U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
COT LAKE
WALWORTH COUNTY
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 60
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
ft GPO—697.032
-------
REPORT
ON
COPfiLAKE
WALWORTH COUNTY
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 60
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND THE
WISCONSIN NATIONAL GUARD
JUNE, 1975
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Wisconsin Study Lakes iv, v
Lake and Drainage Area Map vi
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 2
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 3
V. Literature Reviewed 8
VI. Appendices 9
-------
ii
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 [ 3O3(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.
The lake discussed in this report was included in the National
Eutrophication Survey as a water body of interest to the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources. Tributaries and nutrient sources
were not sampled, and this report relates only to the data obtained
from lake sampling.
-------
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, niultivariate 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 Wisconsin
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 Dani Dodge
Big Eau Pleine Marathon
Browns Racine
Butte des Morts Winnebago
Butternut Price, Ashl nd
Castle Rock Flowage Juneau
Como Walworth
Crystal Vilas
Delavan Walworth
Eau Claire Eau Claire
Geneva Walworth
Grand Green Lake
Green Green Lake
Kegonsa Dane
Koshkonong Jefferson, Rock, Dane
Lac La Belle Waukesha
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
-------
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,
Calumet
Wisconsin Columbia
Wissota Chippewa
Yellow Burnett
-------
LAKE COMO
x Lake Sampling Site
® Tributary Sampling Site
,‘ Direct Drainage Area Boundary
_______ Mi
Scale
(
n
1ap Location
—4234’ 8834
—42 38
—42 38
(
/
L
N
C
-------
COMO LAKE
STORET NO. 5562
I. INTRODUCTION
Como Lake was included in the National Eutrophication Survey as a
water body of interest to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
No wastewater treatment plants impact the lake; and, other than the lake,
only the outlet stream was sampled (Appendix C). Therefore, this report
is concerned only with the lake sampling data.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data, field observations, and other reports (Poff
and Threinen, 1961; Poff et al., 1969) indicate that Como Lake
is eutrophic. Of the 46 Wisconsin lakes studied, 19 had less
mean total phosphorus, 11 had less mean dissolved phosphorus,
35 had less mean inorganic nitrogen, 42 had greater mean Secchi
disc transparency, and 36 had less mean chlorophyll a.
Survey limnologists observed algal blooms in August and
November, 1972.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that Como Lake was phos-
phorus limited at the time the sample was taken (11/10/72).
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in August as well
but nitrogen limitation in June.
-------
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometryt:
1. Surface area:
2. Mean depth: 4
3. Maximum depth:
4. Volume: 4,033
5. Mean hydraulic
B. Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
Name _______________ ___________
Como Creek
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 38.7 inches.
2. Mean annual : ‘30.7 inches.
± Poff et al., 1969.
* 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.
*** See Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods, 1972”.
2
946 acres.
.3 feet.
9 feet.
acre-feet.
retention time: 1.1 years.
Drainage area* Mean flow*
9.1 mi 2 ** 5.3 cfs
-------
3
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Como Lake 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 one or more
depths at a single station on the lake (see map, page vi). During each
visit, a single depth-integrated (near bottom to surface) sample was
collected for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and a simi-
lar sample was collected for chlorophyll a analysis. During the last
visit, a single five-gallon depth—integrated sample was taken for algal
assays. The maximum depth sampled was 6 feet.
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.
-------
4
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
(11/10/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 6.5 (single measurement)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/i) 10.3 (single measurement)
Conductivity ( mhos) 450 450 450 450
pH (units) 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3
Alkalinity (mg/i) 187 188 188 188
Total P (mg/i) 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.012
NO + NO (mg/i) 0.140 0.155 0.155 0.170
Am onia ?mg/l) 0.240 0.250 0.250 0.260
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 12 20 16 33
-------
5
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
06/21/72 1. Merismopedia 7,609
2. Chroococcus 2,536
3. Scenedesmus 2,283
4. Cosmarium 1,956
5. Anabaena 942
Other genera 1,703
Total 17,029
08/16/72 1. Merismopedia 12,703
2. Chroococcus 8,558
3. Anabaeria 3,964
4. Lyngbya 3,964
5. Scenedesmus 3,243
Other genera 6,307
Total 38,739
11/10/72 1. Microcystis 26,847
2. Lyngbya 5,676
3. Synedra 2,342
4. Aphanocapsa 1,892
5. Scenedesmus 631
Other genera 1,891
Total 39,279
-------
6
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 )
06/21/72 01 54.4
08/16/72 01 29.1
11/10/72 01 25.7
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum yield
Spike (mg/i) Conc. (mg/l) Conc. (mg/i) ( mg/i-dry wt. )
Control 0.007 0.212 0.3
0.006 P 0.013 0.212 1.4
0.012 p o.oi9 0.212 3.7
0.024 P 0.031 0.212 7.0
0.060 P 0.067 0.212 7.8
0.060 P + 10.0 N 0.067 10.212 21.9
10.0 N 0.007 10.212 0.3
2. Discussion —
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum , indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Como Lake was relatively low at the time the sample was
taken (11/10/72). Also, the increased yields with increased
levels of orthophosphate show that the lake was phosphorus
limited at that time (note the lack of yield response when
only nitrogen was added).
-------
7
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in August
as well (N/P = 52/1) but nitrogen limitation in June (N/P =
6/1).
-------
8
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
McElwee, William 0., 1972. Personal communication (excerpts from “A
comprehensive plan for the Fox River watershed”). SE Wisc. Reg.
Planning Comm., Waukesha.
McKersie, Jerome R., Robert M. Krill, Bernard G. Schultz, and Terry A.
Moe; 1972. Fox (Illinois) River pollution investigation survey.
WI Dept. Nat. Resources, Madison.
Poff, Ronald, C. W. Threinen, Donald Mraz, Wilbur Byam, Ronald Piening,
Brian Belonger, Warren Churchill, and D. John O’Donnell; 1969.
Como Lake, an inventory with planning recommendations. Lake Use
Rept. No. FX-4, WI Dept. Nat. Resources, Madison.
Poff, Ronald J., and C. W. Threinen, 1961. Surface water resources
of Walworth County. WI Cons. Dept., Madison.
-------
9
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR WISCONSIN 9/30/74
LAKE CODE 5562 LAKE COMO
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE 9.06
SUB—DRAINAGE NORMALIZED FLOWS
TRIBUTARY AREA JAN FEB MAP APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MEAN
5562A1 9.06 3.50 4.20 10.00 8.90 6.20 8.60 3.90 3.10 3.90 3.90 4.60 3.30 5.34
5562ZZ 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 0.0
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE = 9.06 TOTAL FLOW IN = 0.0
SUM OF SUB—DRAINAGE AREAS = 0.0 TOTAL FLOW OUT = 64.10
NOTE *** NO INLET STREAMS
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
5562A1 9 72 15.00 23 22.00
10 72 10.00 20 5.80
11 72 7.70 29 5.10
12 72 5.10 27 4.10
1 73 7.90 29 6.60
2 73 6.00 24 3.60
3 73 19.00 20 17.00
4 73 56.00 14 38.00 30 58.00
5 73 19.00 17 13.00 26 13.00
6 73 8.00 22 7.60
7 73 2.10 22 1.90
8 73 1.20 24 1.20
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/09/30
32217
DEPTH CHLRPHYL
A
FEET UGI’L
556201
42 35 42.0 088 30 12.0
LAKE COMO
55 WISCONSIN
I 1EPALES
3
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
72/06/21 19 10 0000
72/08/16 18 00 0000
18 00 0004
- 18000006
7 ./I l/iD 10 05 0000
10 05 0004
2111202
0010 FEET DEPTH
00010
00300
00077
00094
00400
00410
00630
00610
00665
00666
WATER
DO
TRANSP
CNDUCTVY
PH
1
ALK
N02&N03
NH3—N
PHOS—TOT
PHOS—DIS
TEMP
SECCHI
FIELD
CACO3
N—TOTAL
TOTAL
CENT
MG/L
INCHES
MICROMHO
SU
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/L P
21.3
9.4
12
16
335
380
8.60
8.40
162
149
0.080
0.260
0.100
0.270
0.074
0.047
0.030
0.010
24.3
9.2
370
8.50
148
0.330
0.300
0.049
0.012
24.3
8.8
33
355
450
8.50
8.30
145
188
0.370
0.140
0.350
0.240
0.147
0.034
0.015
0.009
6.5
10.3
450
8.30
187
0.170
0.260
0.034
TIME
OF
DAY
DATE
FROM
TO
72/06/21
72/08/16
72/11/10
19 10 0000
18 00 0000
10 05 0000
54.4J
29. 1J
25.7J
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STD’?ET ETP1FVAL DATE 74/10/02
5562A1 LS S562A1
4? 37 00.0 088 27 30.0
CO AO c fF tc
55 15 LAKE GE’IEVA
0/LAKE CO 10
US 12 X!NG .5 M F OF COMO
11 PALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 O06& 5
DATE T1’ 1E DEPTH N02&NO3 TOT tcJEL NH3-N Pp- OS—DIS PHOS—TOT
P0M 0F N-TOTAL N TOTAL OPTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L ‘ AG/ I MG/L HG/L P MG/L
7?/09/?3 0 15 0.1b z 1.000 0.161 0.020 0.115
7?/l0/?0 17 30 0.036 1.47’) 0.117 0.018 0.060
72/11/29 15 20 - 0.095 0.942 3.115 0.005K 0.037
72/12/27 09 05 0.044 1.000 0.016 0.005K 0.03?
71/O /2 15 -0 0.176 0.960 0.069 0.014 0.050
71/02/24 1? 30 0.052 1.000 0.07 C.005K 0.0?0
71/01/20 11 30 0.021 0.9?0 c .031 0.005K 0.195
71/04/14 16 00 0.056 0.075
71/04/30 15 35 0.080 0.7 0 0.035 0.011 0.070
73/05/17 17 00 0.070 1.150 0.025 0.010 .045
73/05/2 ’ 1? 30 0.068 1.?’)’) 0.034 0.02? 0.065
73/06/27 14 30 0.024 1.100 0.048 0.030 0.090
71/07/?? 1? 35 0.O3 1.300 0.01? 0.010 0.085
73/0 /?4 09 00 0.310 2.3Cr) 0.710 0.05? 0.155
LESS
K VALUE NO N TO
T 1AN F\tD1CArE
------- |