U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
RCFE POND
JEFFERSON COUNTY
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No,
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
ROME POND
JEFFERSON COUNTY
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 47
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND THE
WISCONSIN NATIONAL GUARD
OCTOBER, 197^
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Wisconsin Study Lakes iv, v
Lake and Drainage Area Map vi
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Introduction 3
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 4
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 5
V. Nutrient Loadings 8
VI. Literature Reviewed 13
VII. Appendices 14
-------
•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.
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 [ g303(e)], water
quality criteria/standards review [ 3O3(c)], clean lakes [ 3l4(a,b)],
and water quality monitoring [ glO6 and 3O5(b)] activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
iii
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, Ii. 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 Dam Barron
Beaver Dam Dodge
Big Eau Pleine Marathon
Browns Racine
Butte des Morts Winnebago
Butternut Price, Ashland
Castle Rock Flowage Juneau
Conio Walworth
Crystal Vilas
Delavan Walworth
Eau Claire Eau Claire
Elk Price
Geneva Walworth
Grand Green Lake
Green Green Lake
Keqonsa Dane
Koshkonong Jefferson, Rock, Dane
Lac La Belle Waukesha
Long Price
Middle Walworth
Nagawicka Waukesha
Oconomowoc 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 Colunibia
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
-------
t.)
J
C,
I ,’
/
Map Location
ROME POND
® Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
¶, Sewage Treatment Facility
/)Direct Drainage Area Limits
0 1 2Mi.
ousman
J
42°58’
-------
ROME POND
STORET NO. 5568
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Limited Survey data and the records of others indicate
Rome Pond is eutrophic.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Rome Pond was not sampled in the fall; and, consequently,
no algal assay sample was collected. However, limited lake
data indicate nitrogen limitation in June and August of 1972.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources--During the sampling year, Rome Pond
received a total phosphorus load at a rate about twice that
proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as ‘dangerous ; i.e., a
eutrophic rate (see page 12). However, only about 8% of that
load is attributable to the Village of Dousnian.
It is concluded that phosphorus control at Dousman would not
result in any significant improvement in the trophic condition of
Rome Pond.
2. Non-point sources--The estimated mean total phosphorus
export of the Bark River (see page 12) is somewhat higher than
other unimpacted streams elsewhere in the Rock River basin (e.g.,
-------
2
74 lbs P/mi 2 /yr in Otter Creek, tributary to Lake Koshkonong).
This may be due to underestimation of the Dousrnan phosphorus
contribution but probably is due to upstream cultural impacts
(note that the phosphorus export of the Bark River at the out-
let of upstream Nagawicka Lake was 118 lbs/mi 2 /yr).
-------
II. INTRODUCTION
Rome Pond, also known as Rome Mill Pond, is an impoundment of the
Bark River in the lower Rock River drainage of south-central Wisconsin.
Almost all of the frontage is within a State public hunting area, and
extensive wetlands adjoin the pond.
Recreational uses of the pond include hunting, boating, swimming,
and fishing. Game fish present include northern pike, largemouth bass,
and panfish. Reportedly, weeds and winterkills are major management
problems (Poff, et al., 1968).
-------
4
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry:
1. Surface area: 446 acres.
2. Mean depth: 2* feet.
3. Maximum depth: 17 feet.
4. Volume: 892 acre/feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 6 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area Mean flow
Bark River 106.0 mi 2 67.4 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage 13.3 mi 9.1 cfs
Totals 119.3 mi 2 76.5 cfs
2. Outlet -
Bark River 120.0 mi 2 T 76.5 cfs
C. Precipitationttt:
1. Year of sampling: 38.7 inches.
2. Mean annual : 30.7 inches.
* Narf, 1974.
t Drainage areas are accurate within ±0.5%; mean daily flows are accurate
within ±40%; mean monthly flows are accurate within ±35%; and normalized
mean monthly flows are accurate within ±35%.
-f-i Includes area of lake.
H-t See Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
5
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Rome Pond was sampled two times during the open-water season of
1972 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each time,
near-surface samples were collected for physical and chemical analyses
from one station on the Pond (see map, page vi). During each visit, a
sample was collected for phytoplankton identification and enumeration,
and a separate sample was collected for chlorophyll a analysis.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B and are
summarized below.
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
1st Sample 2nd Sample
Parameter ( 06/22/72) ( 08/19/72 )
Temperature (Cent.) 21.0 25.2
Dissolved oxygen (mg/i) 13.4 4.7
Conductivity (jimhos) 420 475
pH (units) 8.9 7.7
Alkalinity (mg/l) 240 204
Total P (mg/i) 0.112 0.092
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.101 0.064
NO + NO (mg/l) 0.020 0.100
Am onia mg/l) 0.070 0.100
Secchi disc (inches) 36 36
-------
6
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
06/22/72 1. Dinobryon 391
2. Nitzschia 184
3. Synedra 98
4. Cocconeis 72
5. Navicula 65
Other genera 156
Total 966
08/19/72 1. Nitzschia 828
2. Cyclotella 437
3. Anabaena 331
4. Dinobryon 256
5. Cocconeis 211
Other genera 1 ,024
Total 3,087
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 1.4
08/19/72 01 2.6
-------
7
C. Trophic Condition:
Limited Survey data and the records of others show that Rome
Pond is eutrophic. Rooted aquatic vegetation is said to be a
problem.
Compared to the 44 Wisconsin lakes on which sampling was
completed, 71% had less mean total phosphorus, 42% had greater
transparency, but only 10% had less inorganic nitrogen, and
only one lake (oligotrophic Crystal) had less mean chlorophyll a.
-------
8
V. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Wisconsin National
Guard collected a monthly near-surface grab sample from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page vi), except for the high
runoff months of April and May when two samples were collected. Samp-
ling 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 Wisconsin District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the
tributary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads in the Bark River were determined by
using a modification of the U.S. Geological Survey computer program for
calculating stream loadings*. Nutrient loadings for unsampled “minor
tributaries and immediate drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S.) were estimated
by using the mean annual concentrations in Scuppernong Creek at station
B-l and the mean annual ZZ flow.
The Village of Dousman declined participation in the Survey, and nu-
trient loads were estinlated*. The loads attributed to the Bark River do
not include the point-source loads.
*See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
9
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal -
Pop.* Mean* Receiving
Name Served Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Dousman 450 Act. sludge 0.900 Bark River
Wisc. Sch. 500 Act, sludge 0.050 No discharge
for Boys
2. Industrial - None Known
* Narf, 1974.
-------
10
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1 . Inputs -
lbs P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Bark River 11,600 86.7
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 590 4.4
c. Known municipal STP’s -
Dousman 1,120 8.4
d. Septic tanks - None known
e. Industrial - None known -
f. Direct precipitation* - 70 0.5
Total 13,380 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Bark River 15,980
3. Net annual P loss - 2,600 pounds
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
11
B. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1 . Inputs -
lbs NI % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Bark River 274,460 88.6
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 30,780 9.9
c. Known municipal SIP’s -
Dousman 3,380 1.1
d. Septic tanks - None known
e. Industrial - None known
f. Direct precipitation* - 4,300 1.4
Total 309,540 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Bark River 294,690
3. Net annual N accumulation - 14,e50 pounds
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
12
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/mi 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr
Bark River 109 2,589
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
lbs/acr /yr 30.0 loss* 694.0 33.3
grams/m /yr 3.36 - 77.8 3.7
Vo11e weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Rome Pond:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 1.18
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 0.59
* The apparent phosphorus loss from Rome Pond during the sampling year may
have been due to unknown and unmeasured point sources discharging to the
Pond system between the inlet sampling station (A-2) and the outlet samp-
ling station or underestimation of the immediate drainage load but, more
likely, was due to insufficient sampling. Such phosphorus washout could
occur if phosphorus contributions from point or non-point sources had been
reduced just prior to or during the sampling year; there is no indication
that this happened, however.
-------
13
VI. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1972. Wisconsin lakes. Pubi. 218-72, Dept of Natural
Resources, Madison.
Lueschow, Lloyd A., 1972. Biology and control of selected aquatic
nuisances in recreational waters. Techn. Bull. #57, Dept. of
Natural Resources, Madison.
McKersie, Jerome R., Robert M. Krill, Floyd F. Stautz, Thomas Kroehn,
and Richard Narf; 1971 . Lower Rock River pollution investigation
survey. Dept. of Natural Resources, Madison.
Narf, Richard p., 1974. DNR intra-department memorandum (review of
preliminary report on Rome Pond). Dept. of Natural Resources,
Madison.
Poff, Ronald J., Ronald Peining, and C. W. Threinen; 1968. Surface
water resources of Jefferson County. Dept. of Natural Resources,
Ma di son.
Vollenweider, Richard A., (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz
A. Hydrol.
-------
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR WISCONSIN 9/30/74
LAKE CODE 5568 ROME POND
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE 120.00
SUB-DRAINAGE NORMALIZED FLOWS
TRIBUTARY AREA JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MEAN
556841 120.00 45.00 49.00 131.10 156.10 97.90 127.30 55.80 40.10 49.90 49.90 65.60 44.10 76.50
556842 106.00 38.00 45.00 130.00 140.00 87.00 110.00 47.00 34.00 42.00 42.00 58.00 36.00 67.38
556 8ZZ 14.00 5.30 5.90 16.00 19.00 12.00 15.00 6.60 4.70 6.00 6.00 7.90 5.20 9.13
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE = 120.00 TOTAL FLOW IN 918.60
SUM OF SUB—DRAINAGE AREAS = 120.00 TOTAL FLOW OUT = 918.40
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
5568A1 9 72 350.00 24 960.00
10 72 220.00
11 72 140.00
12 72 78.00 3 79.00
1 73 180.00
2 73 110.00 4 260.00
3 73 240.00 4 270.00
4 73 440.00 8 180.00 30 390.00
5 73 300.00 6 360.00 20 190.00
6 73 150.00 3 190.00
7 73 54.00 7 64.00
8 73 31.00 18 23.00
5668A2 9 72 320.00 24 700.00
10 72 200.00
I I 72 120.00
12 72 68.00 3 68.00
1 73 160.00
2 73 100.00 4 230.00
3 73 210.00 4 240.00
4 73 380.00 8 160.00 30 350.00
5 73 270.00 6 320.00 20 170.00
6 73 130.00 3 170.00
7 73 47.00 7 56.00
8 73 27.00 IS 20.00
SS6 BZZ 9 72 59.00 26 150.00
10 72 28.00
II 72 14.00
1. 72 6.20 3 5.80
1 73 22.00
2 73 12.00 4 34.00
3 73 31.00 4 36.00
4 73 54.00 8 23.00 20 50.00
5 73 44.00 6 50.00 20 27.00
6 73 18.00 3 23.00
7 73 5.70 7 7.00
8 73 2.80 18 2.10
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/09/30
556801
4? 59 00.0 088 37 50.0
ROME POND
55 WISCONSIN
11EPALES 2111202
5 0004 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 PHOS-TOT PHOS—DIS
FROM OF TEMP SECCHI FIELD CACO3 N-TOTAL TOTAL
TO DAY FEET CENT MG/L P CHES MICROMHO SU MG/L MGIL MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/06/22 17 20 0000 21.0 13.4 36 420 8.90 240 0.020 0.070 0.112 0.101
72/08/19 1A 40 0000 25.2 4.7 36 475 7.67 204 0.100 0.100 0.092 0.064
32217
DATE TIME DEPTH CHLPPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET UG/L
72/06/22 17 20 0000 1.4J
72/08/19 18 40 0000 2.6J
J ’ VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
5568A1 LSS S68A1
44 59 00.0 088 37 30.0
BARK IVE
55 15 WHITEWATER
O/ OME POND
ST HWY 135 ‘ RDG IN HOME
1 IEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 0 06?5 00610 0067 ! 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO2 MO3 TOT KJEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS PHOS-TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL OPTHO
TO DAY FEET MC’/L MG/L MG/I MG/L P MG/L P
7?/09/?4 15 17 0.269 1.400 0.157 0.036 0.062
7?/ !l/04 14 25 0.471 1.380 0.067 0.044 0.071
72/12/03 10 42 0.640 0.840 0.034 0.019 0.040
73/01/07 14 00 1.060 1.100 0.105 0.032 0.050
73/0?/04 15 15 0.700 2.700 0.110 0.048
73/03/04 13 55 0.850 1.150 0.168 0.048 0.090
73/04/08 13 55 0.336 1.300 0.031 0.024 0.055
71/04/30 10 35 0.176 1.540 0.064 0.033 0.060
73/05/06 16 40 0.138 1.200 0.031 0.034 0.065
73/05/20 15 05 0.06? ?.90 0 0.080 0.030 0.310
73/06/03 10 35 0.063 2.200 0.092 0.120 0.175
73/07/07 iS 50 0.037 0.990 0.030 0.126 0.145
73/08/18 14 00 0.022 0.940 0.052 0.040 0.050
-------
STOPET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
5568A2 LS5568A2
42 59 00.0 088 34 30.0
BARK RIVER
55 15 WHITEWATER
I/ROME POND
Co HWY E BRDG IN HEATH HILLS
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00 i30 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO? NO3 TOT KJEL NH3-N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OV N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MC,/L P MG/L P
7?/09f24 15 30 0.702 2.150 0.235 0.052 0.094
7?/1l/04 15 45 0.590 1.540 0.100 0.056 0,090
7?/12/03 10 50 0.770 1.000 0.084 0.032 0.063
71/01/07 14 15 0.970 1.150 0.150 0.040 0.060
73/02/04 15 05 0.760 1.100 0.075 0.042
7 /O1/04 14 05 0.910 1.100 0.170 0.046 0.080
71/04/08 14 10 0.640 1.100 0.056 0.026 0.045
73/04/30 10 25 0.550 1.800 0.090 0.063 0.095
71/05/06 16 50 0.385 1.200 0.023 0.047 0.080
73/05/20 15 35 0.280 2.200 0.072 0.042 0.085
73/06/03 10 20 0.240 1.600 0.100 0.110 0.175
71/07/07 1? 05 0.130 1.260 0.063 0.063 0.110
71/08/18 14 10 0.105 1.980 0.115 0.038 0.085
-------
ST3PET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
5568A3 LS5568A3
43 01 30.0 088 28 00.0
bARK RIVER
55 15 HARTLAND
I/ROME POND
us is E3RDG N OF DOUSMAN ABOV STP
I1EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH “102&N03 TOT KJEL Nr13-N PHOS—OTS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL OPTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/09/24 14 39 0.098 0.850 0.080 0.006 0.023
72/11/04 14 55 0.180 1.900 0.044 0.005K 0.018
72/12/03 11 15 0.320 0.650 0.017 0.013 0.031
73/01/07 14 30 0.350 0.960 0.132 0.054 0.070
73/02/04 15 30 0.340 0.820 0.040 0.039
73/03/04 14 40 0.480 0.810 0.050 0.056 0.075
73/04/08 14 35 0.189 1.600 0.038 0.012 0.035
73/04/30 10 00 0.189 1.2f 0 0.056 0.013 0.030
73/05/06 17 15 0.063 0.875 0.023 0.013 0.030
73/05/20 16 25 0.025 2.000 0.056 0.017 0.045
73/06/03 09 50 0.063 2.100 0.075 0.026 0.055
73/07/07 17 30 0.012 1,500 0.026 0.020 0.040
71/08/18 14 45 0.016 2.760 0.336 0.017 0.030
1< VALUE KNOWN TO t E LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
5568A4 LS5568A4
43 01 30.0 08R 30 00.0
I ARK RIVER
55 15 HARTLAND
I/ROME POND
Us 18 BRDG W OF UTICA BELO DOUSMAN SIP
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO7F NO3 TOT P(JEL NH3—N PHOS-DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L M(/L P MG/L P
7?/OQ/?4 14 40 0.170 0.800 0.113 0.015 0.033
7?/11/04 14 45 0.250 0.870 0.028 0.015 0.030
72/12/03 ii 03 0.430 0.680 0.034 0.025 0.05?
71/01/07 14 20 0.480 0.840 0.154 0.054 0.070
73/02/04 15 20 0.450 1.000 0.063 0.048 0.072
73/03/04 14 ?0 0.620 0.800 0.120 0.058 0.085
73/04/08 14 25 0.315 0.880 0.049 0.025 0.045
71/04/30 10 13 0.760 1.320 0.069 0.032 0.055
73/05/06 17 00 0.110 1.150 0.028 0.028 0.052
73/05/20 15 c 0.088 1.600 0.061 0.038 0.070
73/06/03 10 05 0.110 1.042 0.046 0.078 0.125
71/07/07 17 17 0.094 1.000 0.018 0.050 0.095
73/08/18 14 30 0.120 2.900 0.053 0.047 0.090
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/02
5568 1 LS5568B1
43 01 00.0 088 30 00.0
SCUPPERNONG CREEK
55 15 HARTLAND
T/ROME POND
CO RD XING E OF DOUSMAN
11EPALES 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/I MG/L P MG/L P
72/09/24 14 47 0.191 1.050 0.147 0.014 0.030
72/11/04 14 50 0.840 0.750 0.078 0.005K 0.015
72/12/03 11 05 1.200 0.680 0.056 0.010 0.019
73/01/07 14 35 1.420 0.580 0.080 0.013 0.025
71/02/04 15 30 1.220 2.100 0.034 0.021 0.060
73/03/04 14 25 1.280 0.960 0.094 0.033 0.065
73/04/08 14 30 1.040 0.600 0.029 0.008 0.015
73/04/30 10 00 0,650 1.150 0.039 0.005K 0.015
73/05/06 17 05 0.630 0.840 0.022 0.008 0.025
73/05/20 16 10 0.640 1.150 0.029 0.007 0.025
71/06/03 09 55 0.320 1.260 0.033 0.011 0.040
73/07/07 17 24 0.015 0.860 0.036 0.02’. 0.050
73/08/18 14 35 0.031 0.880 0.147 0.021 0.045
K VALUE
------- |