U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
BADGER LAKE
POLK COUNTY
MINNESOTA
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 82
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
•foOPO 697.O32
-------
REPORT
ON
BADGER LAKE
POLK COUNTY
MINNESOTA
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 82
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
AND THE
MINNESOTA [JATIONAL GUARD
NOVEMBER, 1974
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Minnesota Study Lakes iv, v
Lake and Drainage Area Map vi
Sections
I. Conclusions i
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
IV. Nutrient Loadings 8
V. Literature Reviewed 13
VI. 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 0 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,bfl,
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 Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency for professional involvement and to the Minnesota National
Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey.
Grant J. Merritt, Director of the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, John F. McGuire, Chief, and Joel G. Schilling, Biologist,
of the Section of Surface and Groundwater, Division of Water Quality,
provided invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the course
of the Survey; and the staff of the Section of Municipal Works, Divi-
sion of Water Quality, were most helpful in identifying point sources
and soliciting municipal participation in the Survey.
Major General Chester J. Moeglein, the Adjutant General of
Minnesota, and Project Officer Major Adrian Beltrand, who directed
the volunteer efforts of the Minnesota National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF MINNESOTA
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Albert Lea Freeborn
Andrusia Beltrami
Badger Polk
Bartlett Koochiching
Bear Freeborn
Bemidji Beltrami
Big Stearns
Big Stone Big Stone, MN; Roberts,
Grant, SD
Birch Cass
Blackduck Beltrami
Blackhoof Crow Wing
Budd Martin
Buffalo Wright
Calhoun Hennepin
Carlos Douglas
Carrigan Wright
Cass Beltrami, Cass
Clearwater Wright, Stearns
Cokato Wright
Cranberry Crow Wing
Darling Douglas
Elbow St. Louis
Embarass St. Louis
Fall Lake
Forest Washington
Green Kandiyohi
Gull Cass
Heron Jackson
Leech Cass
Le Home Dieu Douglas
Lily Blue Earth
Little Grant
Lost St. Louis
-------
V
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Madison Blue Earth
Malmedal Pope
Mashkenode St. Louis
McQuade St. Louis
Minnetonka Hennepin
Minnewaska Pope
Mud Itasca
Nest Kandiyohi
Pelican St. Louis
Pepin Goodhue, Wabasha, MN;
Pierce, Pepin, WI
Rabbit Crow Wing
Sakatah Le Sueur
Shagawa St. Louis
Silver McLeod
Six Mile St. Louis
Spring Washington, Dakota
St. Croix Washington, MN; St. Croix,
Pierce, WI
St. Louis Bay St. Louis, MN; Douglas, WI
Superior Bay St. Louis, MN; Douglas, WI
Swan Itasca
Trace Todd
Trout Itasca
Wagonga Kandiyohi
Walimark Chisago
White Bear Washington
Winona Douglas
Wolf Beltrami, Hubbard
Woodcock Kandiyohi
Zumbro Olmstead, Wabasha
-------
/
•\
I -
)
9
—
-d.
C.
Minnesota
F
BADGER LAKE
® Tributary Sampling Site X take Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
j t Dlrect Drainage Area Boundary • Indirect Drainage Area Boundary
0
M l.
Scale
-------
BADGER LAKE
STORET NO. 2704
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Badger Lake is considered to be eutrophic. Although Survey
limnologists did not observe any algal blooms, they did report
heavy growths of rooted aquatic vegetation.
The Survey lake data indicate relatively good water quality;
and, if these data were the only basis for judgement, this rather
shallow lake might be considered mesotrophic. However, in a num-
ber of other shallow Survey study lakes where rooted aquatic vege-
tation was the primary manifestation of eutrophy (e.g., Shawano
Lake, Wisconsin), nutrient levels were low, little chlorophyll a
was detected, Secchi disc transparencies were good to excellent,
and algal assay control yields (in response to low nutrient levels)
were low.
Among the 60 Minnesota lakes sampled in the fall when essen-
tially all were well—mixed, 10 had less mean total phosphorus, 15
had less mean dissolved phosphorus, and 15 had less mean inorganic
nitrogen. For all 80 lakes sampled, 22% had greater Secchi disc
transparency, but none had less mean chlorophyll a.
B. Rate—Limiting Nutrient:
Because of nutrient loss, the algal assay results are not
considered reliable. However, the lake data indicate nitrogen
-------
2
limitation in July and October and phosphorus limitation in
September.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources——During the sampling year, it is calcu-
lated that Badger Lake received a total phosphorus load at a
rate about 1½ times that proposed by Vollenweider (in press)
as “dangerous”; i.e., a eutrophic rate (see page 12). Of
that load, it is estimated that the Village of Erskine con-
tributed about 71%.
It is calculated that institution of 70% phosphorus removal
at Erskine would reduce the loading rate to 0.32 g/m2/yr or less
than Vollenweider’s eutrophic rate. However, it is concluded
that the rooted aquatic vegetation would continue to be a problem
because of the alternate sediment source of nutrients and the
shallowness of the lake.
2. Non—point sources (see page 12)——The phosphorus exports
of the Badger Lake subdrainage compare well with those of other
unimpacted streams studied elsewhere in western Minnesota (e.g.,
the mean P export of four streams tributary to Big Stone Lake
was 19 lbs/mi 2 /yr).
In all, non-point sources are estimated to have contributed
less than 29% of the total phosphorus load during the sampling
year.
-------
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry*:
1. Surface area: 354 acres.
2. Mean depth: 4 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 11 feet.
4. Volume: 1,416 acre/feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 108 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area Mean flow
Poplar River 28.9 mi2 5.7 cfs
Mitchell Lake outlet 2.3 mi2 0.4 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 2.5 mi 0.5 cfs
2
Totals 33.7 mi 6.6 cfs
2. Outlet -
94-4-
Badger Creek 34.2 mrTT 6.6 cfs
C. Precipitation :
1. Year of sampling: 24.8 inches.
2. Mean annual: 17.9 inches.
* Anonymous, 1972.
1" Drainage areas are accurate within ±5%; mean daily flows are accurate
within ±10%; and ungaged flows are accurate within ±10 to 25% for
drainage areas greater than 10 mi2.
tt Includes area of lake.
ttt See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods"
-------
4
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Badger 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 two
depths at one 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 during
the last visit, a single five-gallon depth—integrated sample was taken
for algal assays. Also each time, a depth—integrated sample was collected
for chlorophyll a analysis. The maximum depth sampled was 4 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.
-------
5
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
(10/20/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1
Dissolved oxygen (mg/i) 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2
Conductivity (pmhos) 460 460 460 460
pH (units) 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.5
Alkalinity (mg/i) 183 184 184 185
Total P (mg/i) 0.022 0.026 0.026 0.030
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.015 0.018 0.018 0.021
NO + NO (mg/i) 0.040 0.045 0.045 0.050
Am onia mg/1) 0.070 0.075 0.075 0.080
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 52 77 84 96
-------
6
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton* —
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
07/11/72 1. Dinobryon 1,713
2. Microcystis 241
3. Cryptomonas 229
4. Anabaena 72
5. Scenedesmus 48
Other genera 194
Total 2,497
10/20/72 1. Dinobryon 452
2. Flagellates 434
3. Cryptomonas 187
4. Navicula 64
5. Achnanthes 54
Other genera — 219
Total 1,410
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 )
07/11/72 01 3.6
09/08/72 01 0.9
10/20/72 01 1.7
* The September pT,ytoplankton sample was lost in shiprnei t.
-------
7
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
A significant loss of nutrients occurred between sample
collection and the beginning of the algal assay, and the results
are not reliable.
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation in July and October
(N/P ratios were 9/1 and 7/1, respectively, and nitrogen limitation
would be expected) but phosphorus limitation in September (N/P =
17/1).
-------
8
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Minnesota National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page vi), except for the high
runoff months of April and May, when two samples were collected, and
December when samples were omitted. Sampling was begun in October,
1972, and was completed in September, 1973.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a “normalized” or average year were provided by
the Minnesota District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the
trib tary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were
determined by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey
computer program for calculating stream loadings. Nutrient loadings
for “minor tributaries and immediate drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S.) were
estimated by using the nutrient loads, in lbs/mi 2 /year, calculated for
the Poplar River at station A—i and multiplying those by the ZZ area
in mi 2 .
The Village of Erskine declined participation in the Survey, and
nutrient loads there were estimated at 2.5 lbs P and 7.5 lbs N/capita!
year.
-------
9
A 0 Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal —
Pop. Mean Receiving
Name Served Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Erskine 571* Ponds O.057** Badger Lake
2. Known industrial - None
* Anonymous, 1973.
** Estimated at 100 gal/capita/day.
-------
10
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading — Average Year:
1. Inputs —
lbs P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non—point load) —
Poplar River 430 21.5
Mitchell Lake outlet 40 2.0
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non—point load) - 40 2.0
c. Known municipal —
Erskine 1,430 71.5
d. Septic tanks - Unknown
e. Known industrial - None - —
f. Direct precipitation* - 60 3.0
Total 2,000 100.0
2 Outputs —
Lake outlet — Badger Creek 2,090
3. Net annual P loss — 90 pounds
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
11
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading — Average Year:
1. Inputs —
lbsN/ %of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Poplar River 22,250 66.6
Mitchell Lake outlet 1,530 4.6
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 1,920 5.8
c. Known municipal —
Erskine 4,280 12.8
d. Septic tanks — Unknown
e. Known industrial — None - -
f. Direct precipitation* - 3,410 10.2
Total 33,390 100.0
2. Outputs —
Lake outlet — Badger Creek 33,290
3. Net annual N accumulation — 100 pounds
ee Working Paper No . 1.
-------
12
0. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/mi 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr
Poplar River 15 770
Mitchell Lake outlet 17 665
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 oligo—
trophic if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate would
be considered one between “dangerous” and “permissible”.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
lbs/acr /yr 5.6 loss* 94.3 0.3
grams/rn /yr 0.63 - 10.6 0.03
Volle 2 weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Badger Lake:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 0.38
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 0.19
* The apparent loss of 90 pounds of phosphorus during the sampling year is
believed to be due to the location of the outlet sampling station some
two stream miles below the actual outlet of the lake. Thus an additional
drainage load was included as an output but not included in the inputs.
Underestimation of the Erskine phosphorus contribution also would result
in the apparent loss.
-------
13
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1972. Survey questionnaire. MPCA, Minneapolis.
Anonymous, 1973. Wastewater disposal facilities inventory. MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Johnson, Clare L., 1952. Waterfiow and muskrat habitat survey-—
Badger Lake, Polk County 0 MN Dept. of Conservation, St. Paul.
Schilling, Joel, 1974. Personal communication (lake map). MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Vollenweider, Richard A., (in press). Input—output models. Schweiz.
A. Hydrol.
-------
1 — ‘ •i’ I A-’ v’ FLt) •i I ‘ )-‘ 1 AT j i .
10/ i0/7’.
IA.<’F Cll, l. 77
—, L J
1ry IT_ . Y _(1 ) ‘jAIL Y fl I ’ S
FLu I
T Et- iT
it) J1 —1
if A f (t .’
FU)
AT’
JL )W )AY
77j3C1
1 )
It
1
I
?
4
‘
7
q
7-’
- ‘
7 - ’
/4
7
‘
7
7
71
7
? Q
l.4
0.3I
10.71
1.71
1. Q
N
12
N
2i
‘
H
i
k
I
i -
.“
1. ( I
1.R(i
tJ•43
0.30
4 r 1
1.4.)
J.Y”
j : ) .4)
1. ’ -’)
?. .O,h
ao.u
7?
•7f)
27C4/7
10
12
1
?
I
4
.
‘-
7
b l
Pr
7)
7
7)
7
7
/3
‘4
1 t
71
/ -
‘l
0.V
(.4
1.1?
1.10
)•17
2q71
‘.?7
D.17
t_.1.-’
r )7
.te ‘
1 jC,
N
H
1”
?I
L ,
H
11
3
‘l
3,7r 1
0.)”
fl. IO
0.12
j.0 -
1.5J
u.1()
:.
‘ ?)
c.14
t 37
2?
0. 0
-------
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TPI 3UTAPY FLOW INFO9UATION FOP MINNESOTA
10/30/ 74
LANE CODE 270 ’ .
r1A [ )( TP LAME
TOTAL DPAINA(,E AREA OF LAP ’1
3 ’. • ‘0
TOTAL 1)PAINAGE AREA OF LAKE
SUr OF S —fl A! lAGE AREAS =
TPIRJTARY lONL-4 y ja;
‘ EAN FLO DAY
FLO* DAY
FLOW DAY FLOW
SUB—ORA ‘ JA ,E
TPIRUTARY ARFA
NORMALIZED FLOWS
JAN FEI- MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
?70 4A1
28.70
3.42
0.27
1.6
21.60
13.50
12.10
6.18
2.62
4.11
1.93
1.31
1.11
5.74
?70’.’31
?.3()
0.0?
0.01
3.18
1.50
1.03
0.99
0.48
0.17
0.35
0.13
0.07
0.06
0.42
?704C1
34..’O
0.42
0.79
3.91
25.80
16.00
14.40
7.30
3.09
4.79
2.27
1.56
1.22
6.75
270422
3.01
0.)?
0.0’
0.?
1.97
1.32
1.30
0.62
0.fl
0.46
0.17
0.09
0.08
0.54
MEAtI M0NTr L1 FLo c AND OAILY FLOwS
SEP OCT NOV DEC MEAN
SUMMARY
34.20 TOTAL FLOW IN
= 80.36
14.21 TOTAL FLOW OUT
= 81.05
?70. . AI
10
7?
1.7T
15
2.30
11
7’
1.23
1’
1. 50
17
77
1.’ 7
10
1.60
1
73
0.46
?l
0.40
7
73
0. ’g
4
0.30
3
71
10.05
1
24.00
‘ .
13
3.0’
1.20
5
73
1.76
13
3.30
6
71
1.45
1
2.00
7
73
1.17
8
1.40
73
44.10
21
3M.00
9
73
78.10
16
17.00
?70 ’ .R1
10
II
1’
1
7
1
4
5
6
7
8
72
7?
7?
73
7
73
73
73
73
73
73
0.1’
0.07
0.09
0.02
0.01
0.49
0.21
0.11
0.1’
0.09
0.35
IS
I’
10
21
4
IM
9
I
3
M
21
0.20
0.09
0.09
0.0’
0.01
1.20
0.fl
0.20
0.20
0.10
4.50
9
73
2.40
IS
1.50
2’
2?
5.60
0.40
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STOPET PETPIEVAI D 4 i /1O’30
?7040 1
47 40 55.0 096 00 28.0
BAt)GEI- LAKE
27 MINNESOTA
1 1E ALES
3
2111202
0005 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/07/il
7?/O9/0
72/10/20
r)ATE
If)
7?/( 7/ II
7?/OQ/0
72/10/20
TIME IWPTH
OF
r)t Y FEET
1? 10 000’)
)7 10 0fl03
10 1 0090
10 15 0004
14 45 0000
)4 45 0004
II IE r)c rH
OF
flAY FF T
1’ 10 ‘ )0 ’
10 j:; oo
14 45 COUD
1001
jO3)C
13377
00094
00400
00410
00630
00610
00665
00666
wAT
DO
TPAN P
CNDUCTVY
PH
T ALK
N0?&N03
NH3—N
PHOS-TOT
PHOS—DIS
TF ”
SECChI
FIFL()
CACO3
N-TOTAL
TOTAL
CEHT
\iG/L
INCHES
MICROMHO
SU
MG/L
P16/L
HG/L
MG/L P
MG/L P
7 4•)
1•1.2
4 fl
450
8.80
8.90
8.60
157
162
155
0.040
0.040
0.060
0.090
0.060
0.140
0.026
0.022
0.016
0.014
0.01?
0.012
15.’
1 .’.
96
495
460
3.70
8.40
153
185
0.060
0.050
0.120
0.080
0.015
0.022
0.010
0.015
7. 1
1?.?
460
9.50
183
0.040
0.070
0.030
0.021
I ’
C-L Y’L
II.
Ii. - J
U. QJ
•
J VALUE Kt’ 3wN TO ‘ i T
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STORET r ETPTEV4L DATE 74/10/ 30
1 )4A1 LS?704A1
47 +l 00.0 9f 00 00.’)
P °L P [ 1 [ TC i — r ADGE LAKE
/ 5
1/4 U’3E L ’cE
X1N 1 41 N OF E S !NE
11F AL 5 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTI-I
00630
00625
00610
00671
00665
r)ATE
TIMF
DEPT-I
NO2 NO3
Tot KJfl
NH3—N
PhOS—DIS
PHOS—TOt
FROM
OF
N—TOTAL
N
TOTAL
OPTP-IO
TO
DAY
FEET
Mr,/L
lG/L
MG/I
MG/L P
MG/L
72/10/1
10
00
0.076
1.250
0.084
0.011
0.0?5
7?/11/1?
10
30
3.023
C.Q 0
0.069
0.013
0.011
73/01/71
09
00
l.9 0
0.084
0.005K
0.( -F
73/02/04
09
30
fl.1l0
fl.7 0
0.046
0.006
0.0?5
73/03/fl
10
10
2.300
1. 00
0.140
0.025
0.o7
73/04/0k
09
00
0.0 15
3.200
0.052
0.011
0.uIu
73/04/?7
09
10
u.0 7 7
3. ’ 7O
J.091
0.005K
0.030
73/05/fl
09
5
0.01
2•7 3fl
0.039
0.019
0.J 45
73/05/20
09
30
1. 0
0.0)6
0.010
0.03 ’-
71/06/03
13
00
).01. JK
1.950
0.009
0.037
0.0 5
73/07/0
1’)
00
0.0 I
2.260
0.154
0.042
0.013
73/08/21
07
30
0.010K
1.130
C.120
0.011
0.042
71/09/16
09
00
0.010K
2.150
0.160
0.016
0.03
K VALUE NOWN TO BE LESS
THAN IrIDICATEL)
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
27 )4 1 LS2704 i1
4/ +0 30.0 01 i(’.O
‘ UTCt 1ELL LK/RAD(,L L ’ s CONN
7.5 E SKINE
T/ 3AL GFP LAKE
US ? r PDG Ni OF E SK1NE
ILEPALtS 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 006?5 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO7e .N03 TOT KJEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS PHOS-TUT
FROM OF ‘,I—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET HG/L MG/L MG/L P-IG/L P MG/L P
7?/1I/1? 10 00 0.0’S 1.340 0.105 0.009 0.01
73/01/21 09 30 0.370 2.100 0.086 0.00 5K 0.085
71/02/04 10 00 0.430 1.730 0.095 0.014 0.160
73/03/18 tO 00 0.420 i.6 0 0.450 0.115 0.15
71/04/OP 10 00 0.019 1.900 0.050 0.005K 0.025
73/04/27 10 00 0.010K 1.380 0.012 0.006 0.32b
73/05/13 10 00 0.010K 1.350 3.020 0.006 0.0?S
71/05/20 10 00 0.010K 2.100 .033 0.006 0.020
73/06/03 09 00 u.034 1.1 U 0.011 0.005K Q . 02 5
73/07/08 10 10 0.0’O 3.700 h087 0.017 0.040
71/QR/21 08 00 J.064 .3q0 O.13P 0.012
73/09/16 10 00 0. O lOrs 1.6R() ) .115 0.021 0.040
K VALUF KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN JNDICATED
-------
STDPET PETPTEVAL )ATE 7L+/I0/1(
?1j4C1 L 2704Cl
7 4? 00.0 i’- 0? t)fl.0
C E <
7 7 1. 5 S IN
O/’- AF)(WR LAPcE
SEO’JuA Y O glrJC, 7 5 II JNw OF ERSI(INE
I1tPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET OE TH
Cu- 7S ‘ ‘Th]0 0’1 7l
DATE TIME IJFPTH JO2 ’IQ3 TOT 1
------- |