[DIAGNOSTIC/FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT
LAKE HENDRICKS / DEER CREEK WATERSHED
BROOKINGS COUNTY, SOUTH DAKOTA;
LINCOLN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
SOUTH DAKOTA CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
EAST DAKOTA WATER DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
February 1993
-------
DIAGNOSTIC/FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT
LAKE HENDRICKS / DEER CREEK WATERSHED
BROOKINGS COUNTY, SOUTH DAKOTA; LINCOLN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
U 3 EPA Region 8 Library
8QC=L
pii 181h SI , Suite 500
.1:^^' GO -?-0202-2'-166
KEN MADISON
PETE WAX
SOUTH DAKOTA CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
EAST DAKOTA WATER DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
February 1993
-------
DIAGNOSTIC FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT
LAKE HENDRICKS / DEER CREEK WATERSHED
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lake Hendricks is a glacial lake located on the South Dakota-Minnesota border,
approximately 20 miles northeast of Brookings, South Dakota. The surface area
of the lake is 1,534 acres. The contributing watershed area is 31,693 acres.
Approximately 80% of the watershed area is in South Dakota, and 20% of the
watershed area is in Minnesota. Upper Deer Creek drains the major subwatershed,
and flows into the southwest end of the lake. Minnesota County Ditch 11 drains
the other major subwatershed area, and flows into the southeast side of the
lake. An un-named tributary drains a smaller subwatershed to the northwest, and
enters at the southwest side of the lake.
During recent years, lake property owners and recreational users of the lake
have expressed concern about the declining quality of the lake. The main
concerns are degradation of water quality, excessive algae and weed growth, and
decreasing depth of the lake caused by sedimentation.
At the request of the Lake Hendricks Improvement Association, the South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural Resources submitted an application to the
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a Diagnostic/Feasibility Study
of Lake Hendricks. The application and funding for a Phase I
Diagnostic/Feasibility Study grant was approved by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency on June 5, 1990. The study period for the Phase I grant was
from July 1, 1990 to May 30, 1992.
Some of the key elements of the study included water quality monitoring of the
lake and watershed, an analysis of land uses and nonpoint sources of pollution,
a socio-economic study of the potential user population, a shoreline erosion
survey, and a survey and analysis of the bottom sediments of the lake.
Based on the results of the study, the following conclusions have been drawn:
1. Water Quality The water quality in Lake Hendricks and its watershed is in
need of improvement. In-lake monitoring results indicated that the lake is in a
hypereutrophic condition, resulting in excessive algae blooms and weed growth.
The tributary monitoring results showed that excessive loads of nutrients are
being added to the lake. The Upper Deer Creek subwatershed was found to be the
largest source of the sediment and nutrient loadings to the lake.
2. Watershed Analysis The Lake Hendricks watershed was also analyzed by
interpretation of U. S. Geological Survey maps and aerial photos. This
watershed analysis revealed that the greatest potential sources of sediment and
nutrients to Lake Hendricks are the Upper Deer Creek subwatershed, and the
subwatershed drained by Minnesota County Ditch #11.
3. Shoreline Erosion A survey of shoreline erosion around Lake Hendricks
indicated approximately 4,040 feet of active erosion. Of this total, about
2,045 feet were considered to be moderate or moderate/severe erosion.
4. Septic Systems A survey of the septic systems around the lake indicated
that many of the systems are ten to fifteen years old or older, making them
subject to failure. In addition, about 10% of the systems have drainfields
within 100 feet of the lake.
-------
5. Sediment Analysis and Survey A sediment survey completed by a consulting
engineering firm found a total sediment volume in the lake of 22,594,000 cubic
yards. An elutriate analysis of the sediment indicated no excessive
concentrations of toxic substances were present in the sample.
In order to address the water quality problems in Lake Hendricks and its
watershed area, the following restoration activities are recommended:
1. Information/Education Program to Promote Best Management Practices
2. Feedlot Runoff Control
3. Shoreline Erosion Control
4. Wastewater System Improvements
5. Lac Qui Parle River Channel Cleanout
6. Dredging
7. Cooperative Lake Restoration Pro.iect
Further information on these recommendations is included in the RESTORATION
ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATIONS section of the report.
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Executive Summary ..i
Table of Contents iii
List of Tables iv
List of Figures v
Introduction 1
Lake Identification and Location 1
Water Quality Standards 4
Description of Public Access 4
Description of Size and Economic Structure of Potential User Population 9
Summary of Historical Lake Uses 9
Lakeshore Development 9
Fisheries 9
Wildlife Propagation 10
Swimming/Boating 12
Watershed Development 12
Population Segments Adversely Affected by Lake Degradation 18
Comparison of Lake Uses to Uses of Other Lakes in the Region 18
Inventory of Point Source Pollution Discharges 21
Geological and Soils Description of Drainage Basin 22
Geography 22
Topography 22
Soils 25
Groundwater Hydrology 25
Land Uses and Nonpoint Pollutant Loadings 27
Watershed Analysis 27
Shoreline Erosion Survey 29
Septic System Survey 29
Baseline Limnological Data 31
Baseline Water Quality Data 31
Current In-Lake Water Quality Data 35
Tributary Data 52
Sediment Sampling and Survey 66
Biological Resources and Ecological Relationships 69
Summary and Conclusion 69
Restoration Alternatives and Recommendations 71
Literature Cited / Bibliography 75
APPENDIX A. Lake Hendricks In-lake Water Quality 77
APPENDIX B. Lake Hendricks Sediment Survey 88
APPENDIX C. Biological Resources of Lake Hendricks and Its Watershed 92
APPENDIX D. Lac Qui Parle River Channel Cleanout 101
i i i
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Lake Hendricks Water Quality Standards 5
2 Public Accesses 7
3 Fish Stocking Records for Lake Hendricks 10
4 Lakes Within a 50 mile Radius of Lake Hendricks 20-21
5 Summary of Parks & Facilities Within 50 mile radius of Lake Hendricks 21
6 1992 Land Use Percentages for the Lake Hendricks Watershed 27
7 Water Quality Data for Lake Hendricks 32
8 Lake Hendricks In-Lake Data, Sites HL1 and HL2 37
9 Lake Hendricks In-Lake Data, Sites HL3 38
10 Quality Assurance/Quality Control for Lake Hendricks: Blanks and Phos 50
11 Quality Assurance/Quality Control for Lake Hendricks: Field Duplicates 51
12 Deer Creek Water Quality Standards 53
13 1991 - 1992 Tributary Concentrations, Site HT1 54
14 1991 - 1992 Tributary Concentrations, Site HT2 55
15 1991 - 1992 Tributary Concentrations, Site HT3 56
16 1991 - 1992 Tributary Concentrations, Site HT4 57
17 Lake Hendricks Elutriate Sample Data 70
iv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Lake Hendricks Location Map 2
2 Lake Hendricks / Deer Creek Watershed Boundary 3
3 Accesses to Lake Hendricks 6
4 Major Access Routes Within 80 km Radius of Lake Hendricks 8
5 Natural Waterfowl Area on Lake Hendricks 11
6 Comparison of Secchi Disc Readings & Physical Lake Conditions 1988 13
7 Comparison of Secchi Disc Readings & Recreational Suitability 1988 14
8 Comparison of Secchi Disc Readings & Physical Lake Conditions 1989 15
9 Comparison of Secchi Disc Readings & Recreational Suitability 1989 16
10 Flood Control 17
11 Minnesota County Ditch #11 19
12 Glaciation of the Lake Hendricks Watershed 23
13 Lake Hendricks Topography 24
14 Soils of Lake Hendricks Watershed 26
15 Lake Hendricks and Watershed and Sub-Basin 28
16 Lake Hendricks Shoreline Erosion 30
17 Lake Hendricks Chlorides 33
18 Lake Hendricks Ortho Phosphorus 34
19 Lake Hendricks Monitoring Sites 36
20 Dissolved Oxygen/Lake Hendricks 40
21 Fecal Coliform/Lake Hendricks 41
22 Laboratory pH/Lake Hendricks 43
23 Ammonia/Lake Hendricks 44
24 Unionized Ammonia/Lake Hendricks 45
25 Total Phosphorus/Lake Hendricks 46
26 Total Dissolved Phosphorus/Lake Hendricks 48
27 Nitrogen to Phosphorus Ratio 49
28 Lake Hendricks Solids Parameters (Total and Dissolved) 59
29 Lake Hendricks Solids Parameters (Suspended, Volatile, Non-volatile) 60
30 Lake Hendricks Loads (Solids - Total and Dissolved) 61
31 Lake Hendricks Loads (Solids - Suspended, Volatile, Non-volatile) 62
32 Lake Hendricks Nutrient Parameters 64
33 Lake Hendricks Loads (Nutrients) 65
v
-------
INTRODUCTION
The Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility Study of Lake Hendricks was initiated at the
request of the Lake Hendricks Association. The purpose of conducting the Phase
I Study was to determine the sources of water quality problems in Lake
Hendricks and its watershed area, and to recommend alternatives for lake
restoration activities.
The Phase I Study was undertaken as a cooperative effort between the South
Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Environmental
Protection Agency (Region VIII), the East Dakota Water Development District,
and the Lake Hendricks Association. A local project coordinator was hired by
the East Dakota Water Development District to conduct water quality monitoring,
and to assist with the development of background information for the study.
The interpretation of data, recommendations for feasible lake restoration
alternatives, and compilation of the final Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility
Report have been the responsibility of the South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources.
The remainder of this report will present the findings of the Phase I
Diagnostic/Feasibility Study for Lake Hendricks, and discuss the rationale for
selection of recommended restoration alternatives.
LAKE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION
Lake Name: Lake Hendricks
States: Minnesota and South Dakota
Counties: Brookings and Deuel Counties, SD; Lincoln County, MN
Nearest Municipality: Hendricks, MN
Latitude: 44 deg. 29 min. 54 sec. N.
Longitude: 96 deg. 27 min. 12 sec. E.
EPA Region: VIII
Major Tributaries: Deer Creek, Minnesota County Ditch #11, and un-named
tributary
Receiving Body of Water: Lac Qui Parle River
Maps showing the location of Lake Hendricks and the Deer Creek watershed are
found in Figures 1 and 2.
-------
Figure 1
Lake Hendricks Location Map
-------
Figure 2. Lake Hendricks /
Deer Creek Watershed Boundary
-------
Hater Quality Standards
The South Dakota beneficial use classifications for Lake Hendricks are as
follows:
1. Designated Uses
a. Warm Water Marginal Fish Life Propagation: lakes and streams
which will support aquatic life and more tolerant species of
warmwater Fish naturally or by frequent stocking and intensive
management, but which suffer frequent fish kills because of critical
natural conditions.
b. Immersion Recreation: waters which are suitable for uses where
the human body may come in direct contact with the water to the point
of complete submersion and where water may be ingested accidentally
or where certain sensitive organs such as the eyes, ears and nose may
be exposed to the water.
c. Limited Contact Recreation: waters which are suitable for
boating, fishing and other recreation where contact may be made with
the water but the person's eyes, mouth and ears would not likely be
immersed.
d. Wildlife Propagation and Stock Watering: lakes and streams which
are satisfactory as habitat for aquatic and semi-aquatic wild animals
and fowl and are of suitable quality for watering of domestic and
wild animals.
2. Applicable Criteria
Water quality criteria for the maintenance of these beneficial uses
are contained in Table 1, Lake Hendricks Water Quality Standards.
DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC ACCESS
Lake Hendricks has four public access areas evenly divided between South Dakota
and Minnesota (Figure 3, Accesses to Lake Hendricks). Facilities provided in
the public access area include shore fishing, boat ramps, campgrounds, and
picnic areas. Additional information is contained in Table 2, Public Accesses.
There are no public transportation facilities to Lake Hendricks. Private
transportation is the only means of transportation due to a small population
base. Population centers, and routes to Lake Hendricks are shown in Figure 4.
4
-------
Table 1.
Lake Hendricks Water Quality Standards
Parameter
Standard
Total Chlorine Residual
<0.02 mg/L
Un-Ionized Armenia
<0.05 mg/L
Total Cyanide
<0.02 mg/L
Free Cyanide
<0.005 mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen
>5.0 mg/L
Undisassociated Hydrogen Sulfide
<0.002 mg/L
PH
>6.5 & <8.3 units
Suspended Solids
<150 mg/L
Temperature
<90° F
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
<0.000001 mg/L
Fecal Coliform Organisms
<200 per 100 mL
Total Alkalinity
<750 mg/L
Total Dissolved Solids
<2500 mg/L
Conductivity
<4000 micromhos/an
Nitrates
<50 mg/L
Sodium absorption ratio
<10:1
5
-------
Figure 3
Accesses to Lake Hendricks
-------
Table 2.
Public Accesses
Name:
Responsible
Agency:
Type:
Land
Area (ha):
Lake
Frontage (m)
Facilities:
Fees:
Hendricks City Park"
City of Hendricks
City Park
11
361
Boat ramps 2, 20'
Boat docks 2
Fishing pier 1
Picnic shelters 2
Picnic tables 70
Parking for 60
Camping 32 sites
Wet bathroom 1
Electric hookups 32
Dump station 1
Concession May - Sept.
Camping $ 7.00/night
$ 35.00/week
Campground is on bid
system. All money
is returned to general
city fund or water fund.
DNR South Side Mot. Area
Minnesota DNR
Boat Launch
0.12
39
Boat ramp 20'
Parking for 10
No fee area
Name:
Responsible
Agency:
Type:
Land
Area (ha):
Lake
Frontage (m)
Facilities:
Lake Hendricks Lakeside South Dakota North Access
Use Area
South Dakota Game,
Fish, and Parks
State Park
4.7
800
Boat ramp 16'
Parking 25
Picnic grills 10
Camping allowed,
assigned sites
Water pump
Pit toilet
South Dakota Game,
Fish, and Parks
Boat Launch, Public
Use area
0.6
540
Boat ramp 16'
Parking 10
Primitive area
No facilities
Fees:
No fee area
No fee area
7
-------
-------
DESCRIPTION OF SIZE AND ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF POTENTIAL USER POPULATION
A description of the size and economic structure of the potential user
population for Lake Hendricks was completed by Dr. Jim Satterlee, Director of
the Census Data Center at South Dakota State University, Brookings, South
Dakota (Satterlee, 1991). In conducting his analysis of the potential user
population, Dr. Satterlee examined two areas surrounding Lake Hendricks. The
first area included a 50 mile radius of the lake, and the second area included
just a 20 mile radius of the lake.
It was found that the total population represented within a 50 mile radius of
Lake Hendricks is 332,500 persons. Sixty-four percent of this population
resides in South Dakota, with the remaining 36% residing in Minnesota.
The total population residing within a 20 mile radius of Lake Hendricks is
35,440 persons. A very high proportion of this population is young adults.
The reason for this is that South Dakota State University at Brookings is
within the 20 mile radius. South Dakota State University is the State's
largest university with an enrollment of 7,500 students. The large number of
young adults in the immediate area places a high demand on Lake Hendricks for
summer water sports such as swimming and boating. The young adults also place
a high demand on the lake for winter recreational activities such as
cross-country skiing, snowmobiling, and ice-fishing.
Southwest State University at Marshall, Minnesota, is located just outside the
20 mile radius. This additional population of young adults places an even
higher demand on the lake for summer and winter recreational activities.
In examining the economic status of the potential user population, it was found
that the per capita income within the 50 mile radius of Lake Hendricks was
$8,678. This is substantially lower than the averages for Minnesota and South
Dakota.
Complete copies of Dr. Satterlee's report on the Socio-Economic Characteristics
of the Lake Hendricks User Population are available from the South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
SUMARY OF HISTORICAL LAKE USES
Lakeshore Development
Lakeshore development includes 102 lakeside residences, numerous farms, and the
City of Hendricks, Minnesota. Other developments include a city park, four
public access areas, and a golf course. Lake Hendricks experiences extensive
public use because of the recreational facilities that have been developed over
the years.
Fisheries
Historically, Lake Hendricks has been an active fishery. Its connection to
the Minnesota River, via the Lac Qui Parle River, allows for natural restocking
by migration of spawning fish. Lake Hendricks has also been managed as a
fishery by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the South Dakota
Department of Game, Fish and Parks.
Table 3 lists fish stocking records from 1958 to 1989. Naturally occurring
species are the principal types of fish stocked.
9
-------
Table 3.
Fish Stocking Records For Lake Hendricks
Year
Species
Size
Amount
1958
Northern Pike
Walleye
Adult
Fry
16
500,000
1959
White Crappie
Adult
448
1960
Walleye
Fry
400,000
1957
Northern Pike
Fry
120,000
1969
Walleye
Fry
301,000
1975
Walleye
Fry
255,360
1976
Walleye
Fry
201,600
1977
Black Crappie
Blue Gill
Walleye
Adult
Adult
Fingerling
850
3,400
35,000
1978
Walleye
Northern Pike
White Crappie
Black Crappie
Fry
Fingerling
Adult
Adult
702,400
608
2,000
2,000
1979
Walleye
Fry
400,000
1980
Walleye
Northern Pike
Fry
Fry
778,000
300,000
1982
Walleye
Fry
797,000
1983
Walleye
Blue Gill
Fingerling
Adult
3,000
2,010
1984
Walleye
Fry
2,804,700
1985
Blue Gill
Adult
2,562
1986
Blue Gill
Adult
2,562
1987
Yellow perch
Walleye
Adult
Fry
18,240
384,720
1989
Walleye
Fry
398,200
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
South Department of Game, Fish and Parks
Wildlife Propagation
A sheltered bay extends from the mouth of Deer Creek to approximately
three-fourths of a mile into Lake Hendricks (Figure 5). This area is about 250
acres in size, and is too shallow for motor boats. It provides excellent
breeding habitat for waterfowl and other species of birds.
10
-------
-------
Swimming and Boating
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency started a Citizen Lake-Monitoring
Program at Lake Hendricks in 1988. Some of the most useful information
obtained from this program are Secchi disc measurements, and corresponding
rankings of water conditions. Water conditions are ranked for recreational use
and aesthetic quality.
Suitability rankings for recreational use are as follows:
1 = Beautiful, could not be better.
2 = Very minor aesthetic problems: excellent for swimming, boating.
3 = Swimming and aesthetic enjoyment slightly impaired because of algae
levels.
4 = Desire to swim and level of enjoyment of the lake substantially
reduced because of algae levels (i.e., would not swim but boating is
okay).
5 = Swimming and aesthetic enjoyment of the lake nearly impossible because
of algae levels.
The ranking system for the physical condition of the lake is similar to the
suitability ranking. Lake condition rankings are as follows:
1 = Crystal clear water.
2 = Not quite crystal clear - a little algae present/visible.
3 = Definite algal green, yellow, or brown color apparent.
4 = High algal levels with limited clarity and/or mild odor present.
5 = Severely high algae levels with one or more of the following:
- massive floating scum on lake or shore
- strong, foul odor
- fish kill
Figures 6 through 9 show that water quality in Lake Hendricks is much better in
the spring than in mid- to late-summer. The data also shows that swimming is
impaired throughout large portions of the summer. The water quality has even
degraded to the point where boating and limited contact recreation are affected
during the worst algae blooms.
Watershed Development
Flood Control: In 1966 the Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the
Upper Deer Creek Watershed Board and Lincoln County Board of Commissioners,
developed a watershed plan for Lake Hendricks. As a result of this plan, a
flood control dam was built on Upper Deer Creek. The dam and associated
channelization were completed to provide flood control for municipalities
downstream (Figure 10).
As part of the watershed plan, the main outlet from the dam was constructed to
divert 100 percent of the flow from Upper Deer Creek to Lake Hendricks.
Previously, the flow in Upper Deer Creek split below the dam. Part of the flow
went south and crossed Highway 14 about one mile east of Brookings, South
Dakota. The remainder of the flow went to Lake Hendricks.
The overall SCS watershed plan included improvement of 1.5 miles of the Lake
Hendricks outlet channel to handle the increased outflow from Lake Hendricks to
the Lac Qui Parle River. All the project features were completed except for
the 1.5 miles of channel improvement at the outlet from Lake Hendricks. During
12
-------
Figure 6.
COMPARISON OF SECCHI DISC READINGS AND PHYSICAL LAKE CONDITION DURING THE SUMMER OF 1988
(Citizen Lake-Monitoring Program)
-------
Figure 7.
Recreat ional
Suitibility
170
160'
150'
9 140"
a
c 130'
v-» 60 120
*=* c
« 110
£ 100
S 90
® 60
% 70
a
$ 60
50
40
30
20
10
COMPARISON OF SECCHI DISC READINDS AND RECREATIONAL SUITIBILITY DURING SUMMER OF 1988
(Citizen Lake-Monitoring Program)
~LEGEND*
Recreational Suitibility Ratings
1. Beautifull
2. Minor Impaired
3. Swimming Impaired
4. No Swimming
5. No Use
Suitibility Boundary
•Secchi Disc
4-
4-
4-
+
+
4-
+
4-
4-4
—v 1—
6-2-88 6-12-88 6-30-88 7-10-88 7-13-88 7-24-88 7-27-88 8-4-88 8-14-88 8-29-88 9-5-88 9-12-88
-------
Figure 8.
COMPARISON OF SECCIII DISC READINGS AND PHYSICAL LAKE CONDITIONS DURING THE SUMMER OF 1989
(Citizens Lake-Monitoring Program)
-------
Figure 9.
COMPARISON OF SECCHI DISC READINGS AND RECREATIONAL SUITIBILITY DURING THE SUMMER OF1989
(Citizen Lake-Monitoring Program)
5-27-89 6-3-89 6-15-89 6-22-89 7-13-89 7-28-89 8-8-89 8-16-89 9-2-89 9-25-89
-------
f''
* * •
Watershed Boundary
Drainage Area Controlled
by Structure
Channel Improvement
(multiple purpose)
Channel Improvement
(f1ood control)
Figure 10.
FLOOD CONTROL
-------
recent years, lake levels have increased due to the inflows being greater than
the outlet structure can handle. The resulting higher water elevations have
caused severe bank erosion and increased sedimentation into the lake.
County Ditch: Minnesota County Ditch #11 was constructed to drain much of the
area immediately surrounding Lake Hendricks (Figure 11). It flows from
Minnesota, through a small area of South Dakota, and then into Lake Hendricks.
POPULATION SEGMENTS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY LAKE DEGRADATION
The population segment most directly affected by the degradation of Lake
Hendricks is the City of Hendricks, Minnesota (population 580). Retail
establishments within the City of Hendricks such as boat dealers, gas stations,
grocery stores, and bait vendors rely heavily on business from residents and
recreational users of the lake.
Other population segments affected by the degradation of Lake Hendricks would
include those within a 50 mile radius of the lake (total population 332,500).
(See previous section of the report titled DESCRIPTION OF THE SIZE AND ECONOMIC
STRUCTURE OF POTENTIAL USER POPULATION.) Within the 50 mile radius of the lake
are two cities (Brookings, South Dakota and Marshall, Minnesota), and two
universities (South Dakota State University and Southwest State University).
The population segments of these cities and universities place an increased
demand on Lake Hendricks for recreational activities.
In summary, there is a significant population base within a 50 mile radius of
Lake Hendricks that relies heavily on the lake for economic support and
recreational activities. The degradation of Lake Hendricks will adversely
affect this population.
COMPARISON OF LAKE USES TO USES OF OTHER LAKES IN THE REGION
Lake Hendricks lies on the eastern edge of the Coteau des Prairie, an area
abundant in freshwater lakes. Lake Lac Qui Parle, located 50 miles to the
northeast is a much larger lake, and contains more species of fish.
Of the other lakes identified within the 50 mile radius of Lake Hendricks, many
have very marginal fisheries, and several have only small gravel boat ramps or
no boat ramps. Other lakes in the region have parks and recreational
facilities that are suited primarily for tourists (Table 4).
Lake Shaokatan and Lake Benton, both in Minnesota, are within easy traveling
distance of Lake Hendricks. These lakes are the most similar in use, size, and
quality. Because of the need for out-of-state licenses, many South Dakota
residents do not utilize these lakes.
Table 5 provides a summary list of the parks and public facilities located at
the 22 lakes within a 50 mile radius of Lake Hendricks. As can be seen from
Tables 4 and 5, there are numerous and diverse recreational facilities in the
vicinity of Lake Hendricks which attract people to the area. Lake Hendricks
serves an important role in providing many of the public and recreational
facilities used by these people.
18
-------
19
-------
Table 4.
Lakes Within a 50 Mile Radius of Lake Hendricks
Body of Mater
Whitewood Lake
Spirit Lake
Lake Albert
Lake Shaokatan
Lake Thompson
Lake Benton
Lake Sinai*
Lake Preston
Lake Poinsett
Lake Herman
Lake Madison
Brant Lake
Oak Lake *
Oakwoods Lake
Tetonkaha
Nearest
Parks Ramps Uses Municipalitv
Boating
Fishing
Fishing
Fishing
Swimming
Boating
Fishing
Picnicking
Boating
Fi shing
Picnicking
Boating
Fishing
Camping
Picnicking
Swimming
Boating
Fishing
Fishing
Boating
Fi shing
Swimming
Camping
Picnicking
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Camping
Picnicking
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Camping
Picnicking
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Camping
Picnicking
Fishing
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Picnicking
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Camping
Picnicking
Lake Preston, SD
Bancroft, SD
Lake Norden, SD
Ivanhoe, MN
Lake Preston, SD
Lake Benton, MN
Sinai, SD
Lake Preston, SD
Estelline, SD
Madison, SD
Madison, SD
Chester, SD
Astoria, SD
Bruce, SD
Bruce, SD
20
-------
Table 4. (continued)
Lakes Within a 50 Mile Radius of Lake Hendricks
Body of Mater
Parks Ramps
Nearest
Uses Municipalitv
Lake Carthage
Lake Cochrane
Goldsmith Lake*
Camden
Lake Sarah
Lake Shetek
Long Lake*
Boating
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Camping
Picnicking
Fishing
Boating
Swimming
Boating
Fi shing
Swimming
Camping
Picnicking
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Picnicking
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Camping
Picnicking
Boating
Fishing
Swimming
Picnicking
Carthage, SD
Brandt, SD
Volga, SD
Lynd, MN
Garvin, MN
Currie, MN
Garvin, MN
*Gravel boat launch or no boat launch.
Table 5.
Summary of Parks and Facilities Within 50 Mile Radius of Lake Hendricks
Total of 22 lakes:
Description of
Public Accesses
Uses Available to the Public
County/City Parks 2
State Parks and
Recreation Areas 10
Swimming, Fishing, Camping,
Picnicking
Swimming, Fishing, Camping,
Picnicking,
Public Landings 41
Boat Launching
INVENTORY OF POINT SOURCE POLLUTION DISCHARGES
There are no known point source discharges of pollution to Lake Hendricks.
21
-------
GEOLOGICAL AND SOILS DESCRIPTION OF DRAINAGE BASIN
Geology
Lake Hendricks is a glacial outwash lake, located on an erosion remnant that
extends north and south. All of the basins within this erosion remnant drain
either to the Big Sioux River or the Minnesota River. Lake Hendricks drains to
the Minnesota River by way of the Lac Qui Parle River. The Lake Hendricks area
was glaciated at least four times during the Pleistocene epoch. Deposits left
by these four ice sheets are from youngest to oldest the Wisconsin, Illinoian,
Kansan, and Nebraskan.
The Wisconsin stage has been sub-divided into four sub-stages, the Iowan,
Tazewell, Cary, and Mankato (Figure 12). Of the four sub-stages of glaciation
in eastern South Dakota, the predominant remnants on the surface in the Lake
Hendricks area are of the Tazewell, Cary, and Iowan age.
Tazewell glacial deposits are till and outwash gravels. The till is typically
a mixture of boulders and clay. The soil that developed on the till ranges
from several inches to three feet in thickness. Tazewell outwash deposits are
found in terraced areas along the Big Sioux River and its tributaries, such as
Deer Creek. The terraces are generally small, covering less than a square mile
in area (Steece, 1958).
Iowan deposits are generally referred to as any till or boulder clays that are
older than Tazewell deposits. These deposits are characterized by level to
slightly sloping topography. Cary deposits are comprised of till, outwash, and
glacial lake sediments. Soils in these areas are usually poorly developed, and
are often only six inches thick.
Topography
The Lake Hendricks watershed (31,693 acres) can be divided into three main
areas. The first area is a well-defined subwatershed known as Upper Deer
Creek. Upper Deer Creek covers approximately 12,677 acres, and makes up about
40 percent of the entire watershed. This drainage area extends southeast for
approximately 10 miles. It has gently sloping hills and valleys in the upland
area, but severely steep slopes at the sides of the creek. This area drains to
a flood control structure just before it enters Deer Creek proper. All of the
water that discharges out of the flood control structure has been diverted to
flow directly to Lake Hendricks. Slopes in this drainage area range from 0.07
percent to 33.01 percent, with an average of 3.75 percent (Figure 13).
The second area is also well-defined with a combination of gentle slopes,
moderately severe slopes, and severe slopes. It covers approximately 3,803
acres, and makes up about 12 percent of the watershed. It extends from the
flood control dam to Lake Hendricks, a distance of about 1 1/2 miles. Slopes
in this drainage area range from 0.55 percent to 35 percent, with an average of
1.19 percent.
The third area of the Lake Hendricks watershed is comprised of the land
immediately surrounding the lake. It covers 15,213 acres, and makes up
approximately 48 percent of the watershed. This land consists primarily of low
rolling hills and valleys. A series of drainage ditches have been constructed
on the south side of this area to increase the productivity of the surrounding
farm land. The average slope of these ditches ranges from 0.25 to 0.50
percent. Slopes in the rest of this area range between 0.00 to 6.89 percent,
and average 0.80 percent.
22
-------
ro
CO
Mankato
Cary
Tazewel1
/>
I owan
Lake
Hendricks
Watershed
V
Figure 12. Glaciation of the Lake Hendricks Watershed
-------
M
-F»
S 0
K \
J.
•
» *
«
•>
•'LDIV
A >[ » II
' •
•
9
II
•
*
.73 ur.
•
ill *
Watershed Boundary
Slopes Greater than 10%
and less than 20%
Slopes Greater than 20%
Slopes Less than 10%
Figure 13 Lake Hendricks TopoqraDhv
-------
Soils
According to the soil surveys of Brookings and Lincoln Counties, the major soil
types in the Lake Hendricks watershed are Singrass-Oak Lake, Forman-Bruse, and
Lamour (Figure 14). The following is a description of the three major soil
types.
1. Singrass-Oak Lake
Singrass-Oak Lake soils are the principal soils in the Lake Hendricks
watershed. They are silty soils composed of glacial till. These
types of soil are found in the north, west, and southwest sides of
the watershed. They are deep, well-drained soils covering the
greatest amount of acreage in the watershed. The surface layer is
composed of a silty clay loam about 10 inches thick. The subsoil is
about seven inches thick.
The permeability of these soils is moderately rapid, and the
moisture-holding capacity is high. Soils of this type are usually
found on slopes of 0 to 6 percent (Soil Survey, Lincoln County, 1970).
2. Forman-Bruse
Forman-Bruse soils are found along the steep hillsides of the Upper
Deer Creek and Deer Creek drainage areas. These soils have developed
from a glacial till that is composed of loam, or a clay-loam mixture.
Forman-Bruse soils are generally found on slopes that range from 10
to 25 percent. Severe erosion can be a problem on these soils.
3. Lamour
Lamour soils are found on the western edge of the Upper Deer Creek and
Deer Creek drainage areas. They have developed in glacial till that
is of a loam or clay-loam texture. These soils occur on gently
sloping ridge tops, and on gentle slopes at the head of drainage
areas. In profile, Lamour soils are predominantly loam. The top soil
is 13 to 18 inches thick. These soils have moderate, to moderately
rapid, permeability. They are found in areas with slopes of 3 to 4
percent (Brookings County Soil Survey, 1955).
Groundwater Hydrology
Lake Hendricks and part of its watershed lie over the Big Sioux Aquifer. This
is the only unconfined shallow aquifer within the drainage area. The Big Sioux
Aquifer is a shallow glacial aquifer composed of outwash sand and gravel.
Recharge to the aquifer is by infiltration of rain water and snowmelt through
the overlying 0.3 to 6.0 meters of top soil.
The Big Sioux Aquifer has a ground water divide that lies at the headwaters of
Deer Creek. At this point, water in the aquifer and on the surface flows east
towards Lake Hendricks and the Lac Qui Parle River and also west towards the
Big Sioux River. Because of the close proximity of the aquifer to Lake
Hendricks there is a hydrologic connection.
In theory, Lake Hendricks receives ground water recharge during high water
periods in the spring and also in the fall when groundwater levels increase.
Conversely, during periods of low groundwater levels, Lake Hendricks may
actually recharge the aquifer (Siegel, 1990).
25
-------
Singrass - Oak Lake
Forman Bruse
Lamour
Figure 14.
Soils of Lake Hendricks Watershed
-------
LAND USES AND NONPOINT POLLUTANT LOADINGS
Watershed Analysis
The Lake Hendricks watershed is located on the Prairie Coteau in the northeast
corner of Brookings County, South Dakota, and extends into Lincoln County,
Minnesota. The size of the watershed area is 12,836 hectares, or 31,693 acres.
The Lake Hendricks watershed was analyzed by use of U. S. Geological Survey
topographic maps and Soil Conservation Service aerial photos. The analysis
indicated that land use in the watershed is 89.6% agricultural, involving
either livestock or crop production. The Land Use and Nonpoint Pollutant
Loading Analysis is available upon request to the South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources Management. The
table below provides a summary of land uses and percentages for the entire
watershed.
Table 6.
1992 Land Use Percentages for Lake
Hendricks Watershed
Land Use
Hectares
Acres
%Watershed
Agricultural Cultivated
6,705
16,555
52.13
Agricultural Non-cultivated
3,662
9,042
28.47
Conservation Reserve Program
815
2,012
6.34
Water
800
1,975
6.22
Farmsteads
343
847
2.67
Transportation
246
607
1.91
Forest
103
254
0.80
High Density Residential
90
222
0.70
Low Density Residential
61
151
0.47
Other
11
28
0.29
Total
12,836
31,693
100.00
Sediment and nutrient loading estimates to Lake Hendricks were calculated using
the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Loading estimates for the entire watershed
are as follows:
Sediment:
Nitrogen:
Phosphorus:
5,166,000 kg/year
31,009 kg/year
2,584 kg/year
Loadings were also estimated for sub-basins within the watershed (Figure 15.)
The sub-basins analyzed were as follows:
1) Sub-basin 1-H
2) Sub-basin 2-H
3) Sub-basin 3-H
Area drained by un-named northwest tributary
Area drained by Deer Creek
Area drained by Minnesota County Ditch 11
Analysis of the Sub-basins provided estimated loading results as follows:
Sub-basin Name
Sediment
1-H (N. W. trib.) 1,002,000 kg/yr
2-H (Deer Creek) 1,991,000 kg/yr
3-H (MN Co. Ditch) 2,173,000 kg/yr
Total
Nitrogen
6,011 kg/yr
11,898 kg/yr
13,100 kg/yr
Phosphorus
503 kg/yr
989 kg/yr
1,092 kg/yr
5,166,000 kg/yr 31,009 kg/yr 2,584 kg/yr
27
-------
Figure 15.
Lake Hendricks Watershed end Sub-basn:
1-H3 Ur.nan.ed Tibutar^
^2-^1 Upper Deer Creek
3—H) Surrounding Uetcrs
28
-------
From the above loading estimates, it can be seen that the sub-basins drained by
Deer Creek and Minnesota County Ditch #11 carry the greatest load of sediment
and nutrients. Since the construction of the soil retention dam on Deer Creek
a significant reduction in loads has occurred. The trapping efficiency of this
structure is believed to be greater than 85%. It is recommended that best
management conservation practices such as conservation tillage, grassed
waterways, and filter strips be implemented where needed in the watershed.
Shoreline Erosion Survey
A survey of the Lake Hendricks shoreline was conducted on September 27, 1990.
The shoreline around the entire lake was surveyed by pontoon with the help of a
number of people familiar with the lake. Areas of erosion were recorded on
videotape. In addition, the areas of erosion were documented on an aerial
photograph of the lake. For each area of erosion, an estimate was made of the
length, height, and severity. The categories for severity of erosion were
minor, minor/moderate, moderate, moderate/severe, and severe.
The results of the shoreline erosion survey are as follows:
Erosion Category Length of Erosion
Minor 1,475 ft.
Minor/Moderate 520 ft.
Moderate 1,195 ft.
Moderate/Severe 850 ft.
Total Eroding Shoreline: 4,040 ft.
The overall shoreline of Lake Hendricks was found to be in good condition, as
no areas of severe erosion were observed. However, a total of 2,045 feet of
shoreline were found to be Moderate and Moderate/Severe in erosion (Figure 16,
Lake Hendricks Shoreline Erosion). Erosion around Lake Hendricks appears to be
caused by a combination of high water levels and livestock grazing. The areas
of erosion in these two categories should be corrected as soon as possible, as
they represent significant direct loadings of sediment to Lake Hendricks.
Septic System Survey
A survey of septic wastewater disposal systems was conducted at Lake Hendricks
on June 1, 1991. Members of the Lake Hendricks Association and Phase I Project
staff conducted the survey. Residents not found at home that day were
contacted later to obtain the necessary information concerning their wastewater
disposal systems.
A total of 111 survey reports were obtained for Lake Hendricks. Of the 111
reports, 74 (67%) had documented dates for construction of the septic systems.
In checking the construction dates, it was found that 22% of the systems were
15 years old, or older. A total of 66% of the 74 reported dates were ten years
old, or older. The increasing age of septic systems can make them more subject
to failure.
It was found that 68% of the septic systems had the distance from the
drainfield to the lake documented. Eight indicated a distance of less than 100
feet from the drainfield to the lake. This would indicate that approximately
11% of the systems are out of compliance with South Dakota regulations for
septic system drainfields. The minimum distance required between a drainfield
and a lake, under current South Dakota state rules, is 100 feet.
29
-------
Figure 16.
Lake Hendricks Shoreline Erosion
-------
Given the age arid location of many of the septic systems around the lake, it
can be assumed that a significant number of these systems are causing a direct
impairment on water quality. Because Lake Hendricks is in a hypereutrophic
condition, measures should be taken to eliminate these nonpoint sources of
contamination to the lake.
BASELINE LIHNOLOGICAL DATA
Baseline Water Quality Data
Table 7 is a composite of water quality monitoring results for Lake Hendricks
over the past twenty-five years. Intervals between samples and laboratory
procedures were not always consistent. Interpretations can only be general due
to these inconsistencies.
Figure 17, is a graph of chloride concentrations using available data.
Chloride was sampled and can be a good indicator of trends in man-made
pollution. Metabolic utilization does not cause significant variation in the
spatial and seasonal distribution of chlorides within a lake. It has been
shown that pollution sources can modify natural concentrations of chlorides
greatly (Wetzel, 1975). Lake Hendricks concentrations are variable, but tend
toward higher concentrations. This may be an indication of external pollution
sources such as watershed runoff and failing septic systems.
Ortho phosphorus concentrations, as well as total phosphorus concentrations,
can be significantly affected by the amount of runoff entering from the
watershed at the time of sampling. This may account for the variable
concentrations shown in Figure 18. Concentrations of ortho phosphorus show a
gradual increase over the years. This is another indication of external
sources of pollution to Lake Hendricks.
31
-------
Table 7.
Water Quality Data for Lake Hendricks
(All chemical parameters in mg/L unless otherwise stated)
(M)
Date
PH
SD
DO
Na
K
Mg
Ca
S04
CI
REF.
7/65
8.5
7.2
11
16
26
32
325
4
A
12/65
8.6
5
13
19
42
142
4
A
1970
7.6
6
12
55
99
161
5
B
1971
8.9
30
11
33
221
165
12
B
1972
7.7
10
12
45
142
156
6
B
9/76
0.5
11.3
13
18
56
91
261
14
C
2/77
8.3
8.6
17
21
76
111
378
16
C
6/79
8.4
1.0
5.7
181
6.7
D
8/81
7.8
9.5
306
13
E
7/84
7.6
74
9
E
7/89
8.4
0.3
F
8/89
8.3
0.4
12
F
Table 7 (cont).
Water Quality Data on Lake Hendricks
Date
Tot
Alk.
Umhos
Cond.
TDS
Tot
P
Ortho
P
N02-N
N03-N
NH3-N
(C)
Temp.
REF
7/65
147
520
.24
.83
26
A
12/65
206
850
.80
.70
.35
A
1970
163
.13
.22
.18
B
1971
171
.21
.05
.03
B
1972
186
.18
.13
.05
B
9/76
260
.33
.25
.30
.21
17
C
2/77
245
1080
971
.36
.26
.85
1.53
4
C
6/79
160
645
568
.13
.08
.10
.08
24.7
D
8/81
302
777
533
.47
.28
.28
1.06
8
E
7/84
417
.38
.28
.50
.29
3
E
7/89
158
750
724
.25
.11
.10
.12
22
F
8/89
180
.25
.13
F
A. Schmidt, 1967.
B. Haertel, 1972.
C. East Dakota Conservancy Sub-District, 1976. (Unpublished).
D. DWNR, 85. Lake Hendricks Water Quality Study Area Report.
E. Hieskary, S.A. & Wilson, B.C. 1990.
F. Stewart, 1989. (Unpublished).
32
-------
Lake Hendricks Chlorides
16-
Feb-77
CD
14"
12-
Sep-76,
Jun-71
Aug-81
Aug-89
CO
I 10-
(0
co '
go c
CD
O
c
o
O
8
Jun-72
Jul-65 Dec-6j
: Jun-70
^
Jul-65
Jul-84
Jun-79
Jun-70
Jun-72 Feb-77
Date
Aug-81
Aug-89
Actual
Regression
Figure 17.
-------
Lake Hendricks Ortho Phosphorus
Date
Actual Regression
Figure 18.
-------
CURRENT IN-LAKE DATA
In-lake samples were collected from Lake Hendricks at three sites (Figure 19,
Lake Hendricks Monitoring Sites).
Site HL-1 was located in the middle of the northeast end of the lake,
approximately 1/4 mile southwest of the outlet. The average depth at this site
over the sampling period was 8.8 feet.
Lat 44 deg, 27 min, 45 sec N Long 96 deg, 26 min, and 52 sec W
Site HL-2 was located in the middle of the lake, approximately 1/2 mile north
of the inlet from Minnesota County Ditch 11. The average depth at Site HL-2
was 9.8 feet.
Lat 44 deg, 29 min, 41 sec N Long 96 deg, 27 min, 48 sec W
Site HL-3 was located in the middle of the lake at the southwest end, about 1/2
mile northeast of the Deer Creek inlet. The average depth at Site HL-3 over
the sampling period was 9.2 feet.
Lat 44 deg, 28 min, 56 sec N Long 96 deg, 28 min, 33 sec W
Summaries of the results from the in-lake monitoring program are included in
Table 8 (Sites HL-1 and HL-2) and Table 9 (Site HL-3). Generally, the
concentrations of the in-lake parameters tested were within the limits of the
South Dakota water quality standards. It should be noted, however, that the
state standards do not include parameters such as total phosphorus and total
nitrogen. These parameters need to be considered when assessing the water
quality condition of Lake Hendricks.
In the following discussion, parameters have been selected which either showed
violations of state standards, or which may be impairing the beneficial uses
designated for Lake Hendricks. Summaries and graphs of other Lake Hendricks
in-lake data can be found in APPENDIX A, LAKE HENDRICKS IN-LAKE WATER QUALITY
DATA.
Trophic Status Index
Carlson (1977) proposed a Trophic State Index (TSI) that compares lakes on a
scale of 0 to 100 based on their trophic state, with 0 being the least
productive. Each change of ten in the scale represents approximately a
doubling of the algal biomass for the index. Lakes with values over 50 are
considered to be eutrophic. The state of South Dakota considers a trophic
index of greater than 65 to be a hypereutrophic condition.
TSI's were calculated for Secchi disc transparency and total phosphorus from
measurements taken at the three in-lake sites. A TSI has not been calculated
for chlorophyll a as the chlorophyll samples have not yet been analyzed. Upon
completion of the analyses, chlorophyll TSI results and concentrations will be
available from the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural
Resources.
The mean Secchi disk TSI from all three in-lake monitoring sites is 66. The
mean total phosphorus TSI from all three sites is 74. Both of these values are
near the top of Carlson's scale, which would place Lake Hendricks in a
hypereutrophic classification.
35
-------
FIGURE 19. LAKE HENDRICKS MONITORING SITES
-------
SAMPLE OAT A FOR LAKE HENDRICKS FOR 190 M 992, SITE HL1
WTEMP
WTEMP
OISOX
DISOX
FECAL
DATE
TIME
SAMP
DEPTH
SURF
BOTT
ATEMP
SOISK
SOISK
SURF
BOTT
COLIFORM
LABPH
TALKAL
TSOL
TDSOL
TSSOL
VOLSOL FIXSOL
AMMONIA
Feet
C
C
C
M
TSI
mg/L
mg/L
per lOOmL
units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
01/22/91
1000
GRAB
9 6
1 0
00
26
48
ae
10
7 20
157
698
696
2
2
0
0 72
02/13/91
915
GRAB
10 0
4 0
-2 0
25
47
76
2
7 60
152
676
670
6
4
2
0 67
04/18/91
1345
GRAB
8 0
B0
140
06
67
122
122
2
8 26
109
555
529
28
24
2
0 02
04/22/91
1215
GRAB
90
10.0
100
170
05
70
11 2
11 2
2
8.48
111
567
553
14
4
10
002
05/30/91
930
GRAB
6.5
22 0
220
25 0
1 1
59
8 2
82
8
6 12
131
666
636
28
26
2
0 25
06/10/91
1000
GRAB
S 5
22.0
21 8
300
06
83
7 2
6 2
30
6 14
136
616
612
6
4
2
0 37
06/26/91
1100
GRAB
90
23 5
23 0
29 0
05
70
84
80
140
8 23
147
633
585
46
4
44
0 32
07/09/91
©30
GRAB
100
22 5
223
220
05
70
7.9
7 7
10
846
151
616
592
24
18
6
0 10
07/22/91
1030
GRAB
9 0
26 0
260
27 0
06
67
60
7 8
2
6 67
152
564
550
14
6
8
0 04
06/05/91
930
GRAB
9 0
21 0
21 0
20 0
0 4
73
8 5
8 4
10
8 43
160
569
535
34
16
18
0 02
OS/19/91
930
GRAB
8 0
22 3
23
190
03
77
7 7
7 7
10
8 65
162
545
509
36
4
32
0 10
09/23/91
930
GRAB
7 5
11 5
11 5
155
0 5
69
9 4
8 9
10
8 65
127
515
473
42
20
22
0 14
10/15/91
1000
GRAB
7 5
60
60
90
0 5
70
104
10 2
10
6 55
*34
525
461
44
16
26
0 02
12/16/91
930
GRAB
80
3 0
00
0 5
69
140
11 2
2
8 47
161
608
607
1
0
1
0 02
01/22/92
900
GRAB
8 0
1 0
100
12 4
122
2
921
164
652
644
8
11
8
0 02
HL1 • 14 SAMPLES
MIN
7 9
1 0
2 3
0 0
0 3
46
6 6
6 2
2
7 20
109
515
473
1
0
1
0 02
37
MAX
10 0
26 0
26 0
30 0
26
70
14 0
12 2
140
8 67
162
696
696
46
26
22
0 72
MEAN
8 6
14 5
16 8
16 1
0 9
66
9 1
8 8
18
8 28
142
597
574
23
11
13
0 20
MEDIAN
90
16 3
21 4
18 0
0 5
70
6 3
eo
10
6 60
149
509
549
25
5
20
0 10
UNIONIZED
AMMONIA N
mg/L
0 0010
0 0031
0 0005
0 0011
00143
0 0221
0 0256
00121
0 0089
0 0021
0 0173
0.0120
0 0011
0 0006
0 0200
0 0005
0 0256
0 0007
0 0060
NITR
PHOS
J + 2
TXN-N
TOTAL-N
TP04
TP04
TDP04
RATIO
»g/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
TSI
mg/L
06
2 58
3 16
0~173
76
0 166
18 38
04
223
263
0.142
76
0 139
18 52
0 1
1 27
1 37
0.122
73
0.047
11 23
0.1
1 24
1 34
0.119
73
0 034
11 26
0 3
1.16
1.46
0 102
71
0 108
1431
0 7
1.54
2 24
0 119
73
0 102
18 82
0 8
1 54
2 34
0 254
84
0 136
921
0 8
1 73
253
O 144
76
0217
17 57
0 8
1 14
1 74
0 142
76
0 112
12 25
0 5
0 96
1 46
0 183
79
0 170
7 98
0 6
1 03
1 63
0 170
78
0 098
9 59
0 1
1 21
1 31
0 125
74
0 064
10 48
O 1
1.09
1,19
0 115
73
0 136
10,35
0 1
1 10
1 20
0 043
58
0 030
27 91
0 1
1 37
1 47
0 063
64
0 155
23 33
0 1
0 96
1 19
0 043
58
0 034
7 90
0 6
258
3.18
0 254
84
0 217
27 91
0 4
1 42
1 83
0 140
74
0 114
14 13
0 5
1 23
1 55
0 134
74
0 124
11 76
SAMPLE DATA FOR LAKE HENDRICKS FOR 1691-1992, SITE HL2
WTEMP
WTEMP
DISOX
DISOX
DATE
TIME
SAMP
DEPTH
SURF
BOTT
ATEMP
SOISK
SOISK
SURF
BOTT
Feet
C
C
C
M
TSI
mg/L
mg/L
01/22/91
1030
GRAB
10 0
1 0
00
30
44
7 1
____
02/13/91
1000
GRAB
100
4 0
00
30
44
40
04/16/91
1415
GRAB
95
6 0
140
0.7
65
122
12 2
04/22/91
1315
GRAB
9 0
90
e c
170
0 7
65
11 8
120
05/30/91
1000
GRAB
9 5
22 0
220
250
1 0
60
8 2
7 2
06/10/91
1015
GRAB
11 0
22 5
220
220
05
70
84
82
06/28/91
1015
GRAB
100
23 0
22 5
28 0
0.5
70
84
82
07/09/91
1000
GRAB
100
22 5
22 5
220
05
70
8.7
82
07/22/91
1000
GRAB
11 0
27 0
26 5
260
0 3
77
92
82
08/05/91
1000
GRAB
90
21 0
21.0
20.0
0 4
73
83
8 1
08/19/91
1000
GRAB
90
223
21 8
190
04
73
7 2
7 2
09/23/91
1015
GRAB
9 5
11 0
11 0
15.5
0 5
71
10 2
9 8
10/15/91
1030
GRAB
90
8.0
80
90
05
70
104
10,2
12/18/91
1100
GRAB
100
30
00
05
69
13 6
11.9
01/22/92
1030
GRAB
86
2
90
13.8
136
HL2- 14 SAMPLES
MIN
To
1 0
60
00
03
44
4 0
7,2
MAX
11 0
27 0
26 5
26 0
30
73
13 6
122
MEAN
9 6
14 5
16 6
15 5
09
66
9 1
9 0
MEDIAN
9 8
165
21 8
180
05
70
86
82
FECAL
COUFORM
per 100mL
LA0PH
units
TAIKAL
mg/L
TSOL TDSOL
mg/L mg/L
UNIONIZED
TSSOL VOLSOL FIXSOL AMMONIA AMMONIA N03 + 2
TXN-N TOTAL-N
mg/L mg/L mg/L
mg/L
mg/L mg/L mg/L
mg/L
TP04
mg/L
TP04
TSI
TDP04
mg/L
2
7 60
106
513
473
1
0
1
002
20
8 75
162
688
685
40
24
34
0 77
6
8 32
143
595
571
24
9
15
0 22
10
8 47
148
594
565
23
11
15
0 12
0 0005
0 0265
0 0091
0 0049
NITR
PHOS
RATIO
10
7 60
159
668
605
3
1
2
0 77
0 0027
O 6
2 55
3 15
0 156
77
0 160
20 19
2
7 70
150
649
637
12
6
6
0 76
0 0044
0 5
2.30
2 80
0 159
77
0 108
17 61
2
831
108
549
521
28
12
18
0 02
0 0005
0 1
1 02
1 12
0 068
65
0 058
16 47
2
8 50
111
546
530
18
14
4
002
00010
0 1
1.20
1 30
0 078
67
0 076
16 67
8
802
130
671
655
18
14
2
0 26
0 0119
0 1
1 20
1.30
0 100
71
0 137
13 00
10
8 22
146
595
555
40
6
34
0 36
0 0264
0 7
1 55
2 25
0 129
74
0 095
17 44
10
822
146
595
555
40
12
28
0 35
0 0265
0.9
1 80
2 50
0 173
78
0 112
14 45
10
6,47
149
614
598
16
14
2
0 07
0 0086
1 0
1 14
2 14
0 129
74
0 125
10 59
2
8 75
152
592
574
18
4
14
002
0,0054
0 5
2 95
3 45
0 247
84
0 125
13 97
10
846
159
578
542
34
10
24
0 02
0 0022
05
0,87
1.37
0 190
60
0 186
7 21
10
8 57
162
628
592
36
2
34
0 16
0 0238
0 6
0 98
1 58
0 159
77
0 092
9 94
20
8 56
133
513
473
40
24
16
0 17
0 0116
0 1
1,14
1 24
0 152
77
0 095
8 16
10
6 57
134
521
481
40
12
26
002
0 0011
0 1
1 04
1 14
0 112
72
0 105
10 18
2
851
159
590
569
1
0
1
002
0 0007
0 1
1 35
1 45
0 066
65
0 066
21 97
2
6 28
164
640
634
6
5
1
002
0 0004
0 1
1 26
1 36
0 043
5B
0 112
31 63
0 1
0 87
1 12
0 066
58
0 056
7 17
1.0
2 95
3 45
0 247
84
0 186
52 27
0 4
1 49
1 91
0 137
73
0 112
14 56
0.5
1 20
1 52
0 141
74
0 107
12 83
Table 8.
Lake Hendricks In-Lake Data, Sites HL1 and HL2
-------
SAMPLE DATA FOR LAKE HENDRICKS FOR 1901-1992, SITE HL3
WTEMP
WTEMP
DISOX
DISOX
FECAL
DATE
TtME
SAMP
DEPTH
SURF
BOTT
ATEMP
SCMSK
SDISK
SURF
BOTT
COUFORM
LABPH
TALKAL
TSOL
TDSOL
TSSOL
VOLSOL
FIXSOL
AMMONIA
Feet
C
C
C
M
TSI
mg/L
mg/L
per 100 ml.
units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
01/22/91
MOO
GRAB
9 8
1 0
20
28
45
6 8
30
7 40
163
704
702
2
1
1
062
02/13/91
1030
GRAB
10.0
7 0
20
2.4
47
54
2
7 BO
111
472
462
10
5
5
0 52
04/18/91
1440
GRAB
85
80
80
140
07
85
122
128
24
8 37
112
549
529
20
12
8
0 02
04/22/91
1350
GRAB
85
9 5
90
170
08
63
11 5
11.8
2
849
114
553
539
14
B
6
002
05/30/91
1015
GRAB
90
22.3
21 8
25 0
08
83
78
7.2
12
7 94
134
681
669
12
10
2
028
06/10/91
1030
GRAB
100
225
220
22 0
05
70
6 8
68
1300
790
149
642
830
12
10
2
034
06/28/91
930
GRAB
90
24 0
23 0
260
0.5
70
7 8
7 8
40
8.20
152
569
551
38
8
32
033
07/09/91
1030
GRAB
85
223
23 0
220
04
73
8 4
79
10
846
158
624
806
18
12
8
004
07/22/91
930
GRAB
100
27 0
26.5
25 0
03
77
7 8
73
20
858
160
593
567
26
8
20
0 02
08/05/91
1030
GRAB
90
21 0
21 5
20.0
04
73
8 5
82
10
6 40
164
563
557
28
2
24
0 05
08/18/91
1030
GRAB
90
22 3
223
200
0.4
73
72
70
20
8 49
168
638
800
38
2
36
0 24
09/23/91
930
GRAB
90
11 0
110
150
04
73
94
0.2
10
869
140
522
478
44
20
24
022
10/15/91
1100
GRAB
9 0
80
80
90
05
70
10 2
102
10
8 51
136
537
519
18
14
4
002
12/16/91
1015
GRAB
80
30
00
0 5
89
138
11.2
2
8 49
278
604
802
2
0
2
002
01/22/92
1000
GRAB
8 0
1 0
2.0
100
13 2
122
2
8 52
164
659
655
4
3
1
002
HIS • 14 SAMPLES
MIN
80
1 0
80
00
03
45
5 4
86
2
7 40
111
472
462
2
0
1
002
MAX
10.0
27.0
265
290
28
77
13 8
12 8
1300
8 69
278
704
702
44
20
36
062
MEAN
9 2
14 8
178
15 9
08
87
8 8
8 7
107
8 27
153
592
572
20
8
12
020
MEDIAN
9 0
18 0
21 8
190
0 5
70
8 1
7 9
11
8 43
151
591
562
18
7
8
0 14
7XN-N TOTAL-N
mg/L mg/L mg/L
00014
00048
o.oooe
00010
0.0110
0 0124
0 0256
0 0048
00040
0.0048
0 0304
00166
0.0010
00006
00006
00006
0 0304
0 0087
0 0046
0 7
0 3
0 1
01
0.3
07
09
1.0
06
03
0 7
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
1 0
0 4
0 4
2 59
1 59
1 18
1 50
1.24
1.26
1 51
1.66
1 61
1 13
1 24
1 33
0 95
0 68
1 11
0 86
2 59
1 40
1 30
mg/L
1 28
1.80
1 54
1 96
241
286
221
1,83
1 94
1 43
1 05
098
1 21
0 98
3 29
TP04
mg/L
0 163
0 102
0 054
0 081
0.125
0 142
0 186
0 159
0 295
0217
0 180
0.146
0 129
0 050
0 056
0 050
0 295
NfTR.
PHOS
TP04 TDP04 RATIO
TSI mg/L
78
71
62
68
74
76
60
77
86
82
79
76
74
61
62
0 153
0 088
0 041
0 037
0.095
0 092
0 186
0 105
0 112
0 149
0 092
0 054
0 054
0 163
0 102
20 18
1853
23 70
19 75
12 32
13 80
1296
16.73
748
7.51
10 78
9 79
8 14
19 60
21.61
1 65 0 1449
1 76 0 144
81
0 037
749
86
0 188
23 7
74
0 102
14 38
75
0 094
13 38
CO
CO
Table 9.
Lake Hendricks In-Lake Data, Site HL3
-------
Dissolved Oxygen
The results of the in-lake sampling in Table 8 indicate that the dissolved
oxygen concentration fell below the state standard of 5.0 mg/L on one occasion
during the sampling period. On February 13, 1991, the dissolved oxygen
concentration at the surface at site HL-2 (middle site) was found to be 4.0
mg/L. There was two feet of ice cover at the time the sample was taken. The
thickness of the ice and snow cover, may have caused a decrease in light
penetration into the water, killing many photosynthetic organisms.
Decomposition of the organic material may have resulted in a slight oxygen
depletion.
Figure 20 shows the average results for surface oxygen at the three in-lake
sites as compared to the average results for the bottom measurements. None of
the average results fell below the state standard.
Dissolved oxygen concentrations below 3.5 mg/L may be fatal to certain species
of game fish (Cole, 1983). The concentration of 4.0 mg/L at Site HL-2 on
February 13, 1991, was above the 3.5 mg/L needed by certain fish. In addition,
the concentrations of dissolved oxygen at Sites HL-1 and HL-3 ranged between
7.5 mg/L and 5.4 mg/L respectively. Therefore, fish could migrate to other
areas of the lake with higher oxygen levels, negating any adverse impact on the
fisheries.
Concentrations of dissolved oxygen were adequate for the beneficial use of
warmwater marginal fish life propagation for the sampling period.
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Fecal coliform bacteria are referred to as indicator organisms. Although these
types of bacteria do not usually cause disease, they can be an indication of
the presence of other types of organisms that could potentially cause disease.
The state standards were exceeded on one occasion during the sampling period
(Figure 21). On June 10, 1991, a count of 1300 fecal coliform organisms per
100 milliliters (1300/100 mL) was found in the sample from Site HL-3. This
result exceeds the state standard for a 24-hour period (200/100 mL), and the
state standard for a single sample (400/100 mL). Site HL-3 was located at the
southwest end of the lake, approximately 1/2 mile northeast of the Deer Creek
inlet. This single exceedence coincides with a runoff event in the watershed.
No definitive interpretation can be made based on a single exceedence. High
levels of fecal coliform bacteria were found in samples from each of the
tributary sites in early June. Because there was no exceedence at the other
in-lake sites, the extent of the fecal coliform contamination is unknown.
Sources of fecal coliform bacteria include human and animal wastes. Discharges
from failing septic systems, and runoff from livestock operations, may have
caused the high levels of fecal coliform bacteria found in the samples from the
tributaries and at in-lake Site HL-3. The possibility of a sampling artifact
or human error can not be discounted since only one sample exhibited an
exceedence.
An effort should be made to determine sources of the fecal coliform bacteria
which were found in Lake Hendricks and its tributaries. However, because the
results for fecal coliform bacteria exceeded state standards on only one
occasion, it can be assumed that Lake Hendricks is generally safe from a health
standpoint for recreational activities such as swimming and skiing.
39
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 k 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
¦*-
HL-1,2,3(SURF)
HL-1,2,3(BOTT)
0-—i—i—i 1—i 1—i—i—i 1 1 1—i 1 r
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91
06/26/91
08/19/91
01/22/92
DATE
Figure 20.
-------
FECAL COUFORM / LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 & 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91
10/15/91
01/22/92
DATE
Figure 21.
-------
m
The pH standard for Lake Hendricks is between the range of 6.5 and 9.0 units.
All samples were within the acceptable range set by the state standards for
water quality (Figure 22). The highest pH reading (8.75 su) occurred at Site
HL-2 on July 22, 1991.
The values for pH can be affected by many factors including geology,
temperature, photosynthesis of aquatic plants, decomposition of organic matter,
and water hardness. Hard water can act as a buffer to pH. However,
photosynthesis may counteract the buffering action of the hard water, and
result in higher pH levels (Vallentyne, 1974).
Ammonia
Elevated concentrations of ammonia occurred during the period from May 30 to
July 9, 1991, and from August 19 to September 23, 1991. However, the highest
levels of ammonia resulted from samples collected on January 22 and February
13, 1991. These samples were collected during a period of ice cover on the
lake when there was very little flow of water into the lake. Therefore, these
high levels of ammonia represent the decomposition of organic matter in the
lake. Increases and decreases in ammonia concentrations (Figure 24) coincide
with the empirical results for un-ionized ammonia.
Un-ionized Ammonia
Un-ionized ammonia is the toxic fraction of ammonia. High levels of un-ionized
ammonia are toxic to fish and cause fish-kills. The state standards for
un-ionized ammonia were not exceeded during the sampling period. Elevated
levels of un-ionized ammonia were observed during the sampling period from May
30, 1991 to July 9, 1991, and again during the sampling period from August 19,
1991 to September 23, 1991 (Figure 23). The higher levels of un-ionized
ammonia from May to July correspond with higher flows into Lake Hendricks from
the tributaries during that period. These increases in concentrations of
un-ionized ammonia are due to the increased nutrient loads and organic material
entering the lake from runoff events.
Higher levels of un-ionized ammonia during August and September are during a
period of low flow from the tributaries into Lake Hendricks. The increased
concentrations during these months are most likely due to decomposition of
organic matter in the lake.
Efforts should be made to limit the amount of organic matter entering the lake.
Sources of ammonia include organic matter, failing septic systems, lawn and
crop fertilizer, and livestock feedlot runoff.
Phosphorus
The State of South Dakota does not include phosphorus in its state water
quality standards. However, levels of phosphorus were found in Lake Hendricks
that may be leading to impairment of the beneficial uses of the lake (Figure
25, Total Phosphate). For example, the minimum concentration of phosphorus
found during the sampling period (0.043 mg/L) was from the sample at Site HL-1
on December 16, 1991. Even at this minimum level, the amount of phosphorus is
over two times the 0.02 mg/L level needed for optimum growth of many algae
species (Wetzel, 1983).
42
-------
LABORATORY pH/LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 k 1992 —SITES HL-1, HL-2, and HL-3
STATE STANDARD IS THE RANGE
BETWEEN THESE TWO LINES
*
HL-1
SITE HL-2
-&
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure 22
-------
AMMONIA
1991 k 1992
LAKE HENDRICKS
SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-H-
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure 23
-------
UNIONIZED AMMONIA / LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 & 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, Hl-3
tn
0.1-
0.09-
0.08-
0.07-
0.06-
^ 0.05-
a
0.04-
0.03-
0.02-
0.01-
STATE STANDARD FOR A
SINGLE GRAB SAMPLE
STATE STANDARD FOR A
24-iiOUR PERIOD
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-&
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure 24
-------
TOTAL PHOSPHATE
1991 k 1992-SITES HL-1,
0.25
J
.> ^ 0.15
0.05
LAKE HENDRICKS
HL-2, and HL-3
LEVELS ABOVE LINE
ARE CLASSIFIED AS
UYPEREUTROPHIC
(WETZEL, 1983)
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91
DATE
*
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-B-
SITE HL-3
Figure 25.
-------
The maximum concentration of phosphorus (0.295 mg/L) was found in the sample
taken at Site HL-3 on July 22, 1991. At this high concentration, the
phosphorus level is about fifteen times the level needed by many species of
algae for optimum growth.
Total dissolved phosphorus was also analyzed (Figure 26). Total dissolved
phosphorus is the form of phosphorus most readily available for algae and plant
growth (as compared to the particulate phosphorus fraction). When phosphorus
is sorbed to particulate matter it is not available for use by aquatic plants.
Seventy-eight percent of the mean total phosphorus was total dissolved
phosphorus.
The concentrations of phosphorus in Lake Hendricks would classify it as being
in a hypereutrophic condition. Hypereutrophic lakes have an over-abundance of
nutrients which can result in nuisance algae blooms, and extensive weed growth.
Due to the shallow depth of Lake Hendricks, the water column does not stratify
and remain mixed throughout the year with the exception of short periods under
the ice. Because of the mixing it is unlikely that anoxic conditions occur at
the water/sediment interface. For this reason, internal loading of phosphorus
from the sediment is unlikely. Phosphorus can be recyled in the water column
by decomposition of aquatic vegetation such as algae. Sources of phosphorus to
Lake Hendricks include lawn and crop fertilizers, failing septic systems,
feedlot runoff, and decaying aquatic vegetation. Because high levels of
phosphorus contribute to nuisance algae and weed growth, efforts should be
taken to control phosphorus loads to the lake.
Limiting Nutrient
Phosphorus is believed to be the limiting nutrient to algal growth if the ratio
of total nitrogen to total phosphorus is greater than 10:1. The graph of the
nitrogen to phosphorus (N:P) ratio (Figure 27) demonstrates that the ratio in
Lake Hendricks during the sampling period was generally greater than 10:1.
This indicates that phosphorus is the limiting nutrient for algae growth.
During late summer the ratio became less than 10:1, indicating nitrogen as the
limiting nutrient. This was particularly true for the sampling period from
August 5, 1991 to October 15, 1991.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
The quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) monitoring program approved by
the EPA was followed as closely as possible. Three different QA/QC samples
were to be taken: 1) Field Duplicate, 2) Blank (distilled water), and 3)
Phosphorus Spike. Because the phosphorus spike solution arrived near the end
of the sampling period, only two spiked samples were analyzed. A total of 115
water samples were taken during 1991 and 1992, along with 12 QA/QC sample sets
(Tables 10 and 11).
Large concentrations of dissolved phosphorus were found in the first samples
for the blank QA/QC sample sets. To correct the problem the State Health Lab
stopped adding acid (preservative) to the bottles. Apparently the liner in the
dissolved phosphorus bottle cap was contributing to the dissolved phosphorus
concentration. Also the distilled water on certain occasions became
contaminated such as the blank sample taken on June 10, 1991.
47
-------
TOT DISSOLVED
PHOSPHORUS/LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 & 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
0.02
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-&
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure 26.
-------
NITROGEN TO PHOSPHORUS RATIO
LAKE HENDRICKS 1991 & 1992
-S.
'X)
ABOVE LINE PHOSPHORUS LIMITED
BELOW LINE'NITROGEN LIMITED "
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-H-
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure 27.
-------
ILANK-
DATE
TIME
SITE
SAMP
DEPTH
WTEMP
C
ATEMP
C
LABPH
su
FECAL
/100ml
TALKAL
mg/l
03/25/91
943
HT-38
GRAB
SURFACE
6
15
8 2f
2
24
04/03/91
930
HT-10
GRAB
SURFACE
7
19
0 13
2
1 4
04/22/91
1215
HU-1B
GRAB
SURFACE
10
17
8 21
2
24
04/30/91
1400
HT IB
GRAB
SURFACE
B
13
8 72
2
26
05/29/91
945
HT-1B
GRAB
SURFACE
208
23
820
22
20
06/10/91
1100
HL-3B
GRAB
SURFACE
225
22
822
54
06/21/91
900
HT-3B
GRAB
SURFACE
20
21
7 85
32
07/22/91
1030
HL-1B
GRAB
SURFACE
28
27
700
2
28
09/12/91
930
HT-1B
GRAB
SURFACE
19 5
22
8 58
2 8
09/23/91
930
HL-lB
GRAB
SURFACE
11 5
15 5
866
10
26
01/22/92
900
HT-18
GRAB
SURFACE
1
10
881
2
3 0
03/11/92
1400
HT-1B
GRAB
SURFACE
05
-1
7 59
2
1 6
03/16/92
1500
HT-1B
GRAB
SURFACE
2
18
830
2
26
¦PHOSPHORUS SPIKE-
DATE TIME SITE SAMP DEPTH TP04 DIFFERENCE
mg/L mg/L
03/11/92 1400 HT-1S GRAB SURFACE 0 292 0 206
03/11/92 1400 HT 1 GRAB SURFACE 0 006
03/10/92 1500 HT is GRAB SURFACE 0 005 0 061
03/16/92 1 500 HT-1 GRAB SURFACE 0 066
| Underlined concentrations have exceeded the EPA holding time |
cn
o
VOLATILE
FIXED
UNIONI2EO
TOTAL
OL
TSSOl
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
AMMON
AMMONIA
N03+2
TKN-N
TP04P
DISS P04
1
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
3
2
2
0
0 03
0 00065
0 1
0 10
0 020
0 020
3
1
1
0
002
0 00039
0 1
0 10
0010
0 047
6
4
2
2
002
0 00059
0 1
0 10
0 010
0 010
3
2
0
2
0 05
0 00414
0,1
0 10
0 000
0 007
0
8
4
2
002
0 00125
0 1
0 13
0014
0 020
83
2
0
2
0 03
0 00220
0.8
0.18
0.003
0 024
9
2
2
0
0 02
0 00055
06
0 10
0 005
0 056
3
2
0
2
002
0 00012
05
0.11
0.005
0 027
0
4
2
2
0.02
0 00254
0.1
0 10
0 005
0.005
0
12
10
2
002
0,00175
0 1
031
0 005
0 005
4
3
2
1
0 02
0 00001
0 1
0 10
0.005
1 1
2
002
0 00007
0 1
034
0 005
0 005
6
2
0.02
0 00038
0 1
0 10
0 005
0 005
TSOL
mg/l
5
4
10
5
4
85
11
5
4
2
7
13
e
Table 10. Quality Assurance/Quality Control for Lake Hendricks: Blanks and Phosphorus
-------
•FIELD DUPLICATES-
VOLATILE FIXED UNIONIZED TOTAL
DATE
TIME
SITE
SAMP
DEPTH
WTEMP
ATEMP
LABPH
FECAL
TALKAl
TSOL
TDSOL
TSSOL
SOUDS
SOUDS
AMMON
AMMONIA
N03+2
TKN-N
TP04P
DISS P04
C
C
tu
/100ml
mg/1
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/1
mg/l
mg/l
mg/1
mg/1
mg/l
03/25/91
945
HT-3D
GRAB
SURFACE
e
15
7 99
2
127
349
347
2
2
0
0 02
0 00013
0 1
099
0220
0 170
03/25/91
945
HT-3
QRA8
SURFACE
e
15
7 90
2
129
354
352
2
2
0
002
0 00021
0 1
0 96
0 220
0 203
04/03/91
930
HT-1D
GRAB
SURFACE
7
19
6 72
2
100
559
533
26
5
21
0 02
0 00143
0 1
1 60
0 136
0 001
04/03/91
930
HT-1
GRAB
SURFACE
7
19
6 69
2
109
555
530
25
e
17
002
000134
0 1
1 55
0 136
0 068
04/22/91
1215
HL-1D
GRAB
SURFACE
10
17
643
2
113
502
544
16
2
16
0 02
0 00096
0.1
1 28
0 105
0 034
04/22/91
1215
HL-1
GRAB
SURFACE
10
17
6,46
2
111
567
553
14
4
10
002
0 00107
0 1
1 24
0 119
0 034
04/30/91
1430
HT-lD
GRAB
SURFACE
9
13
7 96
26
125
596
550
46
24
22
004
0 00062
02
1 00
0 271
0 058
04/30/91
1430
HT-1
GRAB
SURFACE
9
13
8 05
18
122
573
521
52
24
26
0.09
0.00095
0 1
0 92
0 197
0 0S4
05/29/91
930
HT-lD
GRAB
SURFACE
208
23
7.69
420
131
636
612
24
12
12
0 28
0 00866
01
1 67
0 148
0 076
05/29/91
930
HT-1
GRAB
SURFACE
20 a
23
7.93
440
130
621
595
26
20
6
0.28
0.00969
0 1
1 33
0 136
0 071
08/10/91
1030
HL-3D
GRAB
SURFACE
22 5
225
6.16
4800
149
640
626
12
10
2
0 36
002318
07
1 31
0 142
0 112
06/10/91
1030
HL-3
GRAB
SURFACE
225
22
790
1300
149
642
630
12
10
2
0 34
0 01239
07
1 26
0 142
0 092
06/21/91
900
HT-3D
GRAB
SURFACE
20
21
606
254
708
680
28
10
18
003
000131
08
0 86
0 268
0 186
06/21/91
900
HT-3
GRAB
SURFACE
20
21
602
259
705
679
26
8
16
004
0.00160
0.6
0 82
0261
0.188
07/22/91
1030
HMD
GRAB
SURFACE
26
27
6 64
4
153
564
550
14
6
8
004
0 00842
08
1 16
0 142
0 102
07/22/91
1030
HL-1
GRAB
SURFACE
26
27
6 67
2
152
564
550
14
6
8
0 04
0 00669
00
1 14
0 142
0 112
09/12/91
1030
HT-40
GRAB
SURFACE
17 5
22
7 55
325
1405
1393
12
0
12
0 09
0 00104
0,1
1 35
0 292
0 176
09/12/91
1030
HT-4
GRAB
SURFACE
17 5
22
7 46
322
1 49Q
1466
10
0
10
0 11
0 00104
0 1
1 19
0 270
0 190
09/23/91
930
HL ID
GRAB
SURFACE
11 5
13 5
6 64
10
129
517
477
40
12
28
0 17
0 01424
0 1
1 19
0 136
0 064
09/23/91
930
HL-l
GRAB
SURFACE
11 5
15 3
6 65
10
127
515
473
42
20
22
0 14
0 01196
0 1
1 21
0 125
0 064
03/11/92
1400
HT-lD
GRAB
SURFACE
0 5
-1
6 32
2
143
535
531
4
002
0 00035
0 1
0 70
0 060
0 023
03/11/92
1400
HT-1
GRAB
SURFACE
0 5
• 1
6 29
4
144
545
541
4
0 10
0 00265
0 1
0 56
0 006
0 020
03/10/92
1500
HT-lD
GRAB
SURFACE
2
16
2
021
0 1
0 82
0 060
0 027
03/16/92
1500
HT->
GRAB
SURFACE
2
18
e 3a
2
144
525
517
6
0 22
0 00462
0 1
0 62
0 086
0 033
(Underlined concentrations have exceeded the EPA holding UmM
cn
Table 11. Quality Assurance/Quality Control for Lake Hendricks: Field Duplicates
-------
TRIBUTARY DATA
Tributary samples were collected at four sites in the Lake Hendricks watershed
(Figure 19, Lake Hendricks Monitoring Sites). A description of the sites is as
follows:
Site HT-1 Lake Hendricks outlet, located at the northeast end of the
lake.
Lat 44 deg, 30 min, 17 sec N - Long 96 deg, 23 min, 35 sec W
Site HT-2 Minnesota County Ditch, located on the south side of Lake
Hendricks.
Lat 44 deg, 29 min, 01 sec N - Long 96 deg, 26 min, 45 sec W
Site HT-3 Deer Creek, located approximately 1/4 mile from the entrance to
Lake Hendricks.
Lat 44 deg, 27 min, 55 sec N - Long 96 deg, 29 min, 58 sec W
Site HT-4 Un-named tributary to Lake Hendricks entering from the
northwest.
Lat 44 deg, 28 min, 53 sec N - Long 96 deg, 30 min, 00 sec W
The beneficial uses designated for Deer Creek, the main tributary to Lake
Hendricks, are the following:
1. Warmwater marginal fish life propagation
2. Limited contact recreation
3. Wildlife propagation and stock watering
4. Irrigation
The water quality criteria designated for maintenance of these beneficial uses
can be found in Table 12, Deer Creek Water Quality Standards.
Samples from the tributaries were analyzed for the same parameters as the
in-lake samples from Lake Hendricks.
Air Temperature
Laboratory pH
Total Solids
Volatile Sol ids
Ammonia
Total Phosphorus
Field Parameters
Water Temperature
Chemical Parameters
Fecal Coliform
Total Dissolved Solids
Non-volatile Solids
Nitrate+Nitrite
Total Dissolved Phosphorus
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Alkalinity
Total Suspended Solids
Un-ionized Ammonia
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
The following discussion will summarize the results of the tributary
monitoring. Summaries of 1991 and 1992 tributary concentrations are contained
in Tables 13, 14, 15, and 16.
52
-------
Table 12.
Deer Creek Water Quality Standards
Parameter
Standard
Total Chlorine Residual
Un-Ionized Amnonia
Total Cyanide
Free Cyanide
Dissolved Oxygen
Undisassociated Hydrogen Sulfide
PH
Suspended Solids
Tenperature
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Fecal Coliform Organisms
Total Alkalinity
Total Dissolved Solids
Conductivity
Nitrates
Sodium absorption ratio
<0.02 mg/L
<0.05 mg/L
<0.02 mg/L
<0.005 mg/L
>5.0 mg/L
<0.002 mg/L
>6.0 & <9.0 units
<150 mg/L
<90° F
<0.000001 mg/L
<1000 /100 mL
<750 mg/L
<2500 mg/L
<4000 micromhos/cm
<50 mg/L
<10:1
53
-------
Table 13. 1991-1992 Tributary Concentrations, Site HT1.
SAMPLE DATA FOR LAKE HENDRICKS OUTLET (HT1),1991
11 SAMPLES
DATE
SAMP
W TEMP
C
DISOX
mg/L
FECAL
COLIFORM
PER 100ML
LABPH
UNITS
TALKAL
mg/L
TSOL
mg/L
TDSOL
mg/L
TSSOL
mg/L
VOLSOL
mg/L
FIXSOL
mg/L
UNIONIZED
AMMONIA AMMONIA
mg/L mg/L
N03 + 2
mg/L
TKN-N
mg/L
TP04
mg/L
TDP04
mg/L
27-Mar-91
GRAB
2.0
14.2
2
8.61
118
538
509
29
29
0
0.23
0.0088
0.10
2.08
0.197
0.095
01 -Apr-91
GRAB
6.0
14.1
2
8.89
106
548
526
22
9
13
002
0.0019
0.10
2.06
0.136
0.058
03-Apr-91
GRAB
7.0
11.6
2
8.69
109
555
530
25
8
17
0.02
0.0013
0.01
1.55
0.136
0.068
09-Apr-91
GRAB
11.0
9.8
14
8.67
112
555
537
18
16
2
0.23
0.0198
0.10
1.34
0.102
15-Apr-91
GRAB
4.0
11.1
2
8.25
108
547
523
24
8
16
0.03
0.0006
0.10
1.21
0.119
0.061
30-Apr-91
GRAB
9.0
9.8
18
8.05
122
573
521
52
24
28
0.05
0.0009
0.10
0.92
0.197
0.064
03-May-91
GRAB
8.0
11.2
229
7.85
118
559
545
14
12
2
0.02
0.0002
0.10
1.01
0.081
0.041
29-May-91
GRAB
20.8
7.0
440
7.93
130
621
595
26
20
6
0.28
0.0097
0.10
1.33
0.136
0.071
06-Jun-91
GRAB
22.8
7.0
100
7.90
131
621
613
8
6
2
0.36
0.0133
0.10
1.43
0.129
0.078
31-Jul-91
GRAB
21.5
7.3
40
8.66
156
660
628
32
12
20
0.02
0.0034
0.50
1.16
0.217
0.095
08-Aug-91
GRAB
19.0
8.1
25
8.38
155
555
525
30
2
28
0.06
0 0049
0.80
0.93
0.374
0.149
MIN
MAX
MEAN
2.0
22.8
11.9
7.0
14.2
10.1
2
440
79
7.85
8.89
8.35
106
156
124
538
660
576
509
628
550
8
52
25
2
29
13
0
28
12
0.02
0.36
0.12
0.0002
0.0198
0.0059
0.01
0.80
0.19
0.92
2.08
1.37
0.081
0 374
0.166
0.041
0.149
0.078
SAMPLE DATA FOR LAKE HENDRICKS OUTLET (HT1), 1992
6 Samples
FECAL
UNIONIZED
DATE
SAMP
WTEMP
DISOX
COLIFORM
LABPH
TALKAL
TSOL
TDSOL
TSSOL
AMMONIA AMMONIA
N03+2
TKN-N
TP04
C
mg/L
per 100mL
units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
02-Mar-92
GRAB
3.0
12.8
2
8.19
150
604
600
4
0.18
0.0001
0.10
0.96
0.066
04-Mar-92
GRAB
3.5
12.8
2
826
143
530
516
14
0.16
0.0032
0.10
1.28
0.046
11 -Mar-92
GRAB
5.0
13.8
4
829
144
545
541
4
0.16
0.0038
0 10
0.58
0.086
16-Mar-92
GRAB
2.0
13.5
2
836
14
525
517
8
0.22
0.0048
0.10
0.82
0.066
23-Mar-92
GRAB
6.0
12.8
2
8.30
143
520
518
2
0.02
0.0005
0.10
0.86
0.070
30-Mar-92
GRAB
7.0
11.2
2
8.31
189
531
513
18
0.02
0.0006
0.10
1.06
0.110
MIN
2.0
11.2
2
8.19
14
520
513
2
0.02
0.0001
0.10
0.58
0.046
MAX
7.0
13.8
4
8.36
189
604
600
18
0.22
0.0048
0.10
1.28
0.110
MEAN
4.4
12.8
2
8.29
131
543
534
8
0.13
0.0022
0.10
0.93
0.074
-------
Table 14. 1991 -1992 Tributary Concentrations, Site HT2.
SAMPLE DATA FOR MINNESOTA COUNTY DfTCH (HT2), 1991
12 SAMPLES
DATE
SAMP
W TEMP
C
DISOX
mg/L
FECAL
COLIFORM
PER 100ML
LABPH
UNITS
TALKAL
mg/L
TSOL
mg/L
TDSOL
mg/L
TSSOL
mg/L
VOLSOL
mg/L
FIXSOL
mg/L
UNIONIZED
AMMONIA AMMONIA
mg/L mg/L
N03+2
mg/L
TKN-N
mg/L
TP04
mg/L
TDP04
mg/L
18-Mar-91
GRAB
3.0
12.8
12
7.46
130
457
438
19
7
12
0.09
0.0003
0.20
1.60
0.312
0.217
20-Mar-91
GRAB
1.0
13.1
8
7.46
193
564
549
15
10
5
0.10
0.0003
0.10
1.84
0.373
0.237
25-Mar-91
GRAB
1.0
12.4
48
7.46
119
700
680
20
20
0
0.10
0.0003
0.50
1.37
0.322
0.220
01-Apr-91
GRAB
8.0
11.8
2
8.16
175
614
587
27
10
17
0.02
0.0004
0.10
0.87
0.119
0.153
09-Apr-91
GRAB
12.1
9.4
14
7.99
196
864
838
4
2
2
002
0.0004
0.10
0.97
0.085
0.054
15-Apr-91
GRAB
6.0
9.8
32
7.82
216
1,114
1,088
26
20
6
0.02
0 0002
0.10
1.08
0.088
0.102
30-Apr-91
GRAB
8.3
11.2
190
7.88
185
1,298
1,296
2
0
2
002
0.0002
0.10
1.01
0.119
0.078
03-May-91
GRAB
7.0
12.0
2,395
7.92
221
1,073
1,069
4
2
2
0 02
0.0002
080
0.94
0.047
0.044
29-May-91
GRAB
20.0
4.8
4.600
7.60
99
551
469
82
28
54
0 05
0.0008
2.60
1.54
0.373
0210
06-Jun-91
GRAB
19.0
6.0
7,200
7.58
96
407
303
104
58
46
0.10
0.0014
200
1.37
0.454
0.176
21-Jun-91
GRAB
17.0
7.8
7.64
75
573
293
280
80
200
0.10
0.0014
2 10
1.33
0.454
0 224
08-Aug-91
GRAB
17.5
5.7
7.96
100
448
405
43
4
39
004
0.0012
1.60
1.09
0.515
0 449
MIN
MAX
MEAN
1.0
20.0
10.0
4.8
13.1
9.7
2
7,200
1,450
7.46
8.16
7.74
75
221
163
407
1,298
764
293
1,296
732
2
280
30
0
80
16
0
200
15
0.02
0.10
006
0 0002
0.0014
0.0006
0.10
2.60
0.86
0 87
1.84
1.25
0.047
0.515
0.272
0.044
0.449
0.180
SAMPLE DATA FOR MINNESOTA COUNTY DITCH (HT2), 1992
7 SAMPLES
DATE
SAMP
WTEMP
C
DISOX
mg/L
FECAL
COLIFORM
per 100mL
LABPH
units
TALKAL
mg/L
TSOL
mg/L
TDSOL
mg/L
TSSOL
mg/L
UNIONIZED
AMMONIA AMMONIA
mg/L mg/L
N03+2
mg/L
TKN-N
mg/L
TP04
mg/L
27-Feb-92
GRAB
3.0
6.8
2
7.58
97
241
233
8
0.85
0.0034
0.60
2.73
0.568
02-Mar-92
GRAB
8.5
58
2
7.45
105
354
346
8
1.47
0 0068
1.20
4.32
0.518
04-Mar-92
GRAB
4.0
11.4
4
7.64
168
493
491
2
1.01
0.0051
1 30
2.87
0.305
11 -Mar-92
GRAB
0.0
11.8
10
7.57
244
1037
1033
4
0.29
0.0009
400
1.26
0.199
16-Mar-92
GRAB
8.0
11.8
2
7.73
226
927
925
2
0.10
0.0008
2.20
0.98
0.129
23-Mar-92
GRAB
9.0
14.4
10
8.04
263
1012
962
50
002
0.0004
1.50
1.06
0.216
30-Mar-92
GRAB
10.0
17.6
2
8.45
239
1023
1017
6
0.02
0.0010
0.70
083
0 043
MIN
0.0
5.8
2
7.45
97
241
233
2
0.02
0.0004
0.60
0.83
0 043
MAX
10.0
17.6
10
8.45
263
1037
1033
50
1.47
0.0068
4.00
4.32
0.568
MEAN
6.1
11.4
5
7.78
192
727
715
11
0.54
0.0026
1.64
2.01
0.283
-------
Table 15. 1991 -1992 Tributary Concentrations, Site HT3.
SAMPLE DATA FOR DEER CREEK (HT3), 1991
14 SAMPLES
DATE
SAMP
WTEMP
C
DISOX
mg/L
FECAL
COLIFORM
PER 100ML
LABPH
UNITS
TALKAL
mg/L
TSOL
mg/L
TDSOL
mg/L
TSSOL
mg/L
VOLSOL
mg/L
FIXSOL
mg/L
UNIONIZED
AMMONIA AMMONIA
mg/L mg/L
N03+2
mg/L
TKN-N
mg/L
TP04
mg/L
TDP04
mg/L
05-Mar-91
GRAB
1.0
138
100
7.50
95
317
315
2
2
0
0.20
0.0006
0.40
1.94
0.542
0.475
18-Mar-91
GRAB
2.0
12.2
2
7.80
100
328
314
14
2
12
0.02
0.0001
0.30
1.51
0.319
0.122
20-Mar-91
GRAB
2.0
12.8
6
7.80
112
338
330
8
4
4
0.03
0.0002
0.20
1.24
0.288
0.203
25-Mar-91
GRAB
6.0
13.2
2
7.90
129
354
352
2
2
0
0.02
0.0002
0.10
0.96
0.220
0.203
01 -Apr-91
GRAB
9.0
13.2
2
8.07
176
523
515
8
3
5
0.02
0.0004
0.10
0.92
0.119
0.051
09-Apr-91
GRAB
10.0
10.8
2
820
221
626
618
8
6
2
0.02
0.0006
0.10
0.78
0.078
0.058
15-Apr-91
GRAB
7.0
11.4
18
8.00
232
682
660
22
10
12
0.02
0.0003
0.10
0.74
0.081
0 047
30-Apr-91
GRAB
11.0
10.4
12
8.10
239
783
781
2
0
2
0.02
0.0005
0.10
0.57
0.071
0.041
03-May-91
GRAB
10.0
9.6
256
8.10
238
785
771
14
12
2
0.02
0.0005
0.10
3.00
0.058
0.041
29-May-91
GRAB
23.5
8.6
500
8.00
251
788
770
18
16
2
0.02
0.0010
0.10
0.47
0.153
0.129
06-Jun-91
GRAB
21.0
8.0
360
8.00
238
553
523
30
12
18
0.09
0 0037
0.30
0.75
0.220
0.170
12-Jun-91
GRAB
20.0
7.4
360
8.02
259
705
679
26
8
18
0.04
0.0016
0.60
0.82
0.261
0.186
31 -Jul-91
GRAB
19.0
6.3
220
7.97
298
783
753
30
10
20
0.02
0.0007
0.50
0.94
0.298
0.095
08-Aug-91
GRAB
19.0
69
7.86
276
688
646
42
8
34
0.05
0.0013
0.70
0.66
0.212
0.110
MIN
MAX
MEAN
1.0
23.5
11.5
6.3
13.8
10.3
2
500
142
7.50
8.20
7.95
95
298
205
317
788
590
314
781
573
2
42
16
0
16
7
0
34
9
0.02
0.20
0.04
0.0001
0.0037
0.0008
0.10
0.70
0.26
0.47
3.00
1.09
0.058
0.542
0.209
0.041
0.475
0.138
SAMPLE DATA FOR DEER CREEK (HT3), 1992
7 SAMPLES
DATE
SAMP
WTEMP
C
DISOX
mg/L
FECAL
COLIFORM
per 100mL
LABPH
units
TALKAL
mg/L
TSOL
mg/L
TDSOL
mg/L
TSSOL
mg/L
UNIONIZED
AMMONIA AMMONIA
mg/L mg/L
N03+2
mg/L
TKN-N
mg/L
TP04
mg/L
27-Feb-92
GRAB
2.5
12.4
7.54
92
297
283
14
0.53
0.0019
0.80
2.55
0.302
02-Mar-92
GRAB
6.3
10.2
14
7.53
91
250
242
8
0.48
0.0022
0.60
2.18
0.329
04-Mar-92
GRAB
3.5
11.2
16
7.68
104
229
221
8
0.39
0.0021
0.40
1.71
0 286
11 -Mar-92
GRAB
1 5
9.8
2
7.90
203
597
589
8
0.16
0 0012
2.10
0.95
0.156
16-Mar-92
GRAB
7.8
14.2
2
8.04
240
633
631
2
0.02
0.0003
1.50
1.06
0.093
23-Mar-92
GRAB
8.4
11.4
2
8.34
228
622
608
14
0.02
0.0007
0.70
0.69
0.090
30-Mar-92
GRAB
8.0
18.4
2
8.40
231
638
628
10
0.02
0.0008
0.20
0.78
0.070
MIN
MAX
MEAN
1.5
8.4
5.4
9.8
18.4
12.5
2
16
6
7.53
8.40
7.92
91
240
170
229
638
467
221
631
457
2
14
9
0.02
0.53
0.23
0.0003
0.0022
0.0013
0.20
2.10
0.90
0.69
2.55
1.42
0.070
0.329
0.189
-------
Table 16. 1991 -1992 Tributary Concentrations, SlteHT4.
SAMPLE DATA FOR UNNAMED NORTHWEST TRIBUTARY (HT4), 1991
12 SAMPLES
FECAL UNIONIZED
DATE
SAMP
WTEMP
DISOX
COLIFORM
LABPH
TALKAL
TSOL
TDSOL
TSSOL
VOLSOL
FIXSOL
AMMONIA AMMONIA
N03+2
TKN-N
TP04
TDP04
C
mg/L
PER 100ML
UNITS
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
06-Mar-91
GRAB
2.0
11.6
58
7.40
127
366
358
8
2
6
053
0.0013
1.00
2.65
0.475
0.373
25-Mar-91
GRAB
6.0
12.8
6
7.67
186
561
559
2
2
0
0.06
0.0004
0.60
2.17
0.237
0.136
26-Mar-91
GRAB
1.0
13.8
2
7.51
292
744
743
1
1
0
0.05
0.0001
0.30
1.60
0.129
0.088
03-Apr-91
GRAB
12.0
10.6
2
7.48
301
643
642
1
1
0
0.02
0.0001
0.10
0.76
0.061
0.037
09-Apr-91
GRAB
11.2
9.6
2
8.14
378
1,047
1,015
32
24
8
0.02
0.0005
0.10
1.16
0.068
0.081
15-Apr-91
GRAB
5.0
11.5
2
7.94
337
867
847
20
18
2
0.02
0.0002
0.10
0.98
0.061
0.061
30-Apr-91
GRAB
10.0
11.4
28
7.96
274
783
779
4
2
2
0.02
0.0003
0.10
0.72
0.064
0.064
03-May-91
GRAB
7.0
11.8
134
7.93
309
709
703
6
4
2
003
0.0004
0.10
0.45
0.051
0.051
29-May-91
GRAB
23.0
8.2
240
7.88
347
639
631
8
6
2
0.02
0.0007
0.10
1.30
0.298
0.278
02-Jun-91
GRAB
20.5
6.2
820
7.76
145
377
317
60
16
44
0.07
0.0016
1.20
1.22
0.336
0.163
06-Jun-91
GRAB
24.0
7.8
1,400
7.88
295
515
505
10
8
2
0.07
0.0027
0 10
1.00
0.200
0.200
08-Aug-91
GRAB
17.0
7.9
7.72
238
560
550
10
2
8
0.02
0.0003
0.80
1.00
0.266
0.242
MIN
1.0
62
2
7.40
127
366
317
1
1
0
002
0.0001
0.10
0.45
0.051
0.037
MAX
24.0
13.8
1,400
8.14
378
1,047
1,015
60
24
44
0.53
0.0027
1.20
2.65
0.475
0.373
MEAN
11.6
10.3
245
7.77
269
651
637
14
7
6
0.08
0.0007
0.38
1.25
0.187
0.148
SAMPLE DATA FOR UNNAMED NORTHWEST TRIBUTARY (HT4), 1992
4 SAMPLES
FECAL
UNIONIZED
DATE SAMP
WTEMP
DISOX
COLIFORM
LABPH
TALKAL
TSOL
TDSOL
TSSOL
AMMONIA AMMONIA
N03+2
TKN-N
TP04
C
mg/L
per 10OmL
units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
27-Feb-92 GRAB
1.0
12.8
2
7.78
91
319
307
12
0.79
0.0043
200
3.44
0.438
02-Mar-92 GRAB
7.0
9.8
18
7.71
208
390
386
4
0.66
0.0049
0.60
1.93
0.212
04-Mar-92 GRAB
4.0
9.9
2
7.67
249
535
529
6
0.24
0.0013
0.50
1.79
0.179
16-Mar-92 GRAB
1.0
15.2
2
7.74
382
796
792
4
0.02
0.0001
0.10
0.99
0.066
MIN
1.0
9.8
2
7.67
91
319
307
4
0.02
0.0001
0.10
0.99
0.066
MAX
7.0
15.2
18
7.78
382
796
792
12
0.79
0.0049
2.00
3.44
0.438
MEAN
3.3
11.9
6
7.73
232
510
504
7
0.43
0.0026
0.80
2.04
0.224
-------
Dissolved Oxygen
The water quality standards for Deer Creek require that dissolved oxygen be
maintained at a level greater than 5.0 mg/L. The oxygen level did not fall
below the set standard in any of the samples collected from the monitoring
sites on Deer Creek.
The dissolved oxygen level of one sample from the Minnesota County Ditch
monitoring site (HT-2) fell slightly below a level of 5.0 mg/L. The sample
collected on May 29, 1991, had a dissolved oxygen reading of 4.8 mg/L (Table
14).
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
The water quality standard for fecal coliform bacteria on Deer Creek is a count
of 1,000 organisms per 100 milliliters (1000/100 mL). Fecal coliform results
for Deer Creek (Site HT-3) did not exceed the water quality standard during the
sampling period. On five occasions significantly high fecal coliform counts
were recorded on Deer Creek with a maximum of 500/100 mL were found during the
sampling period from May 3, 1991 to July 31, 1991 (Table 15). These results
correspond to a runoff events during the sampling period.
The highest concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria were found at the
monitoring site on the Minnesota County Ditch (Site HT-2). Significant fecal
coliform counts (>100 colonies/100 mL) were detected on four occasions during
the monitoring period. A maximum of 7,200/100 mL was found on June 6, 1991
(Table 14). These fecal coliform results also correspond to runoff events in
Minnesota County Ditch #11.
Fecal coliform bacteria are indicators of animal and/or human waste. Sources
may include failing septic systems, and runoff from livestock feedlots. These
sources need to be addressed, particularly in the subwatershed that is drained
by Minnesota County Ditch #11.
fiH
The water quality standards for Deer Creek state that the pH level shall be
greater than 6.0 su, and less than 9.0 su. The results of all the tributary
samples were within this range of pH units.
Sol ids
Figures 28 and 29 depict the mean solids concentrations for Lake Hendricks.
Figures 30 and 31 show the loads of solids to Lake Hendricks from the three
inlets. The maximum average concentration of suspended solids was found at
Site HT-2 (Minnesota County Ditch #11). The maximum concentration at this site
was 280 mg/L and the mean concentration of 30 mg/L (Table 14). The maximum and
mean concentrations at HT-3 (Deer Creek) were 42 mg/L and 16 mg/L respectively
(Table 15). The maximum and mean concentrations at site HT-4 (un-named
tributary) were 60 mg/L and 14 mg/L respectively (Table 16). There were no
exceedences for the South Dakota Water Quality Standards for suspended solids
90 mg/L) during the sampling period.
The 1991 annual loads for suspended solids at Sites HT-2, HT-3, and HT-4 were
31,101 kg/year (34.3 tons), 173,531 kg/year (191.3 tons), and 2,449 kg/year
(2.7 tons) respectively. The 1991 annual load from Site HT-3 has the largest
contribution of sediment on a per acre basis compared to the rest of the
58
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS SOLIDS PARAMETERS
MEAN CONC. FOR ALL SITES, 1991
CD
E
en
<£>
<
cc
H
LU
O
Z
o
o
<
LU
TOTAL
DISSOLVED
SOLIDS PARAMETERS
1 Site HT1
Stie HT2
HtH
Site HT3
lil
1 Site HT4
Figure 28
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS SOLIDS PARAMETERS
MEAN CONC. FOR ALL SITES, 1991
s
i
1
if
i
lltlfi
fH
SUSPENDED VOLATILE NON-VOLATILE
SOLIDS PARAMETERS
Site HT1
m
Stie HT2
Site HT3 Site HT4
figure 29
-------
5,000,000-
4,500,000-
4,000,000-
3,500,00a
DC
3,000,000-
<
LU
2,500,00a
CD
2,000,000-
1,500,000-
1,000,000-
500,000
LAKE HENDRICKS LOADS
SOLIDS LOADS FOR 1991
4,705,073
81,259
78,818
'/Xss.wmva-va
TOTAL
DISSOLVED
PARAMETER
HT2
HT3
HT4
Figure 30
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS LOADS
SOLIDS LOADS FOR 1991
cy>
ro
200,000
180,000
160,000
140,000
DC
120,000
<
LU
100,000
o
80,000
60,ooa
40,000-
20,000-
SUSPENDED
VOLATILE
PARAMETER
NON-VOLATILE
HT2
HT3
HT4
Figure 31
-------
watershed. The tributary monitoring did not indicate any excessive loads of
sediment from the subwatersheds.
Nitrogen
Site HT-2 had the highest mean nitrogen concentrations of all the inlet sites
to the lake (Figure 32). The highest mean concentrations for total Kjeldahl
nitrogen (TKN) and nitrate+nitrite nitrogen (N0-+N0-) were 1.37 mg/L and 0.19
mg/L respectively. Site HT-3 (Deer Creek) had the largest annual load of both
N03+N02 and TKN in 1991 (Figure 33).
The majority of the higher concentrations were found during spring runoff.
Sources for these concentrations may have been animal and domestic waste,
decaying vegetation, or runoff from nutrient rich agricultural land. High
concentrations were also found in early June of 1991. Since much of the land
is cropped, fertilizer runoff from recently planted crops was the most probable
source.
The water quality standard for un-ionized ammonia on Deer Creek is 0.05 mg/L.
No exceedences were found at Site HT-3 during the sampling period. The maximum
concentration (0.02 mg/L) found was located at the outlet (Site HT-1) on April
9, 1992 (Table 13). This high concentration is more of a direct result from
in-lake biological factors than tributary sources. Many prairie lakes stratify
in the winter. During this stratified period, the profundal zone may become
anoxic causing chemical reactions which release ammonia from the decaying
organic matter. The profundal zone is the very bottom of the hypolimnetic
layer of the lake near the sediment/water interface. In this zone oxygen may
be depleted and the zone is characterized by decay rather than production of
organic matter. When the ice breaks up on the lake the stratified layers
become mixed throughout the lake. This mixing is accompanied by increases in
pH and temperature which increases the un-ionized fraction of ammonia (Cole,
1963).
The inlet monitoring sites all reached a maximum concentration on the same
date, March 2, 1992 (Tables 14, 15, and 16). The concentrations reached at
Sites HT-2, HT-3, and HT-4 on this date were 0.007 mg/L, 0.002 mg/L, and 0.005
mg/L respectively. Because un-ionized ammonia is a fraction of ammonia the
increase on that date coincides with increased ammonia concentration from
snow-melt runoff in the watersheds.
A greater reduction in nitrogen may be realized by implementing Best Management
Practices (BMP's) on Minnesota County Ditch #11 than on Deer Creek. This is
due to the fact that a sediment control structure and BMP's have already been
extensively implemented on the Deer Creek watershed.
Phosphorus
As shown on Figure 32, the mean total phosphorus concentrations for all inlet
sites were relatively similar (range - 0.187 mg/L to 0.272 mg/L). The maximum
concentration was found at site HT-2 (0.568 mg/L) on February 27, 1992 (Table
14). In general the largest concentrations were found in the spring runoff
events in both 1991 and 1992. As with nitrogen, the sources of phosphorus
during spring runoff are from animal and domestic waste and nutrient rich
agricultural land.
Because of the large water volume through Deer Creek, Site HT-3 has the largest
phosphorus load to Lake Hendricks. The load of total phosphorus through Site
HT-3 is estimated at 3,127 kg (.71 tons). Since phosphorus sorbs to sediment
63
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS NUTRIENT PARAMETERS
MEAN CONC. FOR ALL SITES, 1991
O)
E
(T>
-P*
<
DC
LU
o
z
o
o
<
LU
AMMONIA N03+2 TKN-N TP04
NUTRIENT PARAMETERS
TDP04
Site HT1
Stie HT2 111 Site HT3 IH Site HT4
Fi dure 3?
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS LOADS
NUTRIENT LOADS FOR 1991
7,000-
6,000-
cn
cn
5,000-
CC
<£ 4,ooo-
LU
0 3,000-
2,000-
1,000-
2,997
600
254
63
AMMONIA
6,196
626
3,127
145
186
30
N03+N02 TKN-N
PARAMETER
TP04
911
141
ggaaaai
25
TDP04
HT2
HT3
HT4
Figure 33
-------
the increased sediment loads are probably responsible for increasing the
particulate portion of the total phosphorus. The total dissolved phosphorus
loads to Lake Hendricks are also greatest at Site HT-3. While the loads were
higher at the monitoring site on Deer Creek, concentrations of dissolved
phosphorus were higher at Site HT-2 on Minnesota County Ditch #11. Sources of
phosphorus from the Lake Hendricks watershed include animal waste, runoff from
agricultural land, decaying organic matter, and failing septic systems.
In-lake Sediment/Nutrient Budget
The total measured load of suspended solids into Lake Hendricks in 1991 was
207,080 kg (228.3 tons) the suspended solids load which left through the outlet
was 130,207 kg (143.6 tons) (Figure 34). The sediment retained in the lake was
76,873 kg (84.8 tons). Although the lake has a large amount of sediment, the
sediment retained in 1991 is not a significant amount. It is believed that the
majority of the sedimentation occurred prior to implementation of modern
conservation practices and the construction of the sediment control structure
on Deer Creek.
Figure 35 shows the nutrient budget for Lake Hendricks during 1991. The graph
shows that greater loadings of nitrate-nitrite nitrogen, total phosphorus, and
total dissolved phosphorus entered Lake Hendricks than discharged through the
outlet. The load of total phosphorus from the tributaries into the lake was
3,343 kg, whereas the total load from the lake through the outlet (HT1) was
1,058 kg. The total load of dissolved phosphorus into the lake was 1,078 kg,
and the total load of dissolved phosphorus discharged from the lake through the
outlet was 546 kg. The loads of total nitrogen and phosphorus retained in Lake
Hendricks during 1991 were 912 kg (1 ton) and 2,285 kg (2.5 tons) respectively.
One nutrient parameter which was analyzed had a larger total outflow than
inflow, TKN. TKN is used to measure organic nitrogen. Lake Hendricks appears
to be creating a large amount of organic material which is discharged through
the outlet. The total input of organic nitrogen was 6,618 kg and the discharge
through the outlet was 6,830 kg. Although the difference is small (212 kg or
0.2 tons), it is still uncharacteristic when compared to the other nutrients
tested. The retention of nutrients in the lake will contribute to algae and
weed growth. Loadings of nutrients into the lake will contribute to increased
eutrophication of Lake Hendricks.
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND SURVEY
A survey of the bottom sediments of Lake Hendricks was conducted by a
consulting engineering firm during the fall of 1990. The survey produced the
following results:
Water Surface Area 1,534.2 acres
Average Water Column Depth 10 feet
Average Sediment Column Depth 9 feet
Estimated Sediment Volume 22,594,000 cubic yards
or 14,000 acre feet
Maps showing the elevations of water depths and sediment depths are included in
APPENDIX B, LAKE HENDRICKS SEDIMENT SURVEY. The maps indicate that the
sediment is distributed quite evenly throughout the lake at an average depth of
nine feet.
66
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS SOLIDS BUDGET
INLET vs. OUTLET, 1991
250,000
cr>
SUSPENDED
VOLATILE
PARAMETER
NON-VOLATILE
Hi TOTAL OF INLETS HH TOTAL OF OUTLET
Figure 34
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS NUTRIENT BUDGET
INLET vs. OUTLET, 1991
CD
00
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
tr
<
5,000
LU
0
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
AMMONIA
N03+N02 TKN-N
PARAMETER
TP04
TDP04
TOTAL OF INLETS
W;
TOTAL OF OUTLET
Figure 35.
-------
An elutriate sample was collected from Lake Hendricks on March 13, 1990, and
submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Laboratory in Omaha, Nebraska.
The sample was analyzed for metals, nutrients, pesticides, and other toxic
substances. The results of the analysis indicated no excessive levels of toxic
substances in the sediments (Table 17).
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Lake Hendricks and its watershed have many diverse biological resources. Lake
Hendricks discharges to the Lac Qui Parle River, a tributary of the Minnesota
River. The aquatic life of Lake Hendricks is replenished and supplied with
diversity by this connection to the Lac Qui Parle River.
Due to the large concentrations of nutrients in Lake Hendricks dense blue-green
algae "blooms" are present during the summer months. These algal blooms serve
to inhibit light penetration to the bottom sediments and this in turn, inhibits
the growth of aquatic macrophytes.
The small shallow bays on Lake Hendricks act as nesting areas for many species
of waterfowl. Waterfowl species utilize the back reaches of Lake Hendricks for
reproduction and brood rearing. The deeper waters maintain an abundant food
supply for shore-feeding species of birds. The lake is surrounded by numerous
species of hardwood trees and deciduous shrubs which provide habitat for a
variety of bird and mammal species.
Lake Hendricks supplies many of the essential elements for large and diverse
population of plants and animals. APPENDIX C, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES OF LAKE
HENDRICKS AND ITS WATERSHED, contains further information on the plant and
animal species that inhabit the area. Some of the lists of species in APPENDIX
C show that certain species may "possibly" occur in the Lake Hendricks area.
This indicates that some of the species may occur in the area, but are not
common. APPENDIX C also has a list of rare plants that may be found in the
Lake Hendricks watershed.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In summary, many factors are influencing the water quality of Lake Hendricks.
According to the watershed analysis, two areas (the Upper Deer Creek
subwatershed and the Minnesota County Ditch #11 subwatershed) were found to be
contributing significant loads of nutrients. The sediment load to the lake
from the tributaries does not appear to be significant, however the volume of
sediment in the lake basin indicates that historically sedimentation was a
problem.
The survey of shoreline erosion determined that 4,040 feet of shoreline are in
erodible conditions ranging from minor to moderate/severe. These areas
represent direct loadings of sediment into Lake Hendricks.
The survey of septic wastewater systems around the lake found that about 11% of
the systems are out of compliance with current construction requirements.
Because of their age and location, many more septic systems may be failing and
contributing to the degradation of water quality in Lake Hendricks.
The survey of the bottom sediment in Lake Hendricks found a total sediment
volume of 22,594,000 cubic yards. An elutriate analysis of the sediment
69
-------
Table 17. Lake Hendricks Elutriate Sample Data
HRD LAB Wo.90/236
shcet^J'o* 4
DEPAR1HEN! Of 1 HE ARHY l-j
Missouri River Division, Corps of Engineers
Division Laboratory
Omaha. Nebraska
Project South Dakota Depai intent of
U.ucr end
Natural Resource
Dale Sanple laken. 13 Har 90
Customer Sample Id
Lake Hendricks
Date Sample Received- 17 Har 90
HRD Lab Sample No-
M-1179
Sample Description: Uater and Sediment Sanple Container: 3
-Igal glBSs
(uater) and 1
-Igal glass
(sediment)
lime Sample Taken: 11-15 AM
Cooments: Lake Hendricks (Brookings
Co. ) South
Dakot B
Rccei vi ng
Elutriate
Sediment
Uater
Ub t er
Ana tysi s
Result
Uni ts
Resul t
Uni ts
Result
Uni ts
Arrmonta nitrogen
0.89
mg/L
2.3
mg/L
Chemical Oxygen Demand
33
mg/L
49
mg/L
lotal Cyanide
<0.02
mg/L
0 1
mg/Kg
<0.2
ug/L
<0.2
ug/L
SeIenium
0.25
mg/Kg
1.0
ug/L
<1.0
ug/L
I inc
36
mg/Kg
<10
ug/L
<10
ug/L
Nickel
15
mg/Kg
1
ug/L
2
ug/L
Alutiirwjn
13000
mg/Kg
<50
ug/L
<50
ug/L
Ca Ic iun
58000
mg/Kg
71
mg/L
80
mg/L
Sod i un
120
mg/Kg
7.0
mg/L
9.0
mg/L
Potass i ixn
1800
mg/Kg
7.2
mg/L
10
mg/L
S i1ver
< 1
mg/Kg
<10
ug/L
<10
ug/L
Simazine (Princep)
<100
ug/Kg
<0.1
ug/L
<0.1
ug/L
Metribuiin (Lexone)
<100
ug/Kg
<0.1
ug/L
<0.1
ug/L
Atrazine (Aatrex)
<100
ug/Kg
<0.1
ug/L
<0.1
ug/L
AIdr i n
<10
u9/Kg
<0.01
ug/L
<0.01
ug/L
alpha-BHC
<10
ug/Kg
<0.01
ug/L
<0.01
ug/L
beta-BHC
<10
ug/Kg
<0.01
ug/L
<0.01
ug/L
gatrma-BHC (Lindane)
<10
ug/Kg
<0.01
ug/L
<0.01
ug/L
Mi rex
<:o
ug,
-------
indicated that there were not excessive concentrations of toxic substances in
the sediment.
The in-lake water quality monitoring program determined that Lake Hendricks is
in a hypereutrophic condition. The watershed monitoring program showed that
the greatest loads of sediment and nutrients are contributed from the Upper
Deer Creek subwatershed. The subwatershed drained by Minnesota County Ditch
#11 contributes significant loads of sediment and nutrients on a per acre
basis.
RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Many alternatives are possible for restoration of lakes and their watersheds.
Water quality monitoring of the Lake Hendricks has shown that the lake is in a
hypereutrophic condition, and the lake is in need of a reduction of sediments
and nutrients. Based on these findings, the following restoration alternatives
are recommended based on their effectiveness and economic possibility.
Information/Education Program to Promote Best Management Practices
An information and education program should be established to promote the
implementation of best management practices in the Lake Hendricks watershed.
Although traditional best management practices such as conservation tillage,
waterways, terraces, crop rotation, and filter strips have been extensively
applied in the Lake Hendricks watershed, there are still some areas where
additional practices should be implemented.
In order to reduce loadings of sediment and nutrients to the greatest extent
possible, the implementation of best management practices should be promoted in
the areas of the watershed found to be contributing the highest loads. In the
Lake Hendricks watershed, the Deer Creek sub-basin is contributing the greatest
total loads of sediment and nutrients. However, information from the Soil
Conservation Service indicates that traditional best management practices are
already extensively applied in this area. Therefore, best management practices
need to be promoted extensively in the Minnesota County Ditch #11 subwatershed
which contributes higher loadings of sediment and nutrients on a per acre
Because traditional best management practices are already extensively applied
in the Lake Hendricks watershed, it is recommended that Integrated Crop
Management practices should also be promoted through a program of information
and education. Integrated Crop Management practices would include components
such as soil testing to determine proper fertilization rates, and scouting of
cropland to determine optimum application of pesticides. Cost-sharing should
be considered for Integrated Crop Management practices such as soil testing.
This would help to promote these practices, and gain wider acceptance among
landowners in the watershed.
The estimated costs to carry out an effective Information/Education Program for
promotion of best management practices in the Lake Hendricks watershed are as
follows:
basis.
Item
Cost per Year
Promotional materials
Training workshops
Travel within watershed
$1,500 to $2,000
1,500 to 2,000
2,500 to 3,000
Total Cost Per Year
$5,500 to $7,000
71
-------
Feedlot Runoff Control
There are six to eight livestock operations in the subwatershed drained by
Minnesota County Ditch 11 which may be contributing runoff to Lake Hendricks.
It is recommended that these livestock operations be rated by means of a
feedlot runoff model to determine which facilities are contributing the highest
loads of sediment and nutrients.
The average cost to control runoff from a feedlot is estimated at $27,000 to
$30,000 for the construction of an Animal Waste Management System. A total
cost of constructing animal waste systems on Minnesota County Ditch #11 is
estimated at $240,000. Fecal coliform counts from Site HT-2 (Deer Creek)
indicate the presence of animal waste contamination in the watershed. An
inventory of the feedlots in the Deer Creek watershed needs to be completed.
The results of this inventory will be used to develop project needs for future
implementation.
Low-cost alternatives to control feedlot runoff, such as diversion of clean
water around lot areas or establishment of vegetative buffer strips, should be
implemented to the greatest extent possible.
Shoreline Erosion Control
A shoreline erosion survey was conducted at Lake Hendricks as part of the
Diagnostic/Feasibility Study. Areas of shoreline erosion were rated as minor,
minor/moderate, moderate, and moderate/severe.
Because areas of shoreline erosion contribute direct loads of sediment to the
lake, it is recommended that they be corrected as soon as possible. Areas of
moderate to moderate/severe erosion should be repaired first. The estimated
cost of repairs, including backsloping, rip-rapping, and seeding is $20 per
lineal foot for moderate erosion, and $25 per lineal foot for moderate/severe
erosion.
A total of 1,195 feet of shoreline was found to have moderate erosion, and
a total of 850 feet was found to have moderate/severe erosion. The estimated
cost to repair these areas is as follows:
Erosion Category Length(ft.) Cost per ft. Total
Moderate 1,195 $20 $23,900
Moderate/Severe 850 25 $21,250
Total Cost $45,150
It is recommended that shoreline repairs for areas of moderate and
moderate/severe erosion be undertaken over a two-year period. The estimated
cost per year is $22,575. Areas of minor and minor/moderate erosion should be
repaired as time and resources permit.
Sanitary District Establishment
The survey of septic systems around Lake Hendricks found that about 11% of the
systems may be out of compliance with current construction standards. It is
recommended that an effort be made to address the problem of potentially
failing septic wastewater systems. The majority of the cabin development on
the lakeshore is located in Lincoln County, Minnesota.
72
-------
The possibility of extending the wastewater line from the city of Hendricks,
Minnesota should be explored. Assistance in dealing with sanitary system
issues may be obtained from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Assistance
may be available from other agencies such as county governments, watershed
districts, or the city of Hendricks.
Lac Qui Parle River Channel Cleanout
In 1970 a sediment control structure was constructed on Deer Creek by the U.S.
Soil Conservation Service. As a part of the project, the flow from the
discharge pipe of the dam was diverted into the lake and the stream bed was
channelized. Only the flow from the emergency spillway was directed down the
south channel, away from the lake. Virtually all of the flow from the creek
enters Lake Hendricks. One of the results of this project was increased volume
of water to Lake Hendricks.
The aggradation of the outlet channel due to sediment, cattails, and debris
restricts the discharge of the water at the outlet of Lake Hendricks. The
retarded flow causes higher water levels in the lake which leads to shoreline
erosion and a longer hydrologic retention time. These problems could be
reduced by a cleanout of the outlet channel. If the outlet channel was
restored, an improved flushing rate would be achieved and the shoreline erosion
problems would be alleviated.
The City of Hendricks has obtained a permit from the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources for cleanout of the Lac Qui Parle River channel downstream
from the Lake Hendricks outlet. A copy of the permit and other information
concerning the channel cleanout are included as APPENDIX D, LAC QUI PARLE RIVER
CHANNEL CLEANOUT.
Dredging
The sediment survey of Lake Hendricks completed by a consultant engineering
firm indicated a total sediment volume of 22,594,000 cubic yards. Due to the
inordinate volume of sediment in Lake Hendricks, whole lake dredging is not
feasible. The capability of the equipment, volume of sediment, and cost of
removing the sediment combine to make whole lake dredging infeasible.
The removal of sediment by selective dredging would improve the fisheries
habitat of the lake, and enhance recreational opportunities. It is recommended
that one million cubic yards of sediment be removed. By dredging an average
sediment column depth of six feet, about 100 surface acres of the lake would be
provided with a water column depth of approximately fifteen to sixteen feet.
A comparison of the estimated costs and length of time required to dredge one
million cubic yards of silt by use of two different sized dredges is shown
below:
Dredge Size Length of Time Total Cost
8-inch 10 years $2,000,000
10-inch 4 years $1,200,000
14-inch 2 years $1,000,000
Use of the 10-inch or 14-inch dredge is recommended, based on the reduced time
and cost. However, it is also recommended that dredging not be implemented
right away. This will provide an opportunity to reduce sediment loadings into
the lake through shoreline and watershed restoration. It will also provide the
73
-------
Lake Hendricks Association and other local entities the time required to secure
the resources necessary for a major dredging project.
Cooperative Lake Restoration Project
Because Lake Hendricks is located on the border between South Dakota and
Minnesota, it is recommended that a cooperative project be initiated to
implement restoration alternatives. The implementation project will require
the cooperation of the two states and their respective U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency regional offices.
As part of the cooperative project, implementation of the following restoration
activities is recommended:
1. Development of an information/education program to promote best
management practices, including Integrated Crop Management, in the
Lake Hendricks watershed.
2. Evaluation of feedlots in the Lake Hendricks watershed by use of a
feedlot runoff model to determine feedlots which require assistance in
the development of runoff control. A cost-sharing program should be
established to assist in the construction of animal waste management
systems.
3. Areas of the lake shoreline with moderate and moderate/severe erosion
should be surveyed, and plans developed for reconstruction and repair.
4. Coordination of local efforts to control disposal of wastewater from
failing septic systems.
5. Coordination of local efforts to secure funding for dredging of Lake
Hendricks.
6. Coordination of cleanout of the Lac Qui Parle River channel.
74
-------
LITERATURE CITED / BIBLIOGRAPHY
Carlson, R. E. 11977. A Trophic State Index for Lakes, Linmology
Oceanography. 23:(2):361-369.
Cole, Gerald A. Textbook of Limnology. C. V. Mosby Co., 1983.
St. Louis, Missouri.
East Dakota Conservancy Sub-District. 1976. (Unpublished).
Haertel, L. 1972. Ecological factors influencing production of algae in
northern prairie lakes. South Dakota Water Resource Institute, Brookings,
South Dakota.
Hamilton L. J. 1988. Major Aquifers in Brooking County, South Dakota.
United States Geological Survey, Informational Pamphlet No. 40.
Hamilton L.J., 1989. Water Resources of Brookings and Kingsbury Counties,
South Dakota. U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resource Investigations Report
88-4185.
Heiskary, S.A. & Wilson, B.C. 1990. Minnesota Lake Water Quality
Assessment Report, Second Edition. Program Development Section, Division
of Water Quality, Minnesota Pollution Control.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Annual Reports.
Satterlee J. 1991 Lake Hendricks: Socio-Economic Characteristics of the
User Population. Census Data Center, South Dakota State University,
Brookings, South Dakota.
Schmidt, A.E. 1967. Limnological of selected South Dakota Lakes. Masters
Thesis. South Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota.
Siegal, Jerry. 1990. Personal Communication. East Dakota Water
Development District, Brookings, South Dakota.
Soil Conservation Service, 1955. Soil Survey Brookings County. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, In cooperation with South Dakota Agricultural
Experimentation Station.
Soil Conservation Service, 1970. Soil Survey Lincoln County. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, In cooperation with Minnesota Agricultural
Experimentation Station.
South Dakota Department of Game Fish and Parks. Annual Fish Stocking
Reports.
South Dakota Department of Water and Natural Resources. 1985. Lake
Hendricks Water Quality Study Area Report. Financed through a section 208
Water Quality Management Planning Grant.
Steece, F.V. Geology and Shallow Groundwater Resources of the
Watertown-Estelline Area, South Dakota, Report of Investigations No.85
State Geological Survey, Union Building University of South Dakota,
Vermillion, S.D.
75
-------
LITERATURE CITED / BIBLIOGRAPHY
(Continued)
Stewart, William, C., 1989. South Dakota Lakes Survey. South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, (Unpublished).
Tomhave D. W., 1988. Sand and Gravel Resources in Brookings County, South
Dakota. South Dakota Geological Survey, Vermillion, South Dakota.
Vallentyne, John R. The Algal Bowl. Department of the Environment,
Fisheries and Marine Service, Ottawa, 1974.
Wetzel, Robert G. Limnology. Saunders College Publishing, Chicago, 1975,
1983.
Zappetillo David, 1988. Lake Hendricks Fish Population Survey, Minnesota,
Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division. (Unpublished).
76
-------
APPENDIX A. LAKE HENDRICKS IN-LAKE WATER QUALITY
77
-------
TOTAL ALKALINITY / LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 & 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
00
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-H-
SITE HL-3
05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure A-l.
-------
NQ3-NQ2
1991 & 1992
LAKE HENDRICKS
SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-B-
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 1 07/22/91 ' 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure A-2.
-------
TOTAL KJEIDAHl NITROGEN/LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 & 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
3
oo
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-B-
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure A-3.
-------
TOTAL NITRQG
LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 & 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-B-
SITE HL-3
Q ^((^^(^
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91
04/16/91
06/26/91
10/15/91
08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure A-4.
-------
WATER TEMPERATURE/LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 k 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
30
¦*
HL-1,2,3(SURF)
HL-1,2,3(BOTT)
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure A-5.
-------
VOLATILE SUSPEND. SOLIDS/LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 k 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
-------
FIXED
SUSPENDED SOLIDS/LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 & 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
00
-P*
*
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
¦&
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
"i 1 1 r
DATE
Figure A-7.
-------
TOTAL SOLIDS
LAKE HENDRICKS
1991 k 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
750
oo
cn
-*K-
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-s-
SITE HL-3
450
1 r
01/22/91
04/16/91
05/30/91 ' 07/22/91
i r
06/26/91
10/15/91
08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure A-8.
-------
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS/LAKE HENDRICKS
4500
4000
3500
co
3000
2500-
£ 2000
1500
10OOH
I
i j3P| -.j,
500 H '^13-
0
1991 & 1992 - SITES HL-1, HL-2, HL-3
STATE STANDARD FOR
A 2A-HOUR PERIOD
STATE STANDARD FOR
A SINGLE SAMPLE
SSr
*
HL-1
SITE HL-2
-&
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure A-9
-------
CO
250
200
150
100
50
0
TOTAL SUSPENDED
1991 k 1992 - SITES HL-1,
300
HENDRICKS
HL-2, HL-3
STATE STANDARD FOR
A SINGLE SAMPLE
STATE STANDARD FOR
A' 2'4-HOUfT PERTOtT'
*
SITE HL-1
SITE HL-2
-B-
SITE HL-3
01/22/91 05/30/91 07/22/91 10/15/91
04/16/91 06/26/91 08/19/91 01/22/92
DATE
Figure A-10.
-------
APPENDIX B. LAKE HENDRICKS SEDIMENT SURVEY
88
-------
Ru » fL •
\ V> i«* t c I
LAKE HENDRICKS
SEDIMENTATION RANGE MAP
flu H I I - 1> '0 « J
j/4 «uo •/ snn ^
»l«Cl '•osi
(6 »a
tj '0
9 e 7 * 5 *
(.fUPUIC SCAlf
N <•, U*« PI
f Vjo;.
u \ %
V • *
* *
•i •»
S
¦ •». *
, y *
%
, \ 9.
"i
V
/ 5*
/ » * -V*.
/n; _ .. 1 %
>A \ >A V-
7
D*tr» of Sur»r i«i >> •-« o>i
. 't 1 i
* \ % -
Vl, M
. . vV-
UKF IIFNDHirKS
lunrt
n f3/>9*'u-
13 f r n 11« r c! K i s e » b r n vi n
ond Associoles
III »«l»wi J*Jl« 101
Fiqure B-l.
-------
eu * a -i?bB i<
¦0" u»a* rw o»
SPlU *» r CL »bb 60
UD
O
LAKE HENDRICKS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP DEPICTING
TOP OF SEDIMENT LAYER
CRfcPHIC SCALE
D«l«( ol Sur»*y S*«i u o«« i i.
Figure B-2.
LAKE HENDRICKS
noiHiKTanor) hjitt
TOP OP SIOfVtNTlTION TOPOCAaPITT
o osrswu*
Bernhnrd. Eisenbraun
and Associates
iH-iM-mr
-------
LAKE HENDRICKS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP DEPICTING
DOTTOM OF SEDIMENT LAYER
eu b ci . u7oes .
}/i poo •/ sirci 9s
FINU POS1
CRaPIIIC SCAlX
N"TtS C****)!!! ril4<«l >H(I •
Contour Inl«r*t1 • 1 foot
Dtlrt of Survey
Figure B-3.
LAKE HENDRICKS
StDIUtVTlTION SUIVTT
BOTTOM or SfOIWtftTlTlON TOPOCIUPtn
o osr*09*t*.
Rcrnhard, Kisenbrnun
and Associates
frlaa Stwib *7011
IO»*
rii Hi lit mi)
-------
APPENDIX C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES OF LAKE HENDRICKS AND ITS WATERSHED
92
-------
Table C-l.
Fish Species Known to Inhabit Lake Hendricks
Camion Name Scientific Name
Black Bullhead
Ictolurus melas
Yellow Perch
Perca flavescens
White Sucker
Catostcmus ccnmerson
Northern Pike
Esox lucius
White bass
Morone chrvsops
Carp
Cvprinus carpio
Large Buffalo
Ictiobus cvprinellus
Walleye
Stizostedion vitreum
Blue Gill
Lepcmis chrvsops
Black Crappie
Pcmoxis nicrromaculatus
White Crappie
Pomoxis annularis
Fathead Minnow
Pimephales promelas
Orange Spotted Sunfish
Lepomis humilis
Channel Catfish
Ictalurus punctatus
Sand Shiner
Notropis stramineus
Threespined Stickleback
Gasterosteus aculeatus
Harper & Row, 1981
93
-------
Table C-2.
Aguatic/Brergent Plants Possibly Occurring in Lake Hendricks and Watershed
CCTimon Name
Scientific Name
Cannon Cattail
Leafy Pondweed
Sago Pondweed
Richardson Pondweed
Flatstern Pondweed
Wigeon Grass
Horned Pondweed
Slender Naiad
Broadleaf Waterplankton
Northern Arrowhead
Waterweed
Eel Grass
Reed Grass
Wild Rice
Slender Spikerush
Comrton Soikerush
Hardstem Bui nosh
Three Square
River Bulrush
Slender Bulrush
Alkali Bulrush
Sweet Flag
Star Duckweed
Giant Duckweed
Water Stargrass
Coontail
Northern Water Milfoil
Carmen Bladderwort
Tvpia latifolia
Potamogeton foliosus
Potamogeton pectinatus
Potamoqeton richardsonii
Potamogeton zosteriformis
Ruppia occidental is
Zannichella palustris
Naias flexilis
Naias marina
Alisma plantago-acruatica
Saqittaria cuneata
Anacharis occidentalis
Vallisneria americana
Phraqmites ccnrnunis
Zizania aquatica
Eleocharis acicularis
Eleocharis palustris
Scirpus acutus
Scirpus americanus
Scirpus fluviatilis
Scirpus heterochaetus
Acorus calamus
Lenma trisulca
Spirodela polvrhiza
Ceratopphvllum demersum
Heteranthera dubia
Myriophvllun exalbescens
Utricularia vulgaris
Harlow, William M. and Ellwood S. Harrar, Textbook of Dendrology,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1950
94
-------
Table C-3.
Native Trees of Lake Hendricks Watershed
Carman Name
Scientific Name
Black Willow
Salix nicrer
Quaking Aspen
Pooulus tremuloides
Bigtooth Cottonwood
Populus tacamadaca
Eastern Cottonwood
PoduIus deltoides
Butternut
Jualans cineria
Paper Birch
Betula paprifera
American Elm
Ouercus macrocarpa
Slippery Elm
Ulmus americana
Rock Elm
Ulmus fulva
Hackberry
Ulmus thomasi
Red Maple
Celtis occidental is
Boxelder
Acer rubrum
Basswood
Acer necrundo
Green Ash
Fraxinus pennswanica
Harlow, William M. and Ellwood S. Harrar, Textbook of
Dendrology, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1950
95
-------
Table C-4.
Migrational Waterfowl Possible In The Lake Hendricks Area
Corrmon Name
Scientific Name
Carman Loon
Gavia iirmer
Red-Necked Grebe
Podiceps oriseaena
Green Heran
Butorides striatus
Trumpeter Swan
01ar buccinator
Brant
Branta bernicla
White Fronted Goose
Anser albifrons
Snow Goose
Chen caerulescens
Ross' Goose
Chen rossii
Red-Breasted Merganser
Mercrus serrater
Ccnmon Merganser
Mercrus meraanser
Whooping Crane
Grus americana
Harper and Row, 1981
96
-------
Table C-5.
Raptors Possible In The Lake Hendricks Region
Canton Name
Scientific name
Permanent or Breeding Species
Great Horned Owl
Barred Owl
Short-Eared Owl
Long-Eared Owl
Coopers Hawk
Red-Tailed Hawk
Swainsons Hawk
Rough-Legged Hawk
Ferruginous Hawk
Northern Harrier
Prairie Falcon
Merlin
Kestrel
Bubo virginianus
Strix varia
Asio f lanmeus
Asio otus
Acciper cooperii
Buteo iamaicensis
Buteo swainsoni
Buteo lagopus
Buteo regalis
Circus cvnaneus
Falco mexicanus
Falco columbarius
Falco sparverius
Migrational Species
Turkey Vulture
Northern Goshawk
Sharpshinned Hawk
Golden Eagle
Bald Eagle
Osprey
Gyrfalcon
Peregrine Falcon
Cathartes aura
Accipiter gentilis
Accipiter striatus
Acruila chrvsaetos
Haliaeetus leucocephlalus
Pandion haliaetus
Falco rusticolus
Falco pereqrinus
Harper and Row, 1981
97
-------
Table C-6.
Mamnals Of The Lake Hendricks Region
Cannon Name
Scientific Name
Water Shrew
Sorex palustris
Pygmy Shrew
Microsorex hoyi
Short-Tedled Shrew
Blarina brevicauda
Least Shrew
Crvpotis parva
Eastern Mole
Sealopus aouaticus
Keens Bat
Mvotis keenii
Big Brown Bat
Eptesicus fuscus
Red Bat
Lasiurus borealis
Eastern Cottontail
Svlvilacrus floridanus
Black-Tailed Jackrabbit
Lepus California
Eastren Chipmunk
Tamias striatus
Richardsons Ground Squirrel
Spermophilus richardsonii
Thirteen-Lined Ground Squirrel
Spermophilus tridecemineatus
Franklin's Ground Squirrel
Spermophilus franklinii
Fox Squirrel
Sciurus niaer
Grey Squirrel
Sciurus carolinensis
Plains Pocket Gopher
Geomvs bursarius
Plains Pocket Mouse
Peroanathus flavescens
Beaver
Caster canadensis
Deer Mouse
Peromvscus maniculatus
White-Footed Deer Mouse
Percmvscus 1eucopus
Red-Backed Vole
Clethrionomys aapperi
Meadow Vole
Microtus oennsvlvanicus
Muskrat
Ondatra zibethcus
Porcupine
Erethizon dorsatum
Coyote
Canis lantrans
Red Fox
Vulpes vulpes
Racoon
Procvon lotor
Long-tailed Weasel
Mustela frenata
Mink
Mustela vision
Badgers
Taxidea taxus
Striped Skunk
Mephitis mephitis
White-Tad 1 Deer
Odocoilus virainianus
Harper & Row, 1981
98
-------
Table C-7.
Reptile Species Found In The Lake Hendricks Region
Common Name
Scientific Name
Painted Turtle
Chrvsemys picta
Snapping Turtle
Chelvdra serpentina
Carman Garter Snake
Thaimophis sirtalis
Smooth Green Snake
Opheodrvs vernal is
Bui 1snake
Pituophis melanoleucus
Harper & Row, 1981
99
-------
Table C-8.
Rare Plants in the Lake Hendricks Region
Common Name
Scientific Name
Sugar Maple
Acer saccharum
Sweetflag
Acorns americanus
Wood Anemone
Anemone cminouefolia
Spikenard
Aralla racemosa
Wild Ginger
Asarum canadense
Rush Aster
Aster boreal is
Flattop Aster
Aster umbellatus
Indian Plantain
Cacalla plantaginea
Hair Sedge
Carex capillaris
Lake Sedge
Carex lacustris
Penuncled Sedge
Carex pedunclata
Blue Cohosh
CauloDhvllurn thalictroides
Pale Coral-Root
Corallorhiza trifida
White Lady Slipper
Cvpripedivm candidum
Toothwort
Dentaria 1aciniata
Downy Gentian
Gentiana puberulenta
Smal1 Fringed Gentian
Gentianopsis procera
Wild Cranesbill
Geranium maculatum
Bottlebrush Grass
Hvstrix patula
Jointed Rush
Juncus articulatus
Florida Lettuce
Lactuca floridana
Virginia Cutgrass
Leersia vircrinica
Water Nymph
Naias marina
Balsam Poplar
Populus balsamifera
Largeleaf Pondweed
Potamoaetan amolifolia
White Rattlesnake Root
Prenanthes alba
Green-fruited Bur Reed
Sparaanium chlorocarporum
Meadowsweet
Spiraea alba
Nodding Trillium
Trillium cernum
Declining Trillium
Trillium flexipes
Large-flowered Bellwart
Uvularia qrandiflora
Wildrice
Zizania aouatica
Moyle, John B., 1954
100
-------
APPENDIX D. LAC QUI PARLE RIVER CHANNEL CLEANOUT
101
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA MINNESOTA
swU**'
^ v *i¥e*tdnic&4>
Improvement Association, ln<
MAILING ADDRESS P.O. BOX 161 HENDRICKS MINNES
lr.\y-
June 25, 1992 ^ {) ¦, ^
Mr. Ken Madison, Natural Resources Scientist ^
State of South Dakota Dept of Environment t>EP"l» ^ ENVIRON
and Natural Resources » NATURAL RESOURCES
913 5th Street S.E. SLkbosILote.R»fl''ono1
Watertown, SD 57201-3641
Re: Phase One Diagnostic/Feasability Study, Lake Hendricks
Dear Ken:
We thank you for your preliminary review of the Phase One
Study at our Lake Hendricks Improvement Association annual
meeting June 13, 1992. One point however that did not get
covered is the proposal to evacuate approximately one mile
of the Lac Qui Parle River bottom to improve the outflow of
Lake Hendricks that would result in much less erosion that
is taking place along the shore lines.
This subject is covered in considerable detail in correspond-
ence between the City of Hendricks and the Department of
Natural Resources in Minnesota. As noted, no action has been
taking because the parties involved have been waiting for
the Phase One Study. The main point is that Minnesota DNR
has given permission for evacuation and financial resources
must be obtained before work can begin. We look for such
support and recommendations in your Phase One Report to the
South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and to the Federal Enviromental Protection Agency in Denver.
Please refer to attached correspondence:
May 24, 1990 Lake Hendricks Outlet Study, MN Ditch #55 by LHIA
Oct 3, 1990 T.W. Reeves to J.R. Lewis, Re: Application of
the City of Hendricks App # 89-3028
Oct 11, 1990 J.R.Lewis to T.W.Reeves, Re: Compromise Proposal
of Oct. 3, 1990
Oct 27, 1990 T.W.Reeves to A.W.Clapp III, Re: In the Matter
of City Of Hendricks Application...etc.
Nov 14, 1990 T.W.Reeves to A.W.Clapp III Re: In the Hatter
of City of Hendricks Application..etc.
Addressed also to J.R.Lewis
102
-------
-2-
Nov 30, 1990 R.Nyberg to K. Buchholz, Re: Limited Permit
#89-4028, Lac Qui Parle River
Please keep in mind the permit for evacuation work expires
Sept 1, 1995.
Your attention to this matter will be appreciated. Remember
too permission has finally been obtained to evacuate silt only
after many years of concern by the City of Hendricks and
Lake land owners in addition to all those in the area involved
with the future of the Lake.
Very truly yours,
J. Walter Dawson, LHIA Board
cc:S. Hemmingsen, Pres
A-. Graslie, Secty
H. Buchholz, Mayor
T.W.Reeves, Atty
103
-------
$
N
§ .
nss.8
La Ki
:tS3.8
N
Si*
k
{-// (5 M K<4T(f /Z
1152.1' 10' !£>• & 7
Oft/GtK/AL P/Zo/=>Q SA L L£i/£ L 5
S/L
7~
£3>.
J)/Z0P
o&
k
V
I
Vi
NJ
I
5
VS
I iv
S*o
1
§
Q
I
<§
*U
fl?;
^|
nsj.4^1.4-'&?o/?
*J-74£. 4- ' /746.t
/4s Bo/lt Levees
(74-6.5"*
7,$'DROP
L<4K£ Ate"A/fCf
-------
THOMAS W. REEVES
ATTORNEY AT LAW
BOX 6
HENDRICKS. MINNESOTA S6 1 36
TELEPHONE 507-275-31 OS
October 3, 1990
Mr. Jeffrey R. Lewis
Area Hydrologist
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 111
1400 East Lyon
Marshall, MN 56258
Re: Application of the City of Hendricks
App #89-3028
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Monday night I met with the City Council for Hendricks
to discuss the hearing on October 30, 1990. A compromise
was discussed to try and resolve the issue over the City's
Permit Application dated 7/14/88 and revision dated 9/25/89
to excavate a channel for the outlet of Lac Qui parle and
install a variable control structure on the completed Upper
Deer Creek-Lake Hendricks Watershed Protection and Flood Pre-
vention project.
The City has authorized me to propose this as a compromise:
1. Instead of the deepening and widening of the channel and
a variable control structure as proposed by the City, the
City be permitted to excavate this channel 18 feet wide at
bottom to the original grade as shown in the project detail
plans "as built" and completed August 15, 1975.
2. The City be permitted to lower the elevation of the wier
crest of the drop structure at station 73 + 50 from 1,751.40
feet to 1,750.8 feet or to original grade whichever is lowest.
3. That DNR not be required to pay the cost of the permitted
work.
4. That both parties recognize a comprehensive study of Lake
Hendricks is ongoing and this study will consider and make
recommendations about the outlet of Lake Hendricks to the
Lac Qui Parle River which may be part of the basis for a later
application of the City.
5. That the City have 5 years until October 30, 1995 to complete
the permitted work.
105
-------
This proposal is a compromise and recognizes the interests
of both parties. The project "as built" left the original
channel in place through DNR's property and part of the channel
on land to the north. This channel is filling with silt which
does obstruct the flow of water as observed by both parties.
All that is intended is to clear the channel and take out
t he s 111.
The City realizes it may have to get permission of other
agencies and land owners not parties to this agreement, too.
Provision #1 about the profile of the channel is consistent
with the profile of typical ditch section in the "as built"
plans. Since there must be some definition of how wide the
channel work can be this seems reasonable because it matches
the work done downstream.
We are assuming the excavation would remove approximately
1 foot of sediment or slightly less based upon measurements
by DNR in 1988.
Please review this and advise as to DNR's position as
the City wants to resolve this at a pre-hearing conference
without the time and expense of a hearing, if possible.
cf: Mr. A.W. Clapp III
Special Assistant Attorney General
State of Minnesota
Office of the Attorney General
102 State Capitol
St. Paul, MN 55155
Very truly yours,
Thomas W. Reeves.
City Attorney
City of Hendricks, MN
106
-------
PHONE NO.
STATE OF
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
PO BOX 111, 1400 EAST LYON ST. , MARSHALL, MN 56258
\
FILE NO.
-*\minnesot/T~v-
\ 1990
/
(507 J 537-7258
October 11, 1990
Mr. Thomas W. Reeves
City Attorney
PO Box 6
Hendricks, MN 56136
Dear Mr. Reeves:
SUBJECT: COMPROMISE PROPOSAL OF OCTOBER 3, 1990
We appreciate your willingness to attempt to come to some type of agreement
regarding the outlet of Lake Hendricks. We agree with most of the items you
proposed in your letter of October 3, 1990. The only item we do not agree with is
Number 2. We are opposed to the lowering of the crest of the weir at Station 73+50.
This elevation was chosen to preserve the wetlands that existed prior to the project
and still do exist between this drop structure and the lake. A/^ j , . . ,-d - .,,r " <
j r'
We would agree to widening of the weir at the crest elevation of 1751.40 so that the
drop structure is wider at this elevation. At the present time, the drop structure
is only 3'3" wide at elevation 1751.40, and steps up in 0.5' elevation increments as
you go laterally along this structure. We would recommend cutting off the next four
sheet pile panels on each side of the center notch. This would give you a weir crest
length of approximately 16 feet at elevation 1751.4. This would greatly increase the
capacity of this structure to discharge water without water impounding behind it.
The existing channel grade does go up and down quite a bit. We would suggest that
the channel from the drop structure at Station 73+50 to the bottom of the culverts at
Station 49+50 be dug slightly undercut. We would recommend the channel be dug
about one foot below a grade line from the drop structure to the township road
culverts. The channel should probably be wider than the 18' you suggest because
this channel will not have much slope. The new channel should follow the existing
alignment. We would suggest that the channel be about 24 feet wide. The^next
section of channel frcm this road crossing upstream to CSAH 17 crossing will have
even less slope to it. This section of channel should also be about 24 feet wide, we
would again recommend that this reach be undercut about one foot. The last section,
from CSAH 17 upstream to the apron on the downstream side of the Lake Hendricks
dan', can be slightly narrower. This part of the channel has more slope to it. We
wou'd suggest this part of th*» channel have about an 18' foot bottom width.
we believe that cleaning this channel as we propose will significantly lessen the water
impounded between CSAH 17 and the dam on Lake Hendricks. This channel will not
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
107
-------
Mr Thomas W. Reeves
October 11, 1990
Page 2
significantly harm the wetland areas between CSAH 17 and the drop structure at
Station 73+50. The area upstream of CSAH 17 appeared to be the area of most
concern to the city. vvjo
We also will require that the material excavated from this channel cleaning be hauled
away and deposited in upland areas. We do not want this material to be sidecast and
left in the wetland areas. Removal of the accumulated materials to upland areas will
also allow your organization to avoid the need to obtain a permit from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers.
We feel that this approach will improve flow characteristics through this area. This
channel has never been maintained and with the placement of additional obstructions,
such as the rock crossing that was located at Station 64, flow conditions definitely
have degraded since 1967. We hope that this approach could be tried and if, in the
future, conditions do not improve we could then re-evaluate our decisions.
Sincerely,
DIVISION OF WATERS
Area Hydroiogist
igi
c Bill Clapp
Ray Nyberg
Bob Meyer
Ken Varland
108
-------
Figure D-2.
-------
\
>> : :
: ' ' I ! - ! J I
iC'»« •? *•«»» v t* WIM :* •( \
(•m«r At-(it) «Uai.i» »'iv> »>
A Mjl * M/'l/ill'V*
Figure D-3.
-------
THOMAS W. REEVES
ATTORNEY AT LAW
BOX C
HENDRICKS. MINNESOTA 56130
TELEPHONE S07-275-3 I 05
October 27, 1990
A.w. Clapp III
Special Assistan.t Attorney General
102 State Capitol
St. Paul, MN 55155
Re: In the Matter of the Application of the City of
Hendricks, Lincoln County, to Excavate one Mile
Of the Lac QiJ-i Parle River
Dear Mr. Clapp:
This is to confirm our phone conversation of October
26, 1990. We agreed to continue indefinitely the hearing
scheduled October 1^^.990, at Hendricks.
I believe we h^$afa Jnli/Sfeal agreement on terms of a permit
which will settle the siTh_e terms of such agreement
are contained in the lettcrr of ,'j«rfrey R. Lewis dated October
1 1, 1990 . I reviewed this le^/er with my expert last week.
We are concerned about two points.
First, at paragraph two, Lewis proposes to allow widening
oi the wier at the crest elevation of 1751.40'. As I read
this paragraph, Lewis means DNR would permit my client to
cut off four sheet pile panels on both sides of the center
notch so that the center notch would be approximately 16'
wide instead of 3'3" as it now is. However the center notch
is at elevation 1750.8', not 1751.40'. For that conclusion
I refer you to sheet 11 of the "as built" Detail Plans for
the project completed August 15, 1975. Lewis's proposal only
makes sense if the lowest point of the structure as build
is widened from 3'3" to approximately 16'. I will recommend
my client accept this and I believe it will. Please make
sure this is what Lewis meant.
Second, unH->r thr proposal in Lewis's letter, DNR would
permit channeling more extensive than the City requests.
At the least, DNR is either suggesting or recommending more
channeling than the Citi requested in its compromise. The
City does not want to be in a position where, in some future^'
permit application, DNR raises an issue about the City failing
to follow its recommendations about the channeling. We may
never be able to complete this channeling unless there is
another dry period where it is possible to get the work done
111
-------
with locally available construction equipment. Before that
happens it is possible the City could get funded to do channel
improvement from another source.
Right now there is a joint study of Lake Hendricks which
addresses, in part, the question of Lake level and the outlet
into the Lac Qui Parle River. The results and recommendations
a/e more than one year off. If channel work is recommended,
it may be easier to fund the work. Also, I assume the study
and recommendations would take the interests of DNR into account
Jeff Lewis is aware of this study.
It is unlikely the City will undertake any channel work
other than to clean out sediment until it knows the recommendat)
of the study.
Accordingly, the cnannelim, proposed by DNR may not be
leasible or may not be the best solution. The City would
like any agreement to give it enough time to wait for the
study results or favorable weather.
Further, if the City has another proposal, different
than the compromise proposal for channeling, it wants to be
certain under its agreement with DNR, that failure to install
the channel.as agreed is not an issue in a future hearing.
To summarize, the City wants, first, to be certain DNR
and the City are talkiatf^a^bou t the same wier crest elevation
at the drop structure pp De,~modified and, second, to be certain
if any channeling is d&faj/V'tftis agreement does not interfere
with recommendations of study now underway.
Very truly yours,
Thomas W. Reeves.
Thank you.
112
-------
THOMAS W. REEVES
ATTORNEY AT LAW
BOX 6
HENDRICKS MINNESOTA 56 I 30
TELEPHONE 507-275 3I05
November 14, 1990
A.W. Clapp III
Special Assistant Attorney General
102 State Capitol
St. Paul, MN 55155
Mr. Jeffrey R. Lewis
Area Hydrologist
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 111
1400 East Lyon
Marshall, MN 56258
Re: In the Matter of the Application of the City of
Hendricks, Lincoln County, to excavate one mile
of the Lac Qui Parle River
Dear Sirs:
Please be advised the City of Hendricks has accepted
DNR's proposal in Jeffrey Lewis's letter of October 11, 1990.
This is with the express understanding the two questions raised
in my letter of October 27, 1990, were satisfactorily resolved.
First, the City is permitted to cut the structure at
station 73 + 50 to elevation 1750.8' and 16' wide.
Second, if the City does not complete the channeling
as recommended by DNR, this will not be an issue in any future
permit application of the City.
According to Mr. Lewis,an amended permit incorporating
tne compromise settlement will be issued to the City. Please
send a copy for the City's review at the earliest time.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Very truly yours
Thomas W. Reeves.
City Attorney
City of Hendricks, MN
113
-------
D^c^tisoir^
STATE OF
SI
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
PO BOX 756 - HIGHWAY 15 SOUTH, MEW ULM, MN 56073
NO.
FILE NO.
(507) 359-6050
November 30, 1990
/
Mr. Harvey Buchholz, Mayor
City of Hendricks
409 south Brook
Hendricks, MN 56136
Dear Mr. Buchholz:
SUBJECT: LIMITED PERMIT, 89-4028, LAC QUI PARLE RIVER
Attached please find Limited Permit 89-4028. This permit authorizes the City of
Hendricks to remove accumulated silt along approximately 7200 feet of the existing
alignment of the Lac Qui Parle River. This permit will replace the Order of the
Commissioner issued November 3, 1989, and resolve the demand for hearing filed by
the City of Hendricks. The permit authorizes the City to widen the existing lowest
notch on the steel sheetpile structure at SCS Station 73+50. The elevation of this
notch has been discussed and mistakenly reported at different elevations. We
believe the correct elevation of the lowest notch is approximately 1750.90 feet above
mean sea level. The intent of the permit is to allow the widening at its existing
lowest elevation to a width of 16 feet as agreed to by all parties involved.
The drop structure at SCS Station 73+50 is a part of Lincoln CD 55. We would
recommend that you contact Dan Girard, Lincoln County Ditch Inspector, or one of
the Lincoln County Commissioners to discuss the alteration to this drop structure
prior to any work being done. The intent of the permit is also to remove accumulated
material along the Lac Qui Parle River. The actual depth of cuts along the
watercourse will vary. The finished channel shall parallel a line from the drop
structure at Station 73+50 to the downstream sill of the dam at Lake Hendricks. The
channel can be slightly undercut to allow for the settling of materials without
blocking the channel. We would recommend that the channel be cut no more than one
foot below the grade line established from the drop structure upstream to the sill.
All material excavated from the channel must be hauled off site and deposited on
upland areas. The placement of excavated material along the channel would only lead
to accelerated filling in of the channel during high water periods.
The permit has an expiration date of September 1, 1995. Prior to the excavation
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
114
-------
INNESOTA
NATURAL RESOURCE!
LIMITED
PROTECTED WATERS
PERMIT
PA Number
JJ-04
J/90) PROTECTED WATERS 89_4028
^Pf\RTMENT
DIVISION OF |nf ATERS
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 105, and on the basis of statements and information contained in the permit
application, letters, maps, and plans submitted by the applicant and others supporting data, all of which are made a part hereof
by reference, PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED to the applicant named below to change the course, current or cross
section of the following.
Protected Water
Lac Qua Parle River
County
Lincoln (41)
Name ol Applicant
Citv of Hendricks c/o Harvey Buchholz. Mayor
Telephone Number (include Area Code)
(507) 275-3521
Address (No & Street. RFD. Box No.. City. State. Zip Code)
4 09 South Brook, Hendricks, MN 56136
Authored 10 clean ^prodrtHtely 7200 feet cf the existing nl i
-------
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
LIMITED PERMIT 89-4028
1 EXCAVATED MATERIAL: No material excavated from the channel shall be
deposited in wetland areas. All material shall be deposited on upland
areas approved by the Department of Natural Resources.
2. EROSION CONTROL: The permittee shall cover or protect all exposed soil
resulting from the construction authorized by placing riprap, 6od, and/or
Reed on banks and slopes of said construction for the prevention of soil
erosion sedimentation and lake/stream discoloration.
3 MAINTENANCE: The permittee is authorized to maintain the approved work
to the dimensions herein described. Prior to commencing any maintenance
i-ork, permittee 6hall advise the Department of Natural Resources of the
extent and method of maintenance. Maintenance work ahall not kfi. commenced
ur.tl 1 permittee'b receipt q£ Hlfi. Department'r approval.
4. RIGHT TO REVIEW: The Division of Waters reserves the right to review
thi6 permit as additional hydrologic data become available and to issue any
further order as may become necessary to protect public interest.
5. SPOIL-. Excavated materials Bhall not be deposited or stored alongside
the protected water in a manner where the materials can be redeposited into
the protected water by reasonably expected high water or storm runoff.
II--<1°
Date
116
-------
This document was prepared by the South Dakota State Department of Environment
and Natural Resources. Thirty-five copies of this document were printed at a
cost of $3.68 each for a total of $128.87.
------- |