Lake Pocotopaug Lake and Watershed Restoration Evaluation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Lake Pocotopaug Restoration Evaluation 24May 2002
Table 9. ENSR and VLSG Tributary and Storm Drain Sampling Station Identifier,Description and Drainage Areas.VLSGStationIDENSRStationIDLocationTotalArea (ac)Area Drained *% DevelopedDeveloped Area (ac)4 LP-3 Christopher Brook, upstream of Christopher Road 466 36 1699 LP-4 Storm drain at bottom of Clark Hill 18 100 1811 LP-5 Hales Brook, at Lake Drive - upstream of Hales Pond 889 12 10715 LP-6 Candlewood Brook, upstream of Lake Drive 41 39 1618 LP-7 Bay Road Brook, downstream of Bay Road 156 3 421 LP-8 Hazen Brook, end of private drive 20 24 5LP-9 Storm drains at lake edge, between cottages at end ofHawthorne and Emerson Road23 LP-10 O'Neils Brook, upstream of Old Marlboro Road 53 44 2326 LP-11 Day's Brook, downstream of Old Marlboro Road 55 15 822 LP-12 Storm drain at bottom of MohicanWangonk Trail (north side of 12 100 12beach)LP-13 Storm drainage swale, end of Park Street (next to house #5 5* 100 5with ornamental pond)LP-14 Storm drain at S. Wangonk Trail beach 3** 100 3* Location #28 on WMC (1995)** Location #25 on WMC (1995); no drainage area listed, assumed 3 acres4.4 Nutrient LoadingNutrient loading on Lake Pocotopaug was assessed by two methods: using the actual data(water budget and nutrient concentrations) from this study and using a land-use based exportcoefficients. This combination yields a range of apparent loads and allows for a reasonableapproximation of actual conditions over the longer term. Direct measurement of inputs wasapplied wherever feasible, within the confines of logistic and budgetary constraints. Actualsample results were used in direct calculations. Literature values were used when actualmeasurements were not gathered (i.e. waterfowl, groundwater and precipitation). Internalloading was estimated based on a predicted success of the alum treatment. Measurement ofinternal loading was complicated by the fact that the alum treatment occurred in the same yearas this study.4.5 Biological CharacterizationWater samples for biological characterization of planktonic (open-water) biological communitieswere collected at the same time and stations as for in-lake water quality samples (Figure 6).Planktonic communities include photosynthetic organisms (algae, or phytoplankton) and theinvertebrates that feed directly on them (collectively called zooplankton). Both types oforganisms influence and reflect other in-lake characteristics such as water quality and fishcommunity features.Lake Pocotopaug Restoration Evaluation 25May 2002
Page 2 and 3: LAKE POCOTOPAUGLAKE AND WATERSHEDRE
Page 4 and 5: 11.3 Prevent algal blooms from occu
Page 6 and 7: LAYPERSON’S SYNOPSISLake Pocotopa
Page 8 and 9: The stocking of walleye in Lake Poc
Page 10 and 11: Lake Pocotopaug Restoration Evaluat
Page 12 and 13: Period Covered 1988• Pollution fr
Page 14 and 15: Recommendations included• Algacid
Page 16 and 17: Major EventDecember 1999 - Fish kil
Page 18 and 19: Table 5. Land Use from the CT DEP G
Page 20 and 21: Lake Pocotopaug Restoration Evaluat
Page 22 and 23: Figure 4. Lake Pocotopaug Bathymetr
Page 24 and 25: Table 6. QA/QC on Water Quality Dat
Page 26 and 27: Soils - USDA at MAGIC UCONN Geograp
Page 28 and 29: Table 8. Water Quality Variables Me
Page 32 and 33: Phytoplankton samples were collecte
Page 34 and 35: where many measurements would have
Page 36 and 37: Figure 7. 2001 Temperature and Diss
Page 38 and 39: Table 10 continued. 2001 Lake Pocot
Page 40 and 41: phytoplankton biomass (Wetzel 1983)
Page 42 and 43: Figure 9. Annual June, July and Aug
Page 44 and 45: elow 7:1 occurred on September 22,
Page 46 and 47: Table 12. 2001 Dry and Wet Weather
Page 48 and 49: Table 12 continued. 2001 Dry and We
Page 56 and 57: were identified to genus and enumer
Page 58 and 59: Table 13 continued. 2001 Phytoplank
Page 68 and 69: Figure 10. 2001 Phytoplankton Bioma
Page 70 and 71: The late summer bloom of blue-green
Page 72 and 73: Table 15. 2001 Zooplankton DensityZ
Page 74 and 75: Table 16. 2001 Zooplankton BiomassZ
Page 76 and 77: 7.0 RELATIONSHIPS AND TRENDS7.1 Pre
Page 78 and 79: Figure 13. 1991-2001 Surface Water
Page 80 and 81:
Figure 15. 2001 Surface and Mid-dep
Page 82 and 83:
Figure 16. 1991-2001 Chlorophyll a
Page 84 and 85:
Figure 18. 2001 Chlorophyll a vs. S
Page 86 and 87:
Figure 20. 1991-2001 July and Augus
Page 88 and 89:
Table 17. Empirical Model Calculati
Page 90 and 91:
Table 18. Total Phosphorus Loading
Page 92 and 93:
Table 19. Wet Weather Loading Summa
Page 94 and 95:
With the best possible treatment of
Page 96 and 97:
water quality should focus on input
Page 98 and 99:
10.0 MANAGEMENT NEEDS AND OBJECTIVE
Page 100 and 101:
11.2 Reducing Total Phosphorus and
Page 102 and 103:
undeveloped forest land, an opportu
Page 104 and 105:
Figure 22. Buffer Strips for Pollut
Page 106 and 107:
Figure 23. Catch Basin with Sump an
Page 108 and 109:
early spring to capture what appear
Page 110 and 111:
Figure 26. Infiltration Systems.Lak
Page 112 and 113:
Figure 27. Constructed Treatment We
Page 114 and 115:
Chemical TreatmentIn-stream chemica
Page 116 and 117:
TABLE 21. MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR CO
Page 118 and 119:
TABLE 21 continued. MANAGEMENT OPTI
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
12.0 ADDITIONAL DATA NEEDSManagemen
Page 132 and 133:
13.0 RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Page 134 and 135:
this point, but as a rough guide, a
Page 136 and 137:
14.0 REFERENCESAd Hoc Lake Advisory
Page 138 and 139:
Scheuler T.R., P.A. Kumble, & M.A.
Page 140 and 141:
Appendix B:Supplemental Tables and
Page 142:
Appendix D:Educational MaterialsLak
show all

Lake Pocotopaug Lake and Watershed Restoration Evaluation ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?