U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LAKE CARLOS
DOUGLAS COUNTY
NINNESOTA
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 91
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
G97-032
-------
REPORT
ON
LAKE CARLOS
DOUGLAS OMTY
MINNESOTA
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 91
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
AND THE
MINNESOTA NATIONAL GUARD
NOVEMBER, 1974
-------
1
CO NTEIITS
Pag
Foreword
List of Minnesota Study Lakes iv , V
Lake and Drainage Area Map vi
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
IV. Nutrient Loadings 9
V. Literature Reviewed 14
VI. Appendices 15
-------
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
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 rilanagement
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 L5303(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 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. Iloeglein, 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
Ernbarass St. Louis
Fall Lake
Forest Washington
Green Kandiyohi
Gull Cass
Heron Jackson
Leech Cass
Le Homme Dieu Douglas
Lily Blue Earth
Little Grant
Lost st. Louis
-------
V
LAKE NAME
Madison
Malmedal
Mashkenode
McQuade
Mi nnetonka
Mi nnewaska
Mud
Nest
Pelican
Pep in
Rabbit
Sakatah
Shagawa
Si 1 ver
Six Mile
Spring
St. Croix
St. Louis Bay
Superior Bay
Swan
Trace
Trout
Wagon ga
Wa] imark
White Bear
Winona
Wolf
Woodcock
Zumbro
COUNTY
Blue Earth
Pope
St. Louis
St. Louis
Hennepin
Pope
Itasca
Kandiyohi
St. Louis
Goodhue, Wabasha, MN;
Pierce, Pepin, WI
Crow Wing
Le Sueur
St. Louis
McLeod
St. Louis
Washington,
Washington,
Pierce, WI
St. Louis, MN; Douglas, WI
St. Louis, MN; Douglas, WI
Itasca
Todd
Itasca
Kandlyohi
Chi sago
Washington
Douglas
Beltrarni, Hubbard
Kandiyohi
Olmstead, Wabasha
Dakota
MN; St. Croix,
-------
LAKE CARLOS
Tributary Sampling Site
Lake Samolinq Site
Direct Drainage Area Limits
Map Location
I
-------
LAKE CARLOS
STORET NO. 27B9
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate Lake Carlos is mesotrophic. Of the 60
Minnesota lakes sampled in the fall when essentially all were
well-mixed, none had less mean total and dissolved phosphorus,
and 15 had less mean inorganic nitrogen. For all 80 lakes
studied, only 6% had less mean chlorophyll a, and 7% had greater
mean Secchi disc transparency.
Some depression of dissolved oxygen with depth was noted at
stations 2 and 3 in September, 1972.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The results of the algal assay show that Lake Carlos was phos-
phorus limited at the time the assay sample was collected. The
lake data indicate phosphorus limitation at the other sampling
times as well.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources-—The elimination of the Alexandria Main
plant discharge to Upper Lake Winona* should result in some re-
duction of the present o1igotrophic loading rate to Lake Carlos
(see page 13).
* See “Report on Lake Winona”, Working Paper No. 135.
-------
2
2. Non-point sources (see page 13)--The non-point phosphorus
exports to Lake Carlos were exceptionally low because of nutrient
entrapment in the water bodies tributary to Lake Carlos.
In all, non-point sources are estimated to have contributed
nearly 65% of the total phosphorus load to the lake during the
sampling year.
-------
3
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometryt
1. Surface area: 2,520 acres.
2. Mean depth: 43 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 163 feet.
4. Volume: 108,360 acre/feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 3.7 years.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area* Mean flow*
Lake Darling outlet 175.0 mi 2 30.7 cfs
Le Home Dieu Lake outlet 42.3 mi 2 7.2 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 12.8 ml 2.4 cfs
Totals 230.1 mi 2 40.3 cfs
2. Outlet -
2**
Long Prairie River 234.0 ml 40.3 cfs
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 22.9 inches.
2. Mean annual: 22.6 inches.
t DNR lake survey map (1960); mean depth by random-dot method.
* Drainage areas are accurate within ±5%; mean daily flows are accurate
within ±10%; and ungaged flows ar accurate within ±10 to 25% for
drainage areas greater then 10 mit.
** Includes area of lake.
See Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
4
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Carlos 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 vi). During each visit, a single depth-integrated (15 feet
to surface) sample was composited from the stations for phytoplankton
identification and enumeration; and during the last visit, a single
five-gallon depth-integrated sample was composited for algal assays.
Also each time, a depth-integrated sample was collected from each of
the stations for chlorophyll a analysis. The maximum depths sampled
were 42 feet at station 1, 102 feet at station 2, and 50 feet at station 3.
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
(10/28/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 7.3 7.5 7.6 7.7
Dissolved oxygen (mg/i) 8.4 9.6 9.7 10.6
Conductivity (pmhos) 320 331 330 340
pH (units) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.1
Alkalinity (mg/i) 187 191 191 193
Total P (mg/i) 0.010 0.013 0.013 0.018
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.009
NO + NO (mg/i) 0.050 0.067 0.070 0.080
Am onia mg/l) 0.040 0.057 0.060 0.070
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 72 112 118 144
-------
6
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
07/10/72 1. Dinobryon 3,201
2. Flagellates 452
3. Microcystis 434
4. Anabaena 235
5. Chroococcus 199
Other genera 795
Total 5,316
09/02/72 1. Microcystis 3,986
2. Kirchneriella 3,080
3. rlerismopedia 1,413
4. Dinobryon 616
5. Anabaena 507
Other genera 2,463
Total 12,065
10/28/72 1. Chroococcus 1,558
2. Flagellates 1,306
3. Dinobryon 904
4. Lyngbya 628
5. Synedra 176
Other genera 1,106
Total 5,678
-------
7
01
02
03
01
02
03
4.2
5.2
4.3
5.3
3.5
5.4
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/i )
07/10/72 01 6.4
02 4.2
03 3.2
09/02/ 72
10/28/72
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum yield
Spike (mg/i) Conc. (mg/i) Conc. (mg/i) ( mg/i—dry wt. )
Control 0.012 0.117 0.9
0.005 P 0.017 0.117 2.5
o.oio P 0.022 0.117 2.7
0.020 P 0.032 0.117 2.8
0.050 P 0.062 0.117 2.8
0.050 P + 10.0 N 0.062 10.117 24.8
10.0 N 0.012 10.117 0.5
2. Discussion —
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum , indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Lake Carlos was relatively low at the time the sam-
ple was collected. Also, the increase in yield with increas-
ing increments of orthophosphorus (to about 0.020 mg/l) shows
that the lake was phosphorus limited. Note that the addition
-------
8
of only nitrogen did not result in a yield significantly
different than the control yield.
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation at the other
sampling times as well; i.e., N/P ratios were 17/1 or greater.
-------
9
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for all data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Minnesota 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, and the colder
months when two samples were omitted at station C-i because of low flows.
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 tributary
sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were determined
by using a modification of the U.S. Geological Survey computer program for
calculating stream loadings. Nutrient loadings for unsampled “minor tribu-
taries and immediate drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S.) were estimated by using
the mean nutrient loads, in lbs/mi 2 /year, in streams tributary to nearby
Big Stone Lake at stations 27O9D—l, E-1, F-i, and G-1 and multiplying the
means by the Lake Carlos ZZ area in mi 2 .
There are no known point sources impacting Lake Carlos directly.
Lake Le Home Dieu retained 80% of the P load and 66% of the N load from
the City of Alexandria Main Plant during the sampling year. In the
-------
10
following loading tables, the nutrient loads attributed to the indirect
point source were estimated on the basis of the Lake Le Homme Dieu reten-
tion, and the loads attributed to that outlet are those measured minus
the point-source loads.
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal (indirect only)* -
Pop. Mean Receiving
Name Served Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Alexandria 5,090 trickling 0.644 Upper Lake
Main filter Winona
2. Known industrial - None
* See ‘Report on Lake Le Homme Dieu” (Working Paper No. 106).
-------
11
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading — Average Year:
1. Inputs —
lbs Pt % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Lake Darling outlet 1,160 37.4
Le Homme Dieu outlet 220 7.1
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 240 7.7
c. Known municipal -
Alexandria Main* 150 4.8
d. Septic tanks** - 940 30.3
e. Known industrial - None -
f. Direct precipitation*** - 390 12.7
Total 3,100 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Long Prairie River 1,360
3. Net annual P accumulation - 1,740 pounds
* Indirect.
** Estimate based on 128 seasonal and 105 permanent dwellings and one
park on shoreline; 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) -
Lake Darling outlet 72,600 48.4
Lake Le Homme Dieu outlet 16,910 11.3
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 4,720 3.2
c. Known municipal -
Alexandria Main* 950 0.6
d. Septic tanks** - 30,400 20.3
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation*** - 24,280 16.2
Total 149,860 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Long Prairie River 83,270
3. Net annual N accumulation — 66,590 pounds
* Indirect.
** Estimate based on 128 seasonal and 105 permanent dwellings and one
park on shoreline; see Working Paper No. 1.
See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
13
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/mi 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr
Lake Darling outlet 7 415
Lake Le Honirne Dieu outlet 5 400
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
1bs/acr /yr 1.2 0.7 59.5 26.4
grams/rn /yr 0.14 0.08 6.7 3.0
Vol1e weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Lake Carlos:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 0.36
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 0.18
-------
14
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1969. Report on water quality investigation of the Long
Prairie River and lakes Carlos, Le Homme Dieu and Osakis. MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Bishop, Kyle M., and John F. McGuire, 1968(?). Report on pollution of
lakes Winona, Agnes and Henry. MPCA, Minneapolis.
Schilling, Joel, 1974. Personal communication (lake map). MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Vollenweider, Richard A., (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz.
A. Hydrol.
-------
15
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
T4INIJTARY FLOW !NFO MATI0N FOR ,•lINNE5OTA 10/30/74
LA (F CODE 77H9 CAPL’3S LAKE
TOTAL D ATNAGF AREA OF LA’cE ‘34.00
SUR—DR AINA( ,E NORMALiZED FLOWS
TRIRUTARY A f A JAN FE MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MEAN
?7BQA I 234.00 4.60 IO.’O 30.00 112.00 68.50 76.70 45.80 32.30 16.70 40.90 34.20 11.60 40.32
27R D1 175.00 3.47 7.45 23.20 B5.10 53.30 59.P0 33.90 24.20 12.90 30.80 25.40 8.76 30.72
2799C1 47.30 0.52 1.01 5.12 21.10 12.70 15.50 8.4P 5.09 3.09 6.53 5.00 1.63 7.16
?7 97Z 14.20 0.4? 0.76 1.99 5 . 4 4.10 4.91 2.83 1.82 1.26 2.51 1.78 0.96 2.43
SUMMARY
TOTAL D4AINAC,E AREA OF LAKE = 234.00 TOTAL FLOW IN = 483.25
SUM OF SUN—DRAINAGE AREAS 231.50 TOTAL FLOW OUT = 483.50
NOTE *0* TRIN 99R1=44C 1; R9C1=BSCI
MEAN MONTMLY FLOWS AN!) DAILY FLOWS
TPIAJTAPY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
?7R9A 1 10 7? 113.00 14 120.00
II 7? 106.00 15 103.00
1? 77 50.70 15 4’ .00
73 23.10 12 22.00
7 73 55.10 21 54.00
73 137.00 13 116.00
4 73 140.00 5 175.00 19 133.00
5 71 115.00 1 113.00 17 109.00
6 71 R0.0fl 8 91.00
1 73 56.50 11 0.97
P 73 6’.SO 23 0.88
9 73 76.70 30 0.82
?789R 1 10 7 ‘33.R0 14 0.00
II 7? 76.PO IS 74.00
12 7? 17.80 15 3b.00
1 73 16.90
7 71 IQ.50 21 39.00
1 7J 104.00 13 8.00
4 73 104.00 5 130.00 19 98.80
S 73 P7.90 3 102.00 17 84.00
6 73 61.00 8 70.00
7 73 41.00 11 1 .70
8 71 46.00 23 40.50
9 73 ?0.30 30 Ib.60
-------
rQI 3(’TA, Y FLO”J 1NFO ’1ATIO’i FOR “IINNESOTA
10/30/74
L F CODE 77 Q
C r LOS L4tcE
MEAN M()NT -+LY FL )w , ANt) DAILY FLOWS
FLOW DAY
FLOW
TRI tJTA Y
A0NP-1
YFA
MEAN FLOW
DAY
?789C1
10
11
1?
1
3
4
5
6
7
5
q
72
7 )
77
11
73
73
73
73
73
73
71
73
17.f 0
15.10
7.U
?.54
?1.flO
?5.70
71.’iO
1 5. 50
10.10
Q.b7
4 c
14
15
15
21
13
5
3
e
11
73
30
19.00
lb.0O
.7C)
2.5’)
20.00
32.00
24.00
1 .00
9.95
M.51
3•9
?7 q?l
10
11
1?
1
?
3
4
5
6
7
5
9
1 ?
7?
7’
7
73
73
71
73
13
71
73
73
5.39
4.12
2.05
4.01
P.96
7.12
6.76
5.01
1.4?
3.45
l.Q
14
15
15
1’
?1
13
5
3
5
11
3
30
7.30
5.20
4.00
2.00
4.00
7.60
8.90
7,50
5.70
3.3?
3.04
1.62
FLOW DAY
24.00
20.00
6.E ’O
6.40
19
17
19
17
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
ST3 ET PETRIEVAL 1)AT 74/1’ /1i)
278901
45 56 06.0 095 22 15.0
LAKE CARLOS
8INNESOTA
1 IFPALES
3
2111202
0036 FEET DEPT#
DATE
TIME
DFDT f
FR0
OF
TO
DAY
FEET
77/07/tO
09 20
09 20
09 ‘0
09 20
0000
0004
0015
003
72/09/02
09 15
09 15
09 15
09 15
09 15
0000
0004
0015
00??
0029
7?/10/?P
17 45
12 45
1? 45
I? 45
1? 45
0000
0004
0015
0025
004
OATF
TIME
r)ruTH
FPOM
OF
TO
DAY
FEET
7?/07/10
09 70
0000
7?/0 /0 ?
QC 5
(p000
7?/10/?
I? 45
f 000
‘ C013
‘j(3’) 13
)C677
00094
00400
00410
00630
00610
00665
00666
WATE P
DO
1 A iSP
CNDIJCTVY
PH
1 ALK
N02&N03
N83—I’e
PHOS—TOT
PHOS—DIS
TF - °
SECCHI
FIELD
CACO3
N—TOTAL
TOTAL
CE ’JT
G/L
IN(HES
MIC OMH0
SU
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
HG/L P
P4G/L P
‘1.1
120
380
8.50
197
0.050
0.070
0.012
0.008
‘I.’
4.?
370
8.50
193
0.080
0.080
0.013
0.007
17.fl
Q. .
180
8.50
192
0.080
0.080
0.013
0.009
17.1
.3
390
8.00
197
0.070
0.070
0.015
0.008
17.2
345
8.50
170
0.120
0.160
0.020
0.014
IQ.4
c’. 0
340
E .5Q
190
0.120
0.130
0.010
0.010
19.4
.7
420
8.55
185
0.130
0.160
0.019
0.014
19.]
‘.6
155
i.53
185
0.130
0.160
0.015
0.010
18.4
7.’
124
355
330
8.3
8.00
188
191
0.140
0.070
0.180
0.060
0.018
0.018
0.014
0.006
7.5
1(.fl
330
8.00
192
0.070
0.040
0.013
0.006
7.5
Q.2
130
8.00
192
0.070
0.060
0.013
0.006
7.5
,4.’+
130
8.00
190
0.070
0.060
0.013
0.006
7.3
.8
140
8.00
190
0.080
0.060
0.015
0.007
377 I
CHL PHYL
A
U / L
. ;ij
5. Li
j VALUE tcNOWN TO BE IN ER,’OP
-------
STOQET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
27 902
45 57 37.0 095 21 52.0
LAKE CAPLOS
27 MINNESOTA
I IEPALES 2111202
3 0050 FEET DEPTH
Cfl3I0 00100 00077 00094 00400 00410 00630 00610 00665 00666
DATE TIME DEPTH WATER DO TRANSP CNOUCTVY PH 7 ALK NO2 NO3 NH3—N PHOS—TOT PHOS—DIS
FROM OF TEMP SECCHI FIELD CACO3 N—TOTAL TOTAL
TO DAY FEET CENT MG/L INCHES 41CR0MHO SU MG/I MG/I MG/I MG/I P MG/I P
72/07/10 12 45 0000 23.0 115 370 8.60 196 0.110 0.130 0.013 0.011
1? 45 0004 22.’ 9.2 380 8.60 197 0.080 0.080 0.011 0.007
12 ‘.5 0015 20.4 P• ’. 380 8.50 193 0.010 0.050 0.013 0.007
1? 45 0025 15. ’. H.2 380 8.30 198 0.050 0.050 0.014 0.008
1? 45 0046 16.2 7.0 380 7.70 198 0.050 0.050 0.015 0.009
72/09/02 09 55 0000 72 340 8.58 173 0.110 0.140 0.017 0.010
09 55 0004 19.5 9.4 335 8.58 170 0.100 0.140 0.016 0.009
09 55 0015 19.’. 9.1 330 8.60 176 0.090 0.100 0.009 0.007
09 55 00?? 19.3 9.1 325 8.58 172 0.130 0.130 0.014 0.008
09 55 0030 18.5 7.4 320 8.45 177 0.100 0.130 0.014 0.008
09 55 0045 11.? 3.0 365 7.65 189 0.100 0.110 0.012 0.007
09 55 OO’ 0 8.8 ‘.8 365 7.60 189 0.120 0.100 0.010 0.011
09 55 0075 6.3 3.7 360 7.60 189 0.250 0.120 0.011 0.007
09 55 0090 5.9 1.9 360 7.60 189 0.270 0.130 0.014 0.008
00 55 0I0 5.5 .O 370 7.50 187 0.330 0.180 0.046 0.017
72/10/29 13 15 0000 120 325 8.00 193 0.080 0.070 0.011 0.008
11 15 0004 7.7 320 8.00 192 0.070 0.060 0.013 0.007
13 15 0015 7. 330 8.00 193 0.060 0.050 0.013 0.007
I) 15 0030 7.6 330 8.00 192 0.070 0.060 0.012 0.007
11 15 0045 7.5 320 8.00 191 0.060 0.050 0.012 0.006
3? l7
DATE TIME OFPTp-4 C - ’LRPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET hf/I
72/07/10 1? 45 0000 4. ?J
72/09/0? 09 55 0000 5.’J
72/10/28 13 IS 0000 3.SJ
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
STORET PETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
2 7) 90 3
45 59 06.0 095 20 20.0
LA’
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
ST) ET ETPNV’ L )Ar- 74 /11/ib
?7- i 1 LS27R9AL
5 L, 00.0 095 23 00.0
LO”ic’ - A1RIE
27 7.5 ALEXANP IA F
0/1_AKE C LO5
p- - 11G 1.15 M I Nw OF TOwN OF CAPLOS
IJFPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
‘ 0 71 006 ’5
r)ATF T1M - T- D?’ ”Ci TUl LcJL ‘‘-‘1—N PP-iOS—fllS PHUS—TQT
()r r( TA( ‘ TUTAL UPTHO
TO I)AY FF T • ( / 1r,/L M0/L Mr,/L
77/10/14 fl 0 .0 ’3 j.7 ’ 0 C.OSP O.OO SPc 0.021
7?/12/1S 11 4 ’ ‘.Ci3 ( 7I0 ( ‘.017 0.005K
71/0 1/1? 14 1() “.C 5 0.7 0 (‘.061 0.00 5K
71/07/21 11 45 0. ’ (’ 0.C ’3 0.005K 0.025
71/01/13 03 .0 ” . ?J ).‘ 6 0.009 0.020
7l/ 4/Oc 14 .5 ‘.C ‘j.( ?? 0.005K 0.015
71/04/1Y l 05 C. ”) .0Iq 0.005K 0.015
71/05/.fl IS 01 ‘. 0 ’ ‘.u]l 0.005K 0.J1i )
71/05/17 IS 0 .. I)K fl.0t 7 0.005K
71/’)6/0 11 ‘5 .C1’cc ‘.0€ 1 0.005K
1500 i.01 ‘).042 0.010 0.015
7 1/1r /fl “.(1 !.- ‘1 (,. ‘J? l (,.009 0.010
7 /’) / 3 _.(‘j ) .05? u.00
K VALUF JOWN TO E LESS
TI ’iAN If ’IDJCATF [ ,
-------
ST ’ T ‘ET !E’/ l ‘ TL 7 ’/1 / )
27H C)
‘. -‘ 6 00.0 095 23 00.0
LK CA -LOS/L’c DAPLI.’,G CONNECTION
7. ALEXANI)P!A
1/L. KE CANLOS
CO NO 3RDG ? MI N OF ALEXANDRIA
1 IEPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH
‘1 J( 00’ 1 00 71 00665
i3ft TE T f l rW D [ p-i j ) 2 AjIj3 E)f JEL sJ4 3—N r hflS—OIS PhOST’JT
F ?0M j—T )TaI_ rurAl ORTH(
TO 1)AY F ’ T ‘/L “ 1 /L I i(,/L 1(;/L P
7?/l0/I’. 1040 ‘j.l’J 1. 0c u.130 0.005K
72/l1/1 1 10 J.10) 0 . )C ).(‘7 0.012 0,024
7?/1’/lS l ) 10 ‘.1I l. lQu 0.Ou SK 0.01’+
71/01/17 14 3 ’ .1 H 1r ’) t . Ob O 0.00 5K 0.ci?o
73/0?/71 10 () .( 1? 0.00 K 0.0?,
71/03/11 15 iS ‘.‘S’, j. 7 ’) 0.00 ’- ’c f’.01
71/04/05 14 flfl , ).eS J. OOSK 0.0?’)
71/0 /1 14 1 .1 ‘) 1.- o .i37 0.005K 0.020
71/05/01 1440 r.0_ 0.7Yj 0.0fl5 0.015
71/ OS/Il L6 5 ‘.01’ fl .’ i o. 2P 0.006 0. ON
71/0’/0 ’ 35 0.fl ) C.1’l’ 0.005K 0.020
71/07/11 141’) ‘.01C 2. OC (.fl I 0.007 0.015
71/C /71 ‘.071 C. R’j .fl14 ().JO SK 0.015
71/0 4/30 IA 75 1.’)1c., c 1.t01 u. 44 0.013 0.015
K VALUE s NOWN TO 3E LESS
THAN I DICATED
-------
STOT FTRJ V L I) T 74/IC/JO
27L )C1
2 1 5C I
45 ‘i 30.0 O 21 0.0
L ( CA LOS/LK LE MO’1M DIEU CONN
7. ALE ANDR1A E
T/LAr. E CAPLOS
CO ‘-IWY 29 DG 3.5 MI NN( OF ALE*ANDPIA
11F ALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DFPTrI
0O ’1 ) 00e71 O0f 5
r)ATF TTME !)p - T -1 f’I2 rjo: T.iI KJ L • ri —ri PrIOS—fliS PMO,—TOT
FPOM OF “P—lI)TAL TO1 L UPTHO
TO flAY FEf1 /L ‘ r’/t Mc/L ?
7?/10/14 I I 00 .041 1. +.i J.120 0.029 0.0 3
72/flh1 1530 1.0 - ).)2 0.012 0.07
73/07/? ) 11 ‘ 0 C. - 5 ).034 0.005K 0.020
T3/04/0S 14 5 ‘ .O’ 1.:,O f.O IP 0.005K C.01’
73/04/1 ’ - l 75 7.&1(j ‘).fl 6 0.0CS 0.025
7 /0S/01 4 50 .0’. 0. ’C ‘ .007 p.ooc 0.015
7 /QS/17 5 c,s .OIJ ( .‘ ‘0 j .QO >K 0.00 0.030
73/u’,/0 Il 10 ‘ .? ) • 44) 1.013 0.fl0-K
ff07/lI 14 ‘0 .O1D ’< 1.(30 J.007 0.015
7 /04/?3 ).i27 0.010 0.020
fl/09/3 ,) I’. ‘5 ‘. 1 Jl ) C.’) C.’ 2 - 0.006 0.025
K V LU KNOWN TO BE LESS
T’-1i N PJDICATFD
------- |