.510 1.150 0.124 0.225 0.290
7?/1O/22 14 15 4.400 7.730 0.780 0.170 0.290
7?/1?/?3 10 30 5.600 0.115 0.050 0.088
73/32/04 14 50 1.900 7 Q5O 0.630 0.315 0.440
71/03/03 14 40 3.400 5.000 1.900 0.400 0.630
73/04/01 11 26 4.900 1.050 0.100 0.052 0.090
73/04/15 13 47 3.700 1.380 0.066 0.046 0.080
71/05/06 13 49 0.110 1.050 0.027 0.046 0.075
71/05/15 14 50 6.100 0.840 0.060 0.054 0.095
73/06/16 11 50 2.100 1.900 0.?20 0.200 0.440
71/07/OR 09 00 1.800 0.880 0.075 0.220 0.270
71/08/04 15 00 0.011 1.800 0.050 0.016 0.070
-------
STORET PETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
5 570A4 LS557044
43 42 30.0 08 59 15.0
Gr 4ND RIVER
55 15 FOX LAKE
I/r,’ AND LAKE
2ND r4RDG ARV HWY44 RDc, BVMARKESAN STP
1 IEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO2 .NO3 TOT KJ L NH3-N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL OPTHO
TO DAY FfET MG/L ‘lG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/09/24 10 00 0.472 1.’SO 0.093 0.? 15 0.273
7?/10/?? 14 20 4. 00 1.PO0 0.198 0.176
72/12/07 16 40 7.100 0.123 ‘).1?3 0.033 0.061
77/12/23 10 36 5.700 0.115 0.115 0.035 0.06P
71/01/14 10 10 8.500 0.175 0.100 0.031 0.050
73/02/04 15 00 4.100 ?.900 0.640 0.110 0.430
73/03/03 14 50 3.400 5.300 1.900 0.440 0.650
71/04/01 11 31 5.100 1.150 0.096 0.044 0.165
71/04/15 13 55 3.800 0.930 0.033 0.03 0.060
73/0,/06 14 05 0.630 1.400 D.168 0.040 0.070
73/OS/IS iS 00 6.200 1.050 0.024 0.031 0.070
71/06/16 1? 00 2.000 2.520 0.130 0.240 0.420
71/07/06 09 30 1.520 0.R2O 3.063 0.200 0.250
71/08/04 15 10 0.015 2.700 0.052 0.006 0.190
-------
STOPET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
557081 LS S57OB1
43 40 30.0 089 05 10.0
UNNAMED CREEK
55 15 RANDOLPH
T/C,RAND LAKE
PD XING 2 M l W 1 M I S .5 MIW MANCHESTER
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FRO¼I OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL OPT-lO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/09/24 OQ 45 0.844 3.?00 0.132 0.174 0.231
72/10/27 14 08 2.000 2.590 0.310 0.220 0.400
77/l2/?3 10 20 2.900 1.400 0.092 0.021 0.046
73/01/14 10 70 4.300 1.050 0.094 0.020 0.040
71/02/04 14 45 3.100 2.310 0.357 0.170 0.260
73/04/01 11 17 2.100 0.082 0.078 0.198
71/04/15 13 45 2.600 1.700 0.031 0.094 0.155
73/05/06 13 cs 2.600 1.540 0.040 0.126 0.185
73/05/15 14 40 2.600 1.320 0.014 0.046 0.090
71/06/16 11 40 _.1?0 2.200 0.?20 0.273 0.650
71/07/08 08 45 3.100 1.760 0.100 0.147 0.180
73/08/04 14 50 1.300 1.400 0.044 0.018 0.045
-------
T’)
TF557u50
4 ? 00.0 J •4 (5
C l iv JF ‘-,A!J
IS FOA RIV j.
t/ - N.) L E
‘ IVE
1 I LES
73/J4/?° _3)
CP (T) -
l
1.’20
3.400
0 •
U • 1
STfl FT ET.fl AL ) F 7 4/O’ / )
pool ii
214 1204
0000 FEET DEPTH
:f3 j
f 2 -
()LThI0
00671
‘ O0Sl
O0S
TTM L
f)FPIrI
rjIY) Irfl
TUl KJ L
\ft-i3—N
HOS—DIS
PriO’)—h)r
FL( r
CON )UIT
flF
j—I’ii L
N
TOTAL
OPTrIO
TF
FLfl —M&’)
i Y
F -
I
1(/L
G/L
G/L
MG/L P
INST MbI)
MONTHLY
------- |