MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS EXPORT (kgs/km’/yr.)

4

foes ff EE

i

MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN EXPORT (kgs/km7/yr.)

8
i

T T T r
Ey 40 50 Ey

% IN AGRICULTURE + % IN URBAN

sd
a
sq
ef

100%

r= 0.46

so
0 . T T T T T T T T +
0 x 4 Py © eo 2 os
% IN AGRICULTURE + % IN URBAN
Figure 26. Scattergram of "contributing" land use types related

to stream exports of total phosphorus and total nitrogen.

53


manufacturing belt from the northwest corner of Pennsylvania through Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois, and southern Wisconsin to southern Minnesota.
Agricultural and urban land uses also predominated in Delaware and
east-central Maryland, parts of the "ridge and valley" portion of

the Appalachians, and patches of the "finger lakes" area of New York.

Low percentages of these land use types were present in much of

New England, northern Pennsylvania, and numerous places throughout

the Appalachians and Southeast.

The map (Figure 6) illustrating the areal distribution of mean
total phosphorus concentrations data uncovered a pattern roughly
similar to that of the land use map, and hence a possible correlation.
Comparison of the two maps (Figures 5 and 6) revealed several groups
of drainage areas with notably lower phosphorus concentrations than
might be expected from land use alone. These areas were in east-
central Maryland, Pennsylvania, and parts of central and eastern Ohio
and New York (particularly the finger lakes area).

The map (Figure 7) of total nitrogen concentrations, like that for
total P, had a pattern similar to the map of land use. Some noteworthy
differences were: (1) particularly high total nitrogen concentrations
in the Midwest and middle Atlantic region, from Maryland and Delaware
through New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut; and (2) very low values
in the mixed farming areas of the central and southwestern Appalachians
and remainder of the Southeast.

Examination of the areal distributions of both total P and total N
export values revealed some similarities in pattern to that of land use,
but far less than the likenesses between nutrient concentrations and
land use. The distribution maps of slope and flow (discharge/unit
area) values (Figure 8) were constructed to study the possible relation-
ships of these factors to the differences in correlation between nutrient
concentration and land use, and nutrient export and land use. Analyses
of these data will follow in other sections of this paper.

19


RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, have been grouped into
five series. These five broad categories were established to
facilitate further development and application of environmental
technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in
related fields. The five series are:

Environmental Health Effects Research
Environmental Protection Technology
Ecological Research

Environmental Monitoring
Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

APWONME

This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
series. This series describes research conducted to develop
new or improved methods and instrumentation for the identifi-
cation and quantification of environmental pollutants at the
lowest conceivably significant concentrations. It also includes
studies to determine the ambient concentrations of pollutants in
the environment and/or the variance cf pollutants as a function
of time or meteorological factors.

This document is available to the public through the Nationa
Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.


29

TABLE 8. GEOLOGIC CLASSIFICATION AND MEAN VALUES FOR STREAM NUTRIENT
CONCENTRATIONS AND EXPORTS FROM 223 SUBDRAINAGE AREAS IN THE
EASTERN UNITED STATES. DATA GROUPED BY OVERALL LAND USE CATEGORY

Number of Concentrations (mg/1) Export (kg/km?/yr)
Geologic Classification Subdrainage
Land Use and Grouping Code(s) Areas T-P O-P TN I-N T-P 0-P TAN I-N
Forest 53
Sedimentary; some or all limestone (10) T9 -011 006 860 287 6.4 3.6 498.7 159.6
Sedimentary; without limestone (20) a) +014 007.766 337 9.0 4.5 467.6 192.2
Sedimentary; all (10 & 20) 30 012 006 825 «306 7.4 3.9 487.3 171.5
Predominantly sedimentary (10, 14, & 20) 31 2012 .006 «818 301 7.3 3.9 482.3 169.1
Igneous; volcanic origin (30) 0 - - - - - - - -
Metamorphic (40) 16 017 007 +520 +103 10.3 4.6 337.4 65.2
Igneous; plutonic origin (50) 0 - - - - - - - -
Igneous and metamorphic (40 & 45) 18 017 .007 533 +119 10.3 4.6 342.1 74.6
Predominantly igneous and metamorphic (40, 41,
42, & 45) 22 016 .007 625 «135 9.7 4.3 380.7 80.7
Mostly Forest 170
Sedimentary; some or all limestone (10) 55 +037 -015 = 1.056 -488 16.3 6.3 472.1 233.2
Sedimentary; without limestone (20) 48 035 014 817 288 18.0 6.9 441.8 161.2
Sedimentary; all (10 & 20) 103 -036 014 945 -395 17.1 6.6 458.0 194.3
Predominantly sedimentary (10, 14, 20, 23, 24, & 25) 118 +036 .014 -930 +374 7.1 6.5 456.5 186.7
Igneous; volcanic origin (30) i) - - - - - - - -
Igneous; volcanic origin (present but not dominant,
23 & 43) 4 +038 018 +975 +328 13.1 6.2 332.2 115.5
Metamorphic (40) 32 035 .014 762 2277 20.7 8.2 452.0 166.0
Igneous; plutonic origin (50) 1 026 .010 +951 +138 7.4 2.8 269.5 39.1
Predominantly igneous; plutonic origin (50, 52, & 54) 6 032 013 1.049 2317 13.6 9.1 476.2 134.6
Igneous and metamorphic (40, 43, 45, 50, & 54) 40 036 -014 798 +269 19.2 8.2 427.7 149.8
Predominantly igneous and metamorphic (40, 41, 42,
43, 45, 50, 52, & 54) 52 +035 014 +827 +284 18.2 8.1 433.1 152.3
Agriculture 91
Sedimentary; some or all limestone (10) 80 +136 059 4.315 3,296 30.5 12.4 996.8 748.3
Sedimentary; without limestone (20) VW +123 055 3.497 2.335 23.6 10.3 865.4 660.1
Sedimentary; all (10 & 20) 91 +135 +058 4,225 3.190 29.7 12.2 982.3 738.6
Abbreviations:
T-P = Total Phosphorus T-N = Total Nitrogen
0-P = Orthophosphorus I-N = Inorganic Nitrogen


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
STORET NO.

CONNECTICUT
ASPINOOK POND
0901C1
O901FL
HANOVER POND
090581

LAKE ZOAR
091081
0910C1
091001
O910F)
O910G1
O910H1

DELAWARE
KILLEN POND
1002A2
100281
SILVER LAKE
100881
WILLIAMS POND
1009C1

€L

GEORGIA
ALLATOONA RES.
1301F1
CHATUGE
130341
130301
CLARK HILL RES
13040)
1304F 1
1304J1
1304K1
JACKSON LAKE
1309A1
SIDNEY LANIER LAKE
1310€1
131001
1310E1

6
FLAG GEOLOGY

wr

w

wrurur

ne

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SU KM)

ToT P= TOT N
MET lTee 16.4
MET 19.6 18.8
SWOL/IG-V 33 3
MET 13-7 13.5
MET 5.9 5.8
MET 3764 36.8
MET 15.2 14.6
MET 2561 24.2
MET 11.4 11.2
SED W/O L 1663 17.2
SEO W/O L 2065 21.6
SED W/O L 2669 26.5
SED W/O L 8562 109.0
MET 1.9 202
MET 17.0 15.2
MET 16.8 15.1
MET 2.1 201
IGNEOUS-P 3243 31.4
MET/16-P 3969 3746
MET 4669 43.6
MET/IG=P 30.2 29.9
MET 204.8 © 222.3
MET 23365 261.9
MET 230.4 258.4

TOT P

2041
202)

2045

2021
2032
2031
018
2044
2634

+261
2126

2047

0083

0024

2028
2038

2025
2026
2029
036

+032
2072

2655
062

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

(MG/L)

ORTHO P TOT N INORG N
2009 1.256 0440
2010 2959 0291
022 1.664 0995
e011 2532 295
2009 2996 2279
2008 2978 0416
2010 1.126 o72l
0079 1.416 6758
2012 1.069 6653
2192 34322 2.523
2057 20743 1.836
2020 7.610 7.406
2030 1-362 +601
2006 2401 2041
2006 0456 136
2006 0458 +130
+017 S32 2164
2010 +951 +138
012 2318 2090
017 1Lels9 ely
2008 ofhl 0232
+030 931 2465,
+020 1.072 +626
+016 1.295 0679

TOT P

27.6
1264

28-5
1564
22.2
20.2
AL.

2968
20-0

1620
69.3

23.5

665

10.7

2065
27.6

enn
hOPw

13.7

62.9
3365
36.0

EXPORT
(KG/SQ KM)
ORTHO P TOT N
661 845.1
5.9 565.5
14.0 1055.7
Bel 390.2
6.3 664.5
Se2 636.2
6.3 710.9
5366 960.4
720 627.8
85.3 147661
3164 150869
10.0 3802.7
23 10861
2.7 178.3
464 334.8
44 33263
5.0 15564
2638 269.5
3.1 21269
4.8 33464
364 304.6
26.2 812.9
12.2 652.9
9.3 752.8

INORG N

29661
171.6

631.3

21664
193.9
270.6
455.2
514.1
383.5

1121.1
1010.0

3700.8

47.0

18.2

9964
94.3

47.9
3901
23.4
53.7

996
406.0

381.3
394.7


Dakota Minnesota Drift

and Lake—bed Flats Lower New England

Middle Western
Upland Plain

Lower Mississippi
Alluvial Plain

Q 400 800Km
ee
o 200 400 Mi

Scale

Figure 2. Physical subdivisions of the eastern United States. Adapted
from U.S. Geological Survey (1970) and Hammond (1964).


25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

U.S. Department of Interior. 1972. A Land Use Classification
System for Use With Remote-sensor Data. Geological Survey
Circular 671.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. National Eutrophication
Survey Methods for Lakes Sampled in 1972. National Eutrophication
Survey Working Paper No. 1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
National Eutrophication Research Program, Corvallis, Oregon.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Relationships Between
Drainage Area Characteristics and Non-point Source Nutrients in
Streams. National Eutrophication Survey Working Paper No. 25.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Eutrophication Research
Program, Corvallis, Oregon.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. National Eutrophication
Survey Methods, 1973-1976. National Eutrophication Survey Working
Paper No. 175. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Eutrophi-
cation Research Program, Corvallis, Oregon.

U.S. Geological Survey. 1970. The National Atlas of the United
States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Uttormark, P. D., J. D. Chapin, and K. M. Green. 1974. Estimating
Nutrient Loadings of Lakes from Non-point Sources. EPA Ecological
Research Series #EPA-660/3-74-020. U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Washington, D.C.

Vollenweider, R. A. 1968. Scientific Fundamentals of the Eutro-
phication of Lakes and Flowing Waters with Particular Reference

to Nitrogen and Phosphorus as Factors in Eutrophication. A Report
to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. Paris.
DAS/CSI/68. 2:1-182.

68


92

MEAN ORTHOPHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS
v:
LAND USE

DATA ON 473 SUBDRAINAGE AREAS IN
NUMBER EASTERN UNITED STATES
‘OF SUBS

53 FOREST
‘other types naglgible
170 MOSTLY FOREST

‘other types present

52 MIXED

11 MOSTLY URBAN

Other types present

96 MOSTLY AGRIC,

‘other types present

[Ses ares

91 AGRICULTURE

‘Other types. prasent

0.03 9.04
MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

MEAN INORGANIC NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS
vs

LAND USE
DATA ON 473 SUBDRAINAGE AREAS IN
NUMBER
qumeee EASTERN UNITED STATES
53 FOREST

‘other types negligible

170 MOSTLY FOREST

‘types present

52 MIXED

11 MOSTLY URBAN F

Other types present

96 MOSTLY AGRIC,

other types present

91 AGRICULTURE

‘Other types present

3.190

2.50 3.00

1.50 2.00
‘MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

Figure 10. Relationships between general land use and orthophosphorus and inorganic
nitrogen concentrations in streams.


SUBORAINAGE AREAS
STORET NOw

PENNSYLVANIA
LAKE WALLENPAUPACK
422901
422901

SOUTH CAROLINA
HARTWELL RES
45058)
450SF1

MARION LAKE
4S06F)
4506J1

MURRAY LAKE
450781
45070)

ROBINSON LAKE
4508C1
450801
4508F 1

KEOWEE LAKE
451361
4SA3FL
451361

SECESSION LAKE
4S14EL

WILLIAM C. BOWEN LAKE
451681
4516C1

L6

TENNESSEE
BARKLEY LAKE
4701FL
4701G1
470141
4TOINI
4701P1
4701R1
4701S)
470171
4701U1

6
FLAG GEOLOGY

rere ae

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

SED W/O L
SEO W/O L

MET
MET

SED W/0 L
SED w/O L

MET/SWOL,
MET/SWOL,

SED W/O L
SED w/O L
SED w/O0 L

MET
MET
MET

MET

MET
MET

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

ToT P

Sel
2504

3064
5205

15-60
17.0

36.7
3266

2665
33-8
2468

4el
967
S02
4402

2505
3602

TOT N

5.5
24.5

3061
51.0

14.4
16.2

38.7
3464

21.8
27.9
20.5

4.0
925
5.0

43.8

25.6
36.0

11.6
11.6
2464
32.0
29.9

9.6
5.2
11.7

ToT Pe

2020
2023

2030
2028

2064
2084

2037
2063

2007
2014
018

2024
2025
019

023

2020
020

0017
2064
2016
2032
2059
«023
2024
021
2010

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

(MG/L)
ORTHO P TOT N
2008 1.117
2009 1.081
2008 2933
2009 852
023 1.432
029 1.137
018 0133
0024 264)
2005 0537
006 2481
2006 +688
2007 0275
2008 312
006 628
2012 1.104
2007 2935
2007 0736
010 782
012 1.084
2008 +837
2013 +650
2023 2725
2013 610
2014 2598
0014 0426
2018 1.225

INORG N

+184
521

2290
2425

1.051
3344

2388
200

2181
2101
0369

0058
0069
2098

2459

2220
0371

0433
0422
3464
+228
+285
2208
291
2168
0576

TOT P

1066
11.9

13.1
14.7

17.6
28.6

1604
27.0

204
408
508

18.5
18.8
14.8

8.6

7.9
29.3

13.9
26.1
1062
10.5

4.3

EXPORT
(KG/SQ KM)
ORTHO P

402
406

365
47

603
909

8.0
10.3

1.7
200
169

Seu
660
4eT

TOT N

590.7
55762

40765
S011

392.8
38762

32401
27467

181.4
163.7
22268

211.7
234.9
488.4

412.6

1896
25340

362.2
49664
37561
282.6
32061
269.6
26202
188.3
532.3

INORG N

200.6
193.3
208.0
9961
125.8
91.9
127.6
74.3
250.6


FREQUENCY (in % per interval)

Forest (N=53)..
Mostly forest (N=170)
Mixed (N= 52)
Mostly agriculture (W:
Agriculture (N=®1
Mostly urban (N:

Cee peepee Yor,

7 3 bs 0
MEAN ORTHOPHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/l)

Forest (N=52)
Mostly forest (N=170)
Mixed (N=52)

Mostly agriculture
Agriculture (N=
Mostly urban (N=11),

° 3 10 ts 2008 Ea a a eo es TO tT Jao

MEAN INORGANIC NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/!)

Figure 14. Frequency polygons of mean orthophosphorus and mean
inorganic nitrogen concentrations in streams by overall
land use category.

33


Illinois, south-western Michigan, north-central Indiana and west-central
Ohio. Data on the central and eastern Illinois part of the latter region
show nitrogen concentrations in streams in that area to average much
higher than would be predicted from the model. Data on Figure 29 also
suggest that throughout most of the Appalachian highlands, and adjacent
parts of the Piedmont, southern Illinois, southern Indiana and southern
Ohio, nitrogen concentrations in streams can be expected to be near or
below what one would predict from the model. Another area of lower
nitrogen concentrations consists of the extreme northeastern New England
states of Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine.

Although the models presented illustrate a significant increase in
the predictability of nutrient concentrations in streams through the
use of land use parameters, rather than simply using mean values of
data points regardless of land use parameters, the models only indicate
correlations found between existing land use patterns and nutrient
concentrations in streams. It does not necessarily follow that the
models can be used to predict changes in concentrations with associated
changes in land use. However, gross predictions of this nature may be
aided by analysis of the raw data (Appendix A) together with some of the
individual relationships and regional patterns which have been illustrated

Nutrient Runoff--Soils Relationships

The preliminary analysis of the relationships between soils and
nutrient concentrations in streams, discussed in Working Paper No. 25,
indicated significant correlations between pH characteristics in soils
and nutrient concentrations in streams. Generally, concentrations were
found to be considerably higher in streams draining areas with soil
orders characteristically high in bases, than in streams draining areas
with mostly acid-type soils. Efforts were therefore made to include
consideration of surface soil pH in the analysis of results in this
follow up study. It was found that even a good approximation of mean

58


62

NUMBER
‘OF SUBS

MEAN ORTHOPHOSPHORUS EXPORT
LAND USE

DATA ON 473 SUBDRAINAGE AREAS IN
EASTERN UNITED STATES

FOREST

‘other types negligible

170 MOSTLY FOREST
‘thar types preset
52 MIXED
11 MOSTLY URBAN
ther types present
96 MOSTLY AGRIC,
ther types present
91 AGRICULTURE
other types. present
o s 10 15
KILOGRAMS PER SQUARE KILOMETER PER YEAR
MEAN INORGANIC NITROGEN EXPORT
vs
LAND USE
numoen DATA ON 473 SUBDRAINAGE AREAS IN
swore EASTERN UNITED STATES
53. FOREST
ther tyes niglibe
170 MOSTLY FoREST FEvoe gee
ther types present
52 MIXED
ML MOSTLY URBAN
ther types present
96 MOSTLY AGRIC.
‘other types present
91 AGRICULTURE

738.6
‘other types present

800

400 600
KILOGRAMS PER SQUARE KILOMETER PER YEAR

Figure 12. Relationships between general land use and stream exports of

orthophosphorus and inorganic nitrogen.


These data indicate a strong effect of the sedimentary geology
classification on phosphorus loads in streams. Generally their mean
values for sedimentary watersheds were between 2 1/4 and 2 1/2 times
greater than those from igneous watersheds. It should be noted that
the igneous watersheds shown in Tables 6 and 7 are of plutonic origin.
Additional data from the literature led Dillon and Kirchner to conclude
that one would expect phosphorus loads in streams draining igneous
watersheds of volcanic origin to be 15 times greater than in streams
draining igneous watersheds of plutonic origin.

Table 8 was prepared to illustrate the possible effects of geology
on nutrient concentrations and loads in streams with respect to data
collected by the NES on 473 non-point source-type drainage areas in
the eastern United States. The drainage areas were identified accord-
ing to the geological classification outlined earlier in this paper.
The numbers shown after the classification provide a coding scheme for
handling combinations. The data were grouped by overall land use
category to hold land use as constant as possible. Data were not
presented for drainage areas in mixed, mostly urban, and mostly agri-
culture categories because of the greater variability of land use
within these categories.

Generally, data in Table 8 indicate that given this classification
scheme and the NES data, there is no apparent significant effect of
geology on either phosphorus or nitrogen loads in streams. The same
appears true for phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations. Although
there was a paucity of purely igneous watersheds, there were many
where igneous rocks were present, or even represented the predominant
types enough it was felt, to see an effect of this classification if
existent. By looking at the "mostly forested" data set, which contains
the largest number of predominantly igneous-plutonic watersheds, one
can see little difference in mean total phosphorus concentration or
export values between sedimentary watersheds and igneous-plutonic
watersheds. Interestingly, although the mean total phosphorus export

61


86

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBORAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NO. (SQ KM) FOR cl AG URB WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH (%) (CM) = (CMS/SQ_ KM)
TENNESSEE
BOONE RESERVOIR
470481 30 33.54 18.2 To4 7207 164 o 3 Ms. AGRIC U0s-le 4.5 1565 112 0112
4704C) 30 7.49 18.5 348 68.6 BoB o 3 Me AGRIC uos-12 4.5 10.2 ile 0112
470463 30 8.60 18.5 604 7367 164 1) 0 Me AGRIC u0s-12 4.5 1563 12 Olle
4TOGHE 30 5e70 17.7 11.68 63.0 7S 0 0 Me AGRIC v0s-12 405 1464 hie -Oll2
4704S) 30 42.14 56.4 604 36.3 oS 0 34 Me FOR. u0s-12 405 3409 ile 0158
4T04KE 30 17.90 79.9 1.2 18.9 0 0 0 Me FOR. U0s-12 465 4502 112 20158
47041 30 31.00 78.8 364 17.8 Oo 0 0 Me FOR. uos-12 45 4107 112 +0158
CHEROKEE LAKE
470781 30 49,91 49.4 1067 38.8 lel 0 0 MIXED 108-06 5.0 29-2 114 +0134
470701 30 13.13 65.7 12.8 21.5 0 0 ) Me. FOR. 05-13 465 4206 122 +0130
CHICKAMAUGA LAKE
470801 30 72.21 49.9 3-3 46.7 0 0 ol MIXED uo6-11 4S 1262 142 +0166
4STOBEL 30 35.04 51.5 Bel 4564 Oo 0 0 Ms FOR. U06-11 405 1204 142 +0171
4708K) 30 41.70 43.8 4.4 Slee 0 0 26 Me AGRIC U0S-13 4.5 1364 132 +0176
4708M1 30 57.16 61.3 322 33.8 1.7 0 0 My, FOR. U06-11 4.5 15.0 132 20177
4708R1 30 44.96 55.4 52S 38.7 2 0 22 Me FOR. 108-06 5.0 1662 lee +0234
DOUGLAS LAKE
471181 30 78.50 30.0 260 6466 3 0 3e1 Me. AGRIC U06-11 4o5 1664 ile 20097
471101 30 44.50 50.8 409 43.6 22 ol 4 Me FOR. 109-01 7.0 30.0 112 20184
471IKL 30 3.94 25.6 oS 6667 6.7 0 ce) M. AGRIC U06-11 4.5 1561 112 20100
FT. LOUDOUN LAKE
4712C1 30 48.90 15.1 1162 16.3 5720 0 4 M. URBAN 108-06 5.0 10.3 137 +0166
4712E1 30 42.71 1668 20.4 6.5 S63 0 0 Me URBAN 108-06 5.0 10-2 142 +0166
47121 30 24.97 11.3 3362 0 S53 0 2 Me. URBAN 108-06 5.0 10.3 142 +0166
471241 30 29.14 35.4 4.0 58.5 108 0 3 Me AGRIC U0S-13 465 1203 127 0211
47125) 30 26444 30.7 5-8 61.2 1.9 Oo oF M. AGRIC V0S-13 4.5 909 127 00157
4712b1 30 49011 S71 Se2 35.0 204 0 3 Me FOR. U0S-13 4.5 18.0 122 0214
4712PL 30 7654 2942 1308 0 5604 0 06 Me URBAN U05-13 465 1361 132 +0166
471201 30 6663 27.2 1165 0 60.2 oO) lel Me. URBAN U05-13 4.5 13.8 132 +0166
NICKAJACK RESERVOIR
4717E1 30 59.03 92.) oe) 4.7 0 0 2.7 FOREST 108-06 5.0 1946 132 0252
47171 30 10.49 99.8 02 0 0 0 iy FOREST 108-06 520 2504 127 20257
47TLINI 30 4.69 99.8 22 0 0 0 oO FOREST 108-06 5.0 23.7 124 +0253
4717P1 30 3.39 10.0 o 0 0 0 0 FOREST 108-06 S20 2865 124 +0253
47171 30 3.89 99.2 oT 0 O 1) ol FOREST 108-06 S00 24.3 124 0252
4T17R1 30 2638 99.9 ol oO O 0 0 FOREST 108-06 5.0 25.8 124 027)
471771 30 42.37 9762 1.0 oD 0 0 oD FOREST 108-06 500 1963 124 0315


NUMBER OVERALL LAND
OF SUBS USE CATEGORY

18 FOREST
44 MOSTLY FOREST
14 MIXED

2. MOSTLY URBAN
25 MOSTLY AGRIC
5 AGRICULTURE
° FOREST

4 MOSTLY FOREST
12 MIXED

1 MOSTLY URBAN
26 MOSTLY AGRIC
80 AGRICULTURE
34 FOREST
64 MOSTLY FOREST
3 MIXED

5 MOSTLY URBAN
27° MOSTLY AGRIC
4 AGRICULTURE
FOREST
S7 MOSTLY FOREST
ik} MIXED.

3 MOSTLY URBAN,
i} MOSTLY AGRIC
2 AGRICULTURE
Figure 20.

MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS EXPORT (Kg/km2}
vs
LAND USE
BY LAND RESOURCE REGION

A 2 North ond Northeastern Forest
cond Forage Region
10 20 30 40 50
Yy| Corn Belt and Dairy Region
Z, ZA
10 20 30 40 so
Eost ond Central General Forming
ond Forest Region
Is }
10 20 30 40 50

Piedmont and Coastal Plein Mixed
Farming ond Forest Region

Regional relationships between general land use and
stream export of total phosphorus.

39


SUBORAINAGE AREAS
STORET NOw

MAINE
MATTAWAMKEAG LAKE
230881
2308C3
MOOSEHEAD LAKE
2309K)
RANGELEY LAKE

231081
SEBASTICOOK LAKE
2312F1

MARYLAND
DEEP CREEK LAKE
240281
2402C)
240201
2402E1
LIBERTY RESERVOIR
240381
2403C1
o 240301
= 240381
LOCH RAVEN RESERVOIR
240881
2408C1
240801
2408E1
2408F1
240861
2408H)
2408J1

MICHIGAN

LAKE CHARLEVOIX
261781
26170)
261761

MACATAWA LAKE
2648A3
264881

6
FLAG GEOLOGY

rer

WOH UUme

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

SED/MET
SED/MET

MET
SEO/MET
SED

SED
SED
SEO
SED

MET
MET
MET
MET

MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET

sed
SED
SED

SED w/0 L
SED w/0 L

1.5
21.5

3604

1920

02
S502

S23
54.6
64.0
54.8

1861
3668
2607
1064
2565
3662

0

2568
33.6
Bel

6666
4500

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

ToT P TOT N

165
22.9

38.8

19.1

6601
7066
55.5

51.2
53.5
62.7
S306

17.9
36.5
2665
1063
2563
3509

2567
3365
8.5

6463
43.3

ToT e

2010
0012

2008
2010
017

012
2014
031
2048

0026
2017
2020
0024

0016
0040
018
019
2092
0062
2027
020

009
012
0014

2167
2076

(MG/L)
ORTHO P TOT N
005 803
2005 2624
2006 0325
2005 2590
006 2966
2006 0559
2007 764
0009 16414
018 1.984
009 2.55)
007 26463
008 2076S
2008 2.908
2010 20115
2020 20214
0013 26349
011 14424
2044 32175
0012 26385
017 20342
2015 1.981
2005. 1.947
006 1-436
006 1.199
0082 46845,
0029 2.534

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS.
INORG N

0267
0173

0112
0172
227

0314
+300
1.036
1.588

2.235
20193
24406
2.609

1.700
1.927
1.742
1.106
2.630
2.190
2.022
1.662

1.266
372
722

2.808
1.295

TOT P

S53
664

5.0
5.6

10-6

Se8
1004
1205
4302

905
508
708
B26

Got
1364
TS
365
4702
32.9
905
500

Sel
44
11-6

4406
2004

EXPORT

(KG/SQ_ KM)

ORTHO P TOT N
2.7 426.0
206 330.2
3.7 201.1
208 33164
367 59969
2.9 269.0
Se2 S656
3.6 570.9
16.2 178462
3.3 92861
204 841.2
3.1 1079.7
2.09 104661
3.8 799.8
667 T41el
564 975.6
2.0 25966
22.6 1627.9
664 1264.5
660 82561
368 495.6
209 112.3
202 531.7
5.0 99361
13.9 1294.8
7.8 680.0

INORG N

141.7
91.6

69.3
96.6

141.0

1521.1
222.1
418.3
1428.1

813.1
749.0
939.5
938.6

642.8
645.0
723.5
201.6
1348.5
116161
712.4
415.8

723.2
137.7
593.0

750.4
347.5


4. Relationships between nutrient levels in streams and "contribu-
ting" land use types (percent of drainage area in agricultural Jand
plus the percent in urban land use [% agriculture plus % urban]) were
found to be more significant than those considering only one land use
type. Separate regression analyses of % agriculture plus % urban
against both the total and inorganic forms of phosphorus and nitrogen
concentrations were performed. Equations from these analyses offer a
limited predictive capability. More complicated equations taking into
consideration regional characteristics and/or drainage area character-
istics other than land use, afforded only slightly better predictive
capabilities over the simple equations.

5. Because of the effects of various aspects on the "Flow" portion
of the export computation, the most accurate method of predicting export
values or stream loads appears to be by using the appropriate model for
stream nutrient concentrations and then multiplying by flow.

-6. Qualitative refinement of the simple prediction models for
total phosphorus and total nitrogen concentrations: are provided in
maps of each model's residuals. These maps indicate where, in the
eastern United States, nutrient concentrations can be expected to
be greater, equa] to, or Jess than those predicted by the models.

7. Surface soil pH appeared to have a significant effect on
nutrient concentrations in-streams, but because of the time and: expense
involved in procuring accurate surface soil pH data, no further analyses
were accomplished.

8. Using a geological classification scheme based on origin and
the National Eutrophication Survey nutrient runoff data, no clearly
significant relationships were found between geology and phosphorus
or nitrogen in streams. It is hypothesized that use of a rock-type
classification system based on mineral composition, instead of origin,
would reveal significant differences.


ABSTRACT

National Eutrophication Survey (NES) data for 473 non-point type
drainage areas in the eastern United States were studied for relation-
ships between drainage area characteristics (particularly land use)
and nutrient levels in streams. Both the total and inorganic forms of
Phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations and loads in streams were
considered.

The objectives were to: (1) investigate these relationships, as
they were evidenced by the NES data and; (2) develop a means for esti-
mating stream nutrient levels from knowledge of "macro" drainage area
characteristics.

Mean nutrient levels were considerably higher in streams draining
agricultural watersheds than in streams draining forested watersheds.
The levels were generally proportional to the percentages of land in
agriculture, or the combined percentages of agricultural and urban
land use. Variations in nutrient loads (exports) in streams, associated
with differences in land use categories, were not as pronounced as the
variations in nutrient concentrations. This was apparently due, in
large part, to differences in areal stream flow from different land
use types.

Regression analyses of the combined percentages of agricultural and
urban land uses against both the total and inorganic forms of phosphorus
and nitrogen were performed. Equations for these analyses, together
with maps illustrating the equations' residuals, offer a limited predictive
capability and some accountability for regional characteristics.


Ws

WG OD ag)

ELE fe
YY C7, (a

Zi,

Forest Region

7 Piedmont oe sere | Plein ixed Farm ing



7.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

Miner, J. R., ed. 1971. Farm Animal-waste Management. North
Central Regional Publication 206. Iowa Agriculture Experiment
Station Special Report 67. Ames: Iowa State University of
Science and Technology.

Miner, J. R. 1975. Personal communication: Swine and Cattle
Production Characteristics. Agricultural Engineering Department,
School of Agriculture, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

Miner, J. R. and T. L. Willrich. 1970. Livestock Operations and
Field-spread Manure as Sources of Pollutants. In: Agricultural
Practices and Water Quality. Ames: Iowa State University Press.

Rankama, K. and Th. G. Sahama. 1950. Geochemistry. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press. 911 pp.

Robbins, J. W. D., D. H. Howells, and G. J. Kriz. 1971. Role of
Animal Wastes in Agricultural Land Runoff. Environmental Protection
Agency Report No. 13020 DGX 08/71. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office.

Smith, G. D. 1975. Surface Soil pH Ranges Estimates for National
Atlas Soils Map Map Units. Unpublished. Soil Conservation Service,
Hyattsville, Maryland.

Taylor, E. M. 1975. Personal communication: Phosphorus in Rocks.
Department of Geology, School of Science, Oregon State University,
Corvallis, Oregon.

Thomas, G. W. and J. D. Crutchfield. 1974. Nitrate-nitrogen and
Phosphorus Contents of Streams Draining Smal] Agricultural
Watersheds in Kentucky. Journal of Environmental Quality 3(1):
46-49.

67


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINALE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3. 4 SLOPE PRECIP — FLOW
STORET NO. (SQ.KM) FOR CL AG -URB- ss WET «OTHER «CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH = (i) (CM) (CMS/SQ_ KM)
ILLINOIS
SHELBYVILLE RESERVOIR
173981 20 28.21 3.7 +4 95.9 0 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 6.0 lel 97 +0061
4739C1 20 40.64 3.0 1.0 96.0 0 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 640 9 97 +0062
173961 20 144.39 149 28 9742 0 ol 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 640 7 97 +0064
1739H1 20 119430 4.6 = 162 9363 a) 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 640 lel 99 +0063
SPRINGFIELD LAKE
174281 20 60.74 lel 34 9864 0 0 «1 AGRIC M06-06 «6.0 lel vl +0063
VERMILION RESERVOIR
174803 20 98.52 +2 02 9766 eT add «2 AGRIC M06-06 6.0 142 94 +0063
174881 20 13.49 3.3 +2 96.5 0 0 0 AGRIC A07-17 643146 97 +0061
1748C1 20 24.29 22 +2 99.6 0 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 6.0 © 166 94 +0061
1748E1 20 29.73 al +3 99.6 0 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 6.0 142 94 +0062
1748F1 20 43.90 ol 0 99.9 0 0 0 AGRIC AOT-17 64314 97 +0059
174861 20 35641 164 +7 9762 0 7 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 6.0 1.6 94 +0061
SANGCHRIS LAKE
175381 20 36.23 2.8 +2 97.0 0 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 6.0 +8 91 +0061
~ 1753C1 20 12.61 0 0 100.0 0 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 6.0 22 91 +0060
a 175301 20 17.38 «1 1.0 98.9 0 0 0 AGRIC M06-06 640 4 91 +0061
1753E1 20 32.17 1.8 +5 9766 0 0 «1 AGRIC M06-06 6.0 “5 91 +0061
HOLIDAY LAKE
175402 20 138.15 3.9 164 9369 +8 t) 0 AGRIC 06-06 6.00 164 86 +0061
RACCOON LAKE
176202 20 90.86 22.0 240 752 22 ol +5 AGRIC A01-03 643 340 104 +0063
LAKE VANDALIA
176482 20 11.47 2.6 0 97.4 ) 0 0 AGRIC A01-03 663 9 97 +0060
176481 20 10.54 6.5 0 93.5 0 0 0 AGRIC AOI-03 663-168 97 +0060
1764C) 20 4.53 562 0 94.8 0 0 0 AGRIC AQI-03 663162 97 +0059
176401 20 3616 0 0 100.0 0 0 0 AGRIC A01-03 643 164 97 +0059
INDIANA
CATARACT LAKE
18050) 20 3055 54.8 Gel Glel 0 0 0 Me FORe A06-06 6.0 10.0 107 +0093
1805E1 20 6.42 39.0 962 Shel 0 0 +7 MIXED A06-06 6.0 7.1 107 +0093
1805E2 20 15.67 44.3 6461 47.9 o lel +6 MIXED A06-06 6.0 1643 107 +0093
GEIST RESERVOIR
181101 20 23.88 6.6 lel lel 0 0 162 AGRIC A07-04 6.3 3.0 91 +0094
MISSISSINEWA RESERVOIR
1827C1 20 7.59 4.9 0 93.7 7) 5 0 AGRIC A07-04 663 146 94 +0093
182701 20 25.62 15.5 +3 83.6 22 “4 0 AGRIC A07-04 6.3 3.4 94 20093
1827F 1 20 18.36 1.9 0 98.1 0 0 0 AGRIC A07T=04 663 145 94 +0094


EPA-600/3-76-014
January 1976 Ecological Research Series



SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUKDRAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3. 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW 5
STORET NO« (SQ.KM) FOR CL AG ~=—s-URB- WET «OTHER «CATEGORY = MAP -UNIT PH (%) (CM) (CHS/S@_KM
VIRGINIA
CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
S11281 40 4.77 86.0 6.7 7.3 0 0 0 FOR, U06-05 4.5 8.2 112 +0109
511201 40 17653 81.9 262 15.8 1 0 0 FOR.  U06-05 465 667 112 0110
511201 40 14.66 65.6 768 26.3 a Q 3 FOR, U06-05 4.5 963 12 0113
WEST VIRGINIA
BLUESTONE RESERVOIR
5401€} 30 45.95 66.2 1.9 31.9 ) 0 0 Me FOR, = 05-12, 4652949 97 +0158
5401F 1 30 31683 61.1 362 35.7 0 0 0 Me FOR. V05-12 4.5 2861 97 20153
LAKE LYNN
5402C1 30 6.03 72.0 lel 2364 364 0 el My FOR. 108-04 5.5 15.8 112 +0240
TYGART RESERVOIR
5404C1 30 1.50 52.2 0 47.0 0 0 +8 Me FOR. 108-04 5.5 19.4 117 +0237
540401 30 9004 26.9 269 62.3 748 0 +l Ms AGRIC 108-04 5.5 1366 117 20223
S404H) 30 23623 48.4 5.8 38.9 0 1.9 5.0 9 MIXED 108-04 5.5 23.1 117 20221
WISCONSIN
BUTTERNUT LAKE
Ss 550903 10 57073 46.7 764 8.0 0 37.2 67 MIXED $04-04 4.4 3.5 84 +0120
8 550981 10 20.54 35.3 1042 22.7 0 31.8 0 MIXED S04-04 4.5 4.0 84 +0118
EAU CLAIRE LAKE
SS1SC1 42 T6e12 59.1 665 3201 0 2.3 0 Me FOR. A0T-12 643-340 79 +0077
KEGONSA LAKE
5520C1 20 15.05 6.3 762 80.3 0 6.0 +2 AGRIC AQ?~11 663 465, al +0039
552001 20 6.55 8.5 263 88.7 0 0 +5 AGRIC AQ7-11 663 Se7 81 +0039
SHAWANO LAKE
5539C1 20 38.85 9.4 28 7265 62 14.0 Bel Me AGRIC = S04-04 445 2 7 +0072
TAINTER LAKE
554681 20 45.92 36.3 2.8 49.5 0 10.9 +S MIXED A07-02 6.3 8.8 14 +0054
WAPOGASSET LAKE
5550C1 10 8.9) 1665 640 55.0 0 22.5 0 Me AGRIC AOT-120 643347 7 +0056
WAUSAU LAKE
5551C3 10 34.19 2065 4.6 7204 21 0 «4 Me AGRIC AOT=12 643 206 8) +0082
LAKE WINNEBAGO
555481 20 44.34 7.5 266 8367 500 1e2 0 AGRIC AO7-10 663 47 76 +0039
5554C1 20 51.02 5.4 364 82.9 661 Lol del AGRIC AQT-10 663 344 16 +0040
WISCONSIN LAKE
555502 10 25.72 967 +9 8864 140 0 0 AGRIC E12-02 6.5 Sel 76 +0076
5555E2 21 87.31 15.0 164 78.4 167 3.5 0 AGRIC AD7-11 643-768 76 +0076


DISCLAIMER

This report has been reviewed by the Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial
products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

ii


UBDRAINAGE AREAS
TORET NO.

IRGINIA
CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
511261
$112c)
sii2d1

EST VIRGINIA
BLUESTONE RESERVOIR
S40l1EL
S401FL
LAKE LYNN
5402C1
TYGART RESERVOIR
9404C1
540401
S404H)

WISCONSIN
BUTTERNUT LAKE
SS09A3
550981
EAU CLAIRE LAKE
SSISCL
KEGONSA LAKE
ss20cl
552001
SHAWANO LAKE
5539C1
TAINTER LAKE
554661
WAPOGASSET LAKE
5550C1

WAUSAU LAKE
9$51C3

LAKE WINNEBAGO
555431
SSS4C1

WISCONSIN LAKE
s55s02
SSSSE2

€0L

6
FLAG

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

GEOLOGY

SED w/0 L
SED W/O L
SED W/O L

SEO
SED

SED
SED

SED
SED

IGNEOUS-P
IGNEOUS=P

SWOL/TG=P

SED
SED

SED

SED w/0 L
SED W/O L
1G=P/SWOL

SED
SED
SED
SED

2.0
4.3
940

aT
3042

1864
4309

S862
2763

505
15-6

2664

81.6
9002

7065

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

ToT Pp TOT .N

Hee
8.7

28.0
30-3

19.0
4405

5940
27.5

5.5
15-6

26.5

80.8
BIe2

70.3
4364

57.0

ToT Pp

2064
2076
o1iS

019
2015

2012
2056

2077
2027

2033
2041

+068

2235
+184

2050
107
elll
2125
2195
2179

2059
2131

(MG/L)
ORTHO P TOT N
+035 660
2039 «730
2064 727
2007 +989
2006 #810
2006 1.186
2020 1.003
2019 1424)
2006 0774
2015 2928
2018 16282
029 1.650
2097 3.704
0092 3.378
2017 1.426
2058 16454
2047 1.783
6071 1.949
«102 3.645
2098 3.150
030 26259
2056 26444

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

INORG N

2049
126
«101

291
0389

868
2957

0593
2301

2203
027

0282

1.973
2.563

0194
2225
2684
0999

2.301
1.737

2.084
1.726

ToT P

2502
2762
4168

9.5
Te?

BT
4608

S364
1866

1204
15.0

1665

2924
2664

11.3
1863
1965
3201

2364
2260

14.4
3lel

EXPORT
(KG/SQ_ KM)
ORTHO P

3.5
209

44

16.7
13.2
4el

TOT N

260.3
261.2
264.3

29364
391.0

86344
838.7

860.9
532.8

347.8
409.7

491.0

463.0
485.1

322.3
248.2
31367
500.5

438.2
38762

555.8
579.3

INORG N

19.3
45.1
36.7

145.0
187.8

631.9
405.7

411.4
207.2

7661
100.4

68.5

246.6
368.1

43.8
3864
120.4
250.5

276.6
213.5

508.1
40961


2

MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS

vs
LAND USE
DATA ON 473 SUBDRAINAGE AREAS. IN
NuMBER EASTERN UNITED STATES
OF suas
53 FOREST

‘other types negligible

170 MOSTLY FOREST

ether types present

52 MIXED

11 MOSTLY URBAN

other types present

96 ©=MOSTLY AGRIC.

other types present

91 AGRICULTURE

‘other types present

Al 0.135

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS

vs
LAND USE
was
53 FOREST

‘other types neglible

170 MOSTLY FOREST

‘other types present

520 MIXED

M1 MOSTLY URBAN
‘Other types present

96 MOSTLY AGRIC,

‘other types present

91 AGRICULTURE

‘ther types present

2.0
MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

Figure 9. Relationships between general land use and total phosphorus and total

nitrogen concentrations in streams.


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
STORET NO.

MICHIGAN

PORTAGE LAKE
266961
2669H1

THORNAPPLE LAKE
268381

CRYSTAL LAKE
26948)

MINNESOTA

BIG STONE LAKE
27090)
270981
2T09F)

BUFFALO LAKE
e713C1

COKATO LAKE
271982
2e719CL

HERON LAKE
273941

MASHKENODE LAKE
275681

UPPER SAKATAH LAKE
277781

LAKE PEPIN
27ASHL
27A4I1
27A4K 1

ZUMBRO LAKE
2TASFY
270561

LAKE ST. CROIX
27arch

£8

MISSISSIPPI

ARKABUTLA RESERVOIR

280161
ENIO LAKE
28028)
280201

6
FLAG

GEOLOGY

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

SEO w/0 L
SWOL/IG-V

SED
SED

SED
SED
SED
SED

SEO
SEO

SED

w/0
w/0
w70
w/0

w/0
W/O

W/O

MET/SED

SED
SED
SED
SEO

SED
SED

SEO

SED

SED
SED

ere

r

1563
11.0

42.7

19.8

29.0
28.8
2964
59.3

60.0
7168

52.0

06
40.3
62.2
6345
73.5

6668
T5206

60.5

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

ToT P TOT N

1503
10.9

43ek
19.8

2940
28.0
29.3
58.9

59.6
T1ed

S109

6
39.5
61.6
63.5
73.7

65.9
14.9

6064

51.9

3lel
2666

ToT P

2056
2041

077

2038

2089
2052
2073
0240

2326
202

2099
0036
2233
2231
2224
«lol

212)
e147

2053

2093

0086
2101

(MG/L)
ORTHO P= TOT N
2024 1.437
2024 1-056
2043 1.863
0017 1.382
2031 1.159
2030 3-106
2035 1.432
2158 20119
2165 32033
2087 4.026
2045 4.676
008 1.6313
0134 S320
072 2-586
2073 2.059
2064 2.391
2062 20219
+109 3.651
2031 1-812
+030 3794
0014 1.478
2023 1.235

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

INORG N

0282
2435

1.017

257

+460
2.589
2504
731

1.275
2.312

3.059

+823
3.080
1.329
1.044
1.584

1.007
2.646

1.341

2232

3245
2270

TOT P

24e1
1762

19.7
905

362
262
209
48.6

4164
25.8

500
6.3
30.6
3420
34.9
23.6

15.5
1569

1201

48.4

39.4
48.5

EXPORT
(KG/SQ_KM)
ORTHO P= TOT N
10.3 61867
1061 44360
11.0 47569

4.3 34761
1.1 41.5
1.2 129.3
1.4 S7.7
32.0 429.4
20.9 384.8
dled 590.8
2.3 235.0
1.4 230.6
17.6 698.7
10.6 380.7
11.4 320.9
964 35066
7 284.0
12.8 394.8
Tel 414.7
15.6 413.2
6.4 OTT.
11.0 593.2

INORG N

121.4
182.5

259.8

64.6

16.5
107.7
20.3
148.1

161.8
295.3

153.7
144.5
404.5
195.6
162.7
232.2

128.9
28661

306.9

120.7

112.3
129.7


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBURAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3. 4 SLOPE PRECIP — FLOW
STORET NO. (SQ.KM) FOR CL AG URB- WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH (ib) (cM) (CMS/SQ_KM)
INDIANA
MORSE RESERVOIR
18298} 20 48.02 8.5 +1 90.4 9 0 +) AGRIC A07-04 6.3 261 9 -O1nL
WAWASEE LAKE
1836C1 20 4e53 1665 169 80.7 0 9 0 AGRIC AO7-01 663-169 a +0092
WINONA LAKE
1840B1 20 29.81 11.9 *4 8701 +2 +2 e2 AGRIC AOT-01 603 20 94 20094
1840C1 20 9.27 8.2 +8 89.7 0 +S 68 AGRIC AQT-01 643 268 94 +0093
MAXINKUCEE LAKE
184381 20 3681 9.1 604 84.5 0 0 0 AGRIC A07-05 6.3 47 94 +0093
1843C1 20 5.10 18.6 6.2 72.0 0 3.2 0 Me AGRIC A07-05 6.3 540 94 +0093
OLIVER LAKE
184781 20 5652 12.1 4.0 8361 0 “8 0 AGRIC AQ7-01 663 264 89 +0092
VERSAILLES LAKE
185081 20 15.46 25.4 4364 3162 0 0 0 MIXED A06-02 58 349 104 +0093
1850D1 20 11.58 21.0 10.0 68.4 2 0 +4 M AGRIC 06-02 5.8 349 104 +0093
PIGEON LAKE
1855A2 20 33.20 15.0 3.0 81.9 0 0 61 AGRIC A07-05 643-204 89 20094
185581 20 Be18 10.4 5.6 84.0 0 0 0 AGRIC A0T-05 643 21 89 +0093
MARSH LAKE
185681 20 5.52 15.1 1567 6547 0 35 0 Me AGRIC ADT-05 643 660 89 +0093
HAMILTON LAKE
- 185781 20 21.89 15.6 +6 83.8 0 0 0 AGRIC A07-04 663 89 +0093
3 185701 20 2615 17.0 +1 82.9 0 0 0 AGRIC A07-05 663 89 +0091
185701 20 1681 25.7 14.9 5924 0 0 0 Ms AGRIC A07-04 6.3 89 20092
KENTUCKY
LAKE CUMBERLANO
2101C1 30 12.61 46.2 662 47.6 0 0 0 MIXED U05-07 4.5 1768 132 +0132
2101H1 30 39.63 47.1 1.8 50.8 3 0 0 Me AGRIC 06-06 4.5 14.9 127 20134
2101J1 30 40.38 35.4 1.8 62.5 0 0 +3. Me AGRIC 06-06 4.5 13.6 127 20134
2101K1 30 58.43 20.3 3.0 7568 «8 0 +1 AGRIC U06-06 45 1061 127 +0134
210181 30 46.36 89.1 6.6 268 65 0 160 FOREST U05-07 4.5 2246 122 20134
DALE HOLLOW RESERVOIR
210281 30 12.92 41.0 467 54.3 0 0 0 Me AGRIC 05-07 4.5 16.0 127 +0182
2102C1 30 30046 39.9 467 5562 ol 0 el Me AGRIC U05-07 4.5 1762 132 20182
2102F1 30 23.39 78.6 640 1564 0 0 0 Me FOR. 108-06 5.0 25.6 137 +0208
KENTUCKY LAKE
2104C1 40 76659 40.2 468 55.0 0 0 0 Me AGRIC A0T-14 5.8 766 122 20146
210401 43 8.96 52.4 1le4 35.6 03 0 +3 Me FOR. U06-03 4.5 1140 122 +0146
21041 43 138.44 54.5 2.5 42.7 0 al 22 Me FOR, = U06-03 4658 122 20146
2104F1 30 32.92 64,3 8.7 27.0 0 0 0 My FOR. 06-03 4.5 1069 122 +0146
2104K1 34 9661 82.5 268 14.7 0 0 0 Me FOR. U06-03 4.5 14.8 127 +0146
2104L1 34 38.18 76.2 40 1966 ry al sl M4. FOR. = U06-03. 465 1640 127 +0146
2104M1 34 19.43 66.7 2.5 30.5 0 0 +3) Me FOR. U06-03 4.5 1168 127 +0146
2104N1 40 13.99 57.2 1061 29.9 201 0 «7 Me FOR. U06-03 4.5 Bel 127 +0146
2104V1 30 37.58 74.6 22 22.9 3 0 0 Me FORS 06-06 4.5 1765 132 20146
2104W1 30 55.04 77.5 3.6 18.6 +2 0 sl Me FOR. U06-06 4.51748 132 20146
2104X1 30 48.02 86.1 2.0 1169 0 0 0 Me FOR. 06-06 4.5 19.4 132 +0146
2104Y1 30 59.83 79.1 261 1847 el 0 0 Me FOR. U06-06 4651764 130 +0146
210421 34 19.71 76.1 342 20.7 0 0 0 Ms FOR. U06-03 4.5 1066 127 20146


or averages. Generally, these ranges are quite wide and the midpoints,
or other: indicators of central tendency, do not vary from one land use
type to another as appreciably as one might expect.

It would seem that uniformity in procedure, which is largely lacking
from one study (basic investigation) to another, would limit the validity
of comparing the results of one with another, or using combined results to
establish nutrient loading coefficients. More important, there is an
insufficient quantity and an inadequate distribution of data points avail-
able from literature sources to study the regional aspects of nutrient
runoff. An example of the latter point is shown later in this paper in
the section dealing with the effects of geology on nutrients in streams.

STUDY AREA SELECTION CRITERIA

In general, criteria for selecting tributary sampling sites for their
associated land use study drainage areas were:

A. Absence of identifiable point sources.

B.. Availability of usable aerial photography (preferably

in scales of from 1:40,000 to 1:80,000) and/or existing
. land use studies for identifying land use.

C. Availability of accurate topographic maps for drainage

area delineation.

D. Sufficient relief for clear definition of drainage area

limits and for surface runoff to be a significant factor.

E. Need to encompass a variety of geographic and climatic

areas, and obtain, where possible, land use homogeneity
within subdrainage areas.

A few exceptions to these criteria were necessary to accomodate
study of particular types of areas. Within the 1973 study area, several
heavily mined watersheds and several predominately urban watersheds (but
without apparent industrial or municipal wastewater treatment facilities)
have been included.

It should be noted that an overriding selection constraint was that
tributary sampling sites for land use study drainage areas had to be


The next most complex model, as was the case with phosphorus, fits
one regression line for region B and another for regions A, C and D.
However, the two equations for predicting total nitrogen concentrations
not only have different intercepts, but different slopes as well. One
partial explanation is that the effect of "% agriculture + % urban" on
nitrogen concentrations is not linear over a very wide range.

The equations for the regional model are:

Logy9 (NCONC) = -0.331 + 0.0101 (% agric. + % urban) (6)
for region B and
Logs (NCONC) = -0.236 + 0.0071 (% agric. + % urban) (7)

for regions A, C and D.

This regional model, like that for total phosphorus concentrations,
does not give appreciably better predictions than the simple model, due
to the large amount of unexplained variation. The root mean square
deviation for the regional model is 0.17 as compared to 0.19 for the
simple model. Differences in predicted values using the two models are
shown in Table 5.

TABLE 5. PREDICTED MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS
(mg/1) FOR SIMPLE AND REGIONAL MODELS

Simple Model Regional Model
Avg. NCONC in Avg. NCONC in
% Ag + % Urb Avg. NCONC Region B Regions A, C &D
0 0.53 0.58
25 0.87 0.83 0.87
50 1.45 1.49 1.32
75 2.41 2.67 1.98
100 4.00 4.77 2.98

48


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUSURAINAGE AREAS.

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINALE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LANO USE 3 4 SLOPE PRECIP. Flow
>TORET NO. (SQ KM) FOR cL AG URB WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH = (4) (cM) (CMS/SQ KM)
NORTH CAROLINA
HADIN LAKE
370181 40 23.05 77.3 «8 21.2 0 0 +7) Me FOR, U0S-03 4.5 6.8 il +0103
HLEWETT FALL LAKE
370261 40 36.67 80.5 1.0 1862 0 0 «300M. FOR. U0S-01 4.5 648 ale +0085
37020) 40 32.56 72.4 8.3 19.2 0 0 «1M. FOR. U05-01 4.5 Se4 117 +0078
370261 40 16.24 54.9 1.6 43.1 o 0 +4 Me FOR. U05-01 4.5 3.6 12 +0085
3702H) 40 77.52 76.1 +6 2167 35 0 lel Me FOR. U0S-01 4.5 81 122 +0150
FONTANA LAKE
3704C1 30 81.61 87.0 0 13.0 0 0 0 Me FOR. 05-06 4.5 43.8 142 +0377
3704E1 30 29.03 98.3 0 1.3 0 0 +4 FOREST 05-06 4.5 4665 142 +0225
3704F1 30 24.04 88.2 +30 1165 0 0 0 Me FOR, U05-06 4.5 3860 142 +0377
HIGH ROCK LAKE
370681 40 39,03 65.3 +8 32.4 Lol 0 +4 Me FOR. U05-03 4.5 644 114 +0083
370601 40 33.64 41.6 2.6 S4.7 +6 0 +S Me AGRIC U06-05 4.5 78D 114 +0082
370661 40 40.12 42.7 149 52.6 166 OG 142 Me AGRIC U06-05 4.5 547 114 +0100
HIWASSEE LAKE
370781 30 65.50 76.8 1.4 19.8 0 0 0 My FOR, 05-13 465 3569 152 20242
3707C1 30 14,01 68.7 +9 1063 0 0 sl Me FOR, U0S-06 4.5 21.3 142 +0241
LOOKOUT SHOALS LAKE
371081 40 13.39 40.7 +5 58.7 0 0 «lL Ms. AGRIC =U0S-03 4.5 B49 119 +0167
S RHOOHISS LAKE
371561 40 15.80 63.8 0 35.4 28 0 0 Me FOR. U0S-03 4.5 1240 127 20174
371541 40 19.79 73.8 168 2267 1s? 0 0 Me FOR. U05-03 445 10.9 127 +0209
SANTEETLAH LAKE
3716A2 30 144,88 83.4 #5 15.0 160 0 «1 My FOR. U05-13 4.5 3961 157 +0289
371681 30 9.71 73.0 +8 26.0 0 0 +20 Me FOR, U0S-13 4.5 40.7 142 +0324
3716C1 30 19.22 85.3 1469 12.7 0 0 +l Me FOR. U0S-13 4.5 39.8 142 +0324
371601 30 110662 97.3 76 2e1 0 0 0 FOREST U0S-13 4.5 39.2 147 20413
3716E1 30 35.66 97.3 5 242 C) ) 0 FOREST UOS-13 4.5 42.6 1s2 +0322
3716F 1 30 72.88 99.5 22 3 C) 0 0 FOREST U0S5-13 4.5 3949 165 +0263
LAKE TILLERY
371701 40 29.50 55.1 +2 43,5 +8 0 +4 Me FOR, 05-03 4.5 4a 114 +0106
OHIO
BEACH CITY RESERVOIR
3901C1 10 44.21 13.3 +7 84.0 149 0 «1 AGRIC 108-04 S65 5.2 102 +0097
390101 13 83.89 15.4 267 80.2 “4 0 163 AGRIC 108-04 5.5 6.6 102 +0096
390161 13 8.96 30.3 2.8 63.8 0 0 3.1 MM, AGRIC 108-04 5.5 1164 102 +0100
3901F1 31 34.50 29.0 149 605.9 33 0 2.9 Me AGRIC 108-04 5.5 14.3 102 +0099
39016) 30 15,51 1641 366 7643 140 0 3.0 AGRIC 108-04 5.5 12.3 102 +0099
3901H1 30 31.03 17.0 165 79.5 124 0 +6 © AGRIC 108-04 5.5 11.4 102 20097
3901K1 30 70042 21.6 4.3 6566 ) 0 862 Me AGRIC 108-04 5.5 16) 102 +0101


SECTION VI
APPENDIX

69


not average annual stream discharge as was shown with these data;
therefore, one or more covariants seem probable.

Some additional explanation of the difference between relationships
of nutrient concentrations to land use and nutrient export to land use
may be found in differences in mean annual precipitation patterns
relative to study area locations. From analysis of study area locations,
it appeared that most of the forested drainage areas were located in
regions receiving slightly greater average annual precipitation amounts
than regions where most of the agricultural watersheds were located.
Greater annual precipitation amounts would help explain the greater
flow values in forested study areas. However, the correlation between
percent of subdrainage area in forest and mean annual precipitation was
found to be statistically less significant (r = 0.56) than the correlation
between slope and forest.

The data also indicate that urban land usage seems to have a pronounced
effect on the amount of export. Again, the cause is probably increased
flow rates, but in this case it was more likely because of greater areas

‘of impervious surfaces.

For additional help in understanding the differences in the relation-
ships between concentrations and land use, and export and land use, it
is important to recognize that the drainage areas included in this study
are not control plots. Rather, they are natural drainage areas which
represent, typical land use- and geographically-related characteristics
in their respective areas. If one were studying control plots where
slope, soil type, and climate conditions were similar from one plot to
another, one would expect a significantly higher nutrient export rate
(as well as a higher nutrient concentration) from plots in agricultural
land-use than from forested plots. Runoff as well would probably be
somewhat greater from agricultural plots than from forested plots. Natural
drainage areas, on the other hand, possess different topographic, soils,
and climatic characteristics. These characteristics are important in
determining land use in the first place. In general, flat to rolling
terrain and rich soils, such as are found in southern Minnesota, lend

30


Since increased or decreased percentages of all general land use types
appeared to have some effect on nutrient levels, a land use ratio of
"contributing" (agriculture + urban) over “non-contributing" (forest +
cleared-unproductive + wetland) types was investigated for its utility

as a Single factor including all land use types. Generally, relationships
between these ratios and nutrient levels in streams were found to be more
significant than those considering only one land use type. It was then
determined that use of just the numerator (% agriculture plus % urban)
from the ratio provided more easily understood land use values and
eliminated the graphing problems encountered by working with values to
infinity.

Use of "% agriculture plus % urban” to relate effects of land use on
nutrient levels in streams appears to be appropriate where agriculture
and/or forest comprise the predominant type(s). These two land use
categories comprise the bulk of the land use data gathered for this
study, but also constitute by far the predominant land use in the
eastern half of the United States. The use of "% agriculture plus %
urban" even seems to compensate for minor amounts of the other general
land use types. However, its use is probably unsatisfactory for pre-
dicting or estimating nutrient concentrations or loads for areas where
either urban, cleared-unproductive, or wetland land use types predominate;
particularly where urban predominates. Insufficient data have been col-
lected for these types.

"Contributing" Land Use Types and Nutrient Concentrations

Figure 22 shows the relation between mean total phosphorus concen-
trations in streams and "% agriculture plus % urban". The equation for
the regression line shown in Figure 22 is:

Logng (PCONC) = -1.831 + 0.0093 (% agric. + % urban) (1)

The correlation coefficient for this relationship is 0.73. The
utility of the equation for predictions is illustrated in Table 2.

42


Ly

8.84

MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/l)

r= 0.84

100%

he rl “
at T T T T T “T T T T 4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
% IN AGRICULTURE + % IN URBAN
Figure 23. Scattergram of “contributing" land use types related

to nitrogen concentrations in streams.


ev

(mg/I)

MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS

43544
ad

005

T T T T T T T T T
60 70 80 90

30 40 50
% IN AGRICULTURE + % IN URBAN

Figure 22. Scattergram of "contributing" land use types related
to phosphorus concentrations in streams.


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUNDRAINAGE AREAS

i LANO USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SUILS MEAN AVE AINN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NO. (SQ KM) FOR cL AG URB = WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH = (%) (CM) (CMS/SQ_KM
CONNECTICUT
ASPINOOK POND
090101 10 2.33 87.4 361 7.7 163 3 220 Me FURS 504-04 4.5 646 or +0209
0901F1 10 22.74 82.5 3.8 8.8 +7) 3e7 5 Me FOR. S04-04 4.5 7e2 97 +0188
HANOVER POND
090581 10 12.85 46.5 11.3 +3 3964 1.6 +9 Me URBAN = 3504-08 = 465-1164 94 +0198
LAKE ZOAR
091081 10 1.71 72.5 13462 14.3 0 ) 0 Ms FOR. S04-04 4.5 16.0 97 +021)
0920C1 10 24.81 74.3 967 662 862 9 +7) My FOR. S$04-04 4.5 12.0 94 +0197
091001 10 482 40.8 1765 39.1 lel 165 0 = MIXED S04-04 4.5 12.8 1 +0207
O910FL 10 2.98 69.2 742 1346 966 0 +4 0 Me FOR. S04-04 4.5 1561 89 +0210
091061 10 12.02 63.7 7.3 22.5 “4 22 29 Me FOR. S04-04 4.5 11.8 a1 +0202
O9LOHL 10 12.28 40.2 1767 11.9 28.1 1.48 23 MIXED $04-04 4.5 11.0 91 +0186
DELAWARE
NO KILLEN POND
1002A2 40 37.40 36.0 268 61.0 or) 4 0 Ms AGRIC u0i-04 5.5 1.3 117 20147
100281 40 2628 23.4 0 76.6 0 0 1) AGRIC U05-05 4.5 1.2 117 0148
SILVER LAKE
100881 40 5.02 6.1 5 92.1 9 0 +4 AGRIC U0S-05 4.5 149 114 +0166
WILLIAMS POND
1009C1 40 4.01 29.0 1061 59.4 165 0 0 Ms. AGRIC 05-05 4.5 +6 117 20017
GEORGIA
ALLATOONA RES.
1301F1 30 46.54 96.2 1.8 1.8 0 0 +2 FOREST 05-06 4.5 20.0 132 20141
CHATUGE
1303A1 30 15.44 91,3 oS B62 0 0 0 Me FOK. U0S-04 445 4264 152 20234
1303C1 30 23.34 89.5 2.4 8.41 0 0 0 Me FOR. U0S-04 4.5 4364 163 «0232
CLARK HILL RES
1304C1 40 31.13 80.4 9e3 1001 0 0 22 Me FOR. U05=-03 4S ToT 117 +0093
1304F 1 40 71.92 70.3 368 25.2 “7 0 0 Me FOR. 05-01 4.5 90 117 20089
1304J1 40 43.38 6769 2.5 2945 0 C) «1 Me FOR. U05-0l 445 009 117 +0082
1304K1 40 25.64 6264 2.7 35.8 238 0 23 Me FOR. U05-01 4.5 B63 117 +0082
JACKSON LAKE
1309A1 40 188.84 59.3 2.1 3746 +6 1 +30 Me FOR. U05-03 4.5 643 119 20139
SIDNEY LANIER LAKE
1310C1 40 63.56 61.5 1.48 36.6 ol 0 0 Me FOR. U05-03 4.5 1564 is2 20274
131001 40 53.54 53.4 75 45.6 ) al el My FOR. 05-03 4.5 12.3 197 20194
1310E1 40 43.15 51.5 2.0 45.0 1.24 0 sl Me FOR. U0S-01 4.5 14.2 163 +0194


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS 8Y SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBORATNAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3. 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NUs (SQ KM) FOR cL AG URB WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH = (%) (CM) (CMS/SQ
MICHIGAN
PORTAGE LAKE
266961 10 42.97 S8.6 264 38.9 0 0 el Me FOR. S04-04 4.5 467 91 +0130
co69Ht 10 57.55 61.8 669 27.9 2.6 ol 7 Me FOR. 504-04 4.9 5.9 a1 +0130
THORNAPPLE LAKE
26830) 20 144,83 19.2 1.0 77.2 3 1.6 o7 AGRIC A07=-04 6.3 1.9 76 +0079
CRYSTAL LAKE
26948) 20 7649 26.4 14.1 5865 1.0 oO oO Me AGRIC A07-04 6.3 sel 76 20083
MINNESOTA
BIG STONE LAKE
270901 20 35.02 2.6 263 95.0 0 oO el AGRIC M05-04 7.2 260 $3 +001)
eTogel 20 15,07 369 166 94.5 0 0 0 AGRIC M05-04 7.2 2.0 S3 20012
2709F 1 20 62.19 1.8 200 96.2 0 0 0 AGRIC M05-04 7.2 1.3 $3 0012
BUFFALO LAKE
2713C1 20 6.19 964 O T4.1 1562 1.3 0 Me AGRIC M05-01 6.5 165 14 +0063
CUKATO LAKE
271982 20 $1.90 4.8 +l 75.0 203 15.2 2.6 AGRIC A07=06 6.3 3e1 69 20041
2T19Ch 20 9.82 Sel 0 89.8 0 Sel 0 AGRIC A07-06 6.3 4.0 69 0036
HERON LAKE
2739H1 20 6424 1.0 lel 97.8 0 0 el AGRIC M07-06 6.3 1.2 64 +0020
co MASHKENODE LAKE
s 275681 10 17628 4164 14.67 1.2 27.8 1.1) 1368 MIXED A04-01 5.5 4.5 71 20056
UPPER SAKATAH LAKE
277781 20 88.34 6.2 lel 79.9 «7 1165 26 AGRIC A07-06 6.3 Se2 76 0031
LAKE PEPIN
27A4H1 20 176.79 19.1 162 7966 0 el 0 AGRIC AO7-17 6.3 903 4 20046
eTA4SJ) 20 64.39 26.8 4e5 6867 0 0 0 Me AGRIC AQ7-17 6.3 12.0 4 +0050
2TASK) 20 44.91 19.9 4.2 73.8 2.0 0 ol Me AGRIC AO7T=17 663 1204 76 +0046
ZUMBRO LAKE
27ASFL 20 049 9 0 76.2 23.8 0 0 AGRIC 406-07 6.0 667 4 +004)
2TASG) 20 78.30 7.7 0 92.3 O 0 0 AGRIC M06-07 6.0 59 4 +0036
LAKE ST. CROIX
27a7cl 20 15.07 13.4 48 81.5 0 0 3 AGRIC MOS-01 6.5 609 74 20074
MISSISSIPPI
ARKABUTLA RESERVOIR
280161 40 83.14 20.2 Se4 70.9 209 cu +6 Me. AGRIC A07-09 6.0 132 +0166
ENID LAKE
280281 40 32.14 58.1 1.3 40.1 0 0 ) Me FORK. A07-09 6.0 132 0145
280201 40 34.60 55,3 1.2 43.5 oO 0 0 Me FOR, A07-09 6.0 132 +0153

KM)


NUMBER
OF SUBS

18
AA
14
2
25
5

12

26

34

13

27

57
13

18

OVERALL LAND
USE CATEGORY

FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST
MIXED

MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/1!)
vs
LAND USE
BY LAND RESOURCE REGION

North and Northeastern Forest
and Forage Region

MOSTLY URBAN,

MOSTLY AGRIC

AGRICULTURE

FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST
MIXED

018,

MOSTLY URBAN

MOSTLY AGRIC

AGRICULTURE

FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST
MIXED

010

East and Central General Farming
and Forest Region

MOSTLY URBAN

HLA

MOSTLY AGRIC.

AGRICULTURE

FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST
MIXED.

WU
oo
WY

mostly URBAN YYYyyyy
mostiy acric. YYyyyy

Li ddd

AGRICULTURE

Spe ey
lu
oo

i
MMMM

005

———— Tt T T T
010

Piedmont and Coastal Plain Mixed

Farming and Forest Region

Hy

VU.

0.10

01s

Figure 18. Regional relationships between general land use and

total phosphorus concentrations in streams.

37


EPA-600/3-76-014
January 1976

THE INFLUENCE OF LAND USE
ON
STREAM NUTRIENT LEVELS

By

dames M. Omernik
Eutrophication Survey Branch
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon 97330

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
CORVALLIS, OREGON 97330


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES VERALL ILs M AVE ANN
SUBURAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 CAND USE SoS SLOPE “PRECID Flow 5
STORET NO. (SQ.KM) FOR CL AG =—:URB- WET «OTHER CATEGORY «MAP UNIT PH (%) (CM). (CMS/SQ._ KM)
TEWNESSEE

OLD HICKORY LAKE

4720C1 30 36.88 28.5 4.3 65.6 66 0 1.0 Me AGRIC A0B-02 5.3 13.9 124 +0185

4720F 1 30 T9641 20.3 569 73.2 65 0 41 Me AGRIC = A0B-02, 54350412 +0185
PERCY PRIEST RESERVOIR

4723F 1 30 28.59 35.4 264 59.4 04 0 264 Me AGRIC AdB-02 563 769 119 0141
TIMS FORD RESERVOIR

4724E1 30 8.55 48.7 Tol 44.2 0 ) 0 MIXED VOS-10 4.5 1066 137 +0163

4724F 1 30 21.37 67.5 763 24.8 63 0 41 Me FOR. =: U0S=10 451160137 +0170
REELFOOT LAKE

47270) 40 21.86 63.8 966 24.8 0 0 168 Me FOR, = 407-0960 22.7 122 +0113

VERMONT

ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN LAKE

501021 10 22.07 37.1 340 S91 08 0 0 Me AGRIC S04-04 4.5 706 B84 +0190

501031 10 236421 53.3 946 32.8 3.0 143 0 OM. FOR. S04-04 4.5 16.7 84 +0190
WATERBURY RESERVOIR

501131 10 5.41 79.5 3.0 17.5 0 0 0 Me FOR, = $04-04 445 1869 99 +0220

3 501141 10 23.05 84,6 67 1360 167 0 0 OM, FOR, = S04-04 4.52343 99 +0220

s 501151 1o 66.59 81.3 365 13.5 «7 160 0 OM, FOR, = S04-04 445 1841 99 +0220
VIRGINIA
CLAYTOR LAKE

510381 30 4B.02 97.8 68 66 2 0 6 ~~ FOREST UOS-12 4453169 102 +0087

5103€1 30 43.80 3.9 3.0 90.8 64 0 169° AGRIC UOS-12 465 1767 102 +0082
JOHN W FLANNAGAN RES.

51050) 30 20.95 66.7 1268 762 104 0 1169 Me FOR. 108-06 5.0 36.7 117 0128

5105E1 30 8.83 83.6 Sel 11.3 0 0 0 Ms FOR, = 108-06 «5034.8 = 117 +0124

5105F 1 30 7.25 88.3 529 568 0 0 0 FOREST 108-06 5.0 3165 117 +0126
OCCO@UAN RESERVOIR

510801 40 13.91 69.5 969 1966 03 0 67 Me FOR, = -U0S=03 4S 907102 +0086
SMITH MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR

S110E1 30 27.07 69.8 864 20.4 67 0 67 Me FOR, = 05-04 45 2441 109 0111

SL10F 1 30 68.58 57.6 565 35.8 64 0 47 My FOR, = US-03 4.5 20.8 = 109 +0110

511061 30 11.73 5062 564 43.0 140 0 44 Me FOR, U0S=03 4.5 16.4 109 0114
LAKE CHESDIN

51118) 40 25.87 63,2 362 32.5 ol 0 1.0 My FOR, 05-03 4.5 54412 +0096

S111C1 40 152.32 70.4 664 22.1 «1 64 +6 Me FOR. U05-03 4.5 5,3 ile +0097

51111 40 52.97 83.5 664 8.6 65 62 «8 Me FOR. 05-03 45 6.0 112 +0093


on nutrients in either lakes or streams. One of the few articles
written on the subject (Dillon and Kirchner, 1975) has suggested a
strong effect of geology on phosphorus loads in streams. It was the
strength of Dillon and Kirchner's conclusions, together with the
suitability of their system to NES non-point source study data, that
motivated the inclusion of geology as a macro-aspect to be considered
in this paper.

Tables 6 and 7, from Dillon and Kirchner, illustrate the results
of their findings.

TABLE 6. RANGES AND MEAN VALUES FOR EXPORT OF TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
FROM 31 SOUTHERN ONTARIO WATERSHEDS (kg/km?/yr)

Geological Classification

Land Use Igneous Sedimentary
Forest
Range 2.5-7.7 6.7-14.5
Mean 4.8 10.7
Forest + Pasture
Range 8.1-16.0 20.5-37.0
Mean 11.7 28.8

TABLE 7. RANGES AND MEAN VALUES FOR EXPORT OF TOTAL PHOSPHORUS FROM
43 WATERSHEDS. VALUES INCLUDE DATA GIVEN IN TABLE 6 AND
ADDITIONAL DATA FROM THE LITERATURE (kg/km?/yr)

Geological Classification

Land Use Igneous Sedimentary
Forest
Range 0.7-8.8 6.7-18.3
Mean 4.7 11.7
Forest + Pasture
Range 5.9-16.0 11.1-13.0
Mean 10.2 23.3

60


is notable that inclusion of the surface soi] pH value makes it unneces-
sary to fit a different model for region B. Also interesting is the fact
that after adjusting for "% agriculture plus % urban", the effect of
animal unit density is not statistically significant for total phosphorus
concentrations. Animal unit density had a significant effect on total
phosphorus concentrations for the data (on 143 drainage areas) collected
for Working Paper No. 25 (Environmental Protection Agency, 1974). This
may have been due to the fact that most of the agricultural areas included
in the Working Paper No. 25 data set were dairy oriented. With the present
data set (473 subdrainage areas) it is probable that other agricultural
characteristics have masked the effects of animal unit densities.

Figure 23 shows the relationship between mean total nitrogen concen-
trations and "% agriculture plus % urban". The equation for the regression
line shown in Figure 23 is:

Log), (NCONC) = -0.278 + 0.0088 (% agric. + % urban) (5)

The correlation is stronger (r = 0.83) than that shown for phosphorus
concentrations (Figure 22), and there is noticeably less variation around
the regression. Thus, the model does a little better in predicting than
did the simple model for phosphorus. The utility of this equation for
predicting mean total nitrogen concentrations is shown in Table 4.

TABLE 4. PREDICTED MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/1)

% Ag + % Urb Avg. NCONC 67% Limits 95% Limits
0 0.53 0.35-0.80 0.24-1.19

25 0.87 0.58-1.31 0.39-1.96

50 1.45 0.97-2.18 0.64-3.26

75 2.41 1.61-3.62 1.07-5.42
100 4.00 2.67-6 .00 1.78-9.00

46


SUMMARY OF LANO USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

ANIMAL DENSITY MEAN CONCENTRATIONS EXPORT
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS 6 7 (AN UNITS/SU KM) (MG/L) (KG/SQ_KM)
STORET NO. FLAG GEOLOGY TOT Ph TOT N TOT P ORTHOP TOT N INORG N TOT P ORTHOP TOT N  JNURG N
OHIO
ONSHAUGHNESSY RESERVOIR
3931C1 1 SED 3769 38.9 4063 2028 2.331 1.513 19.5 6.7 72062 467.5
ROCKY FORK CREEK
393281 1 SED 49.3 48.8 4039 2023 2-080 14.2 BG 7S7e1 275.2
3932C1 1 SED S766 S760 099 +029 2.500 3468 = 1062 879.6 488.4
LAKE SHAWNEE
39332 1 SED 71e7 Tle3 4044 2016 4.292 14.3 502 1394.0 1149.7
TAPPAN RESERVOIR
3934A) 2 SED 2340 24.9 4034 +008 1.134 11.7 2.7 389.8 = 185.6
393481 2 SEO 2206 24.6 059 2022 16143 20.0 7.5 38764 170.1
393401 1 SED 3504 36.3 041 2011 16273 14.3 3.8 445.5 221.5
PENNSYLVANIA
BLANCHARD RESERVOIR
420181 1 SED 3405 34.4 028 2014 2.605 1.895 5.0 2.5 466.1 339.1
420101 L SED 4266 4265 026 +008 2.501 1.946 1.9 +6 18363 142.6
420101 1 SED 13.1 13.1 6016 +008 +776 +166 1.9 1.0 94.3 20.2
CONNEAUT LAKE
420401 1 SED 4765 4764 052 2014 1.115 +553 3662 968 776.9 385.3
PYMATUNING RESERVOIR
421361 1 SED 4208 42.8 047 2018 1.872 1.239 13.0 5.0 S18.7 343.3
SB 4213¢1 1 SED 28.6 28.6 6086 2028 1.558 +6660 1069 3.6 197.6 83.7
4213F 1 1 SED 4906 49.6 6039 2014 1.302 +681 1769 664 596.4 312.0
421341 L SED 50.7 50.6 4030 2014 1.798 1.272 lle 5.3 68362 483.3
SHENANGO RESERVOIX
4216F 1 1 SED S0.u 50.0 041 +020 2.092 14143 1061 4.9 513.1 280.4
421661 1 SED 406 46.6 030 2011 1.619 2568 364 2.0 289-6 101.6
42161 a SED 47.0 47.0 037 2016 14959 2696 6el 2.6 25768 11501
BEAVER KUN RESERVOIR
421981 1 seD 3604 3625 2123 +060 1.644 +504 217.3 106.0 2904.2 1526.3
LAKE CANADOTHA
422141 L SED 286d 28.5 6038 2013 1.416 +336 19.3 666 716.8 170.6
422icl 1 SED 3866 3865 6024 2007 14443 2492 1665 4.8 994.4 339.1
INDIAN Lake ,
4223C1 1 SED 1.2 1.2 6012 +006 1.460 2370 562 266 629.3 159.5
422301 1 SED 2.8 200 02) +006 16705 +810 742 2.0 581.7 270.4
CUNEWAGO LAKE (PINCHOT) :
42264) 1 IG-P/SwIL 2540 24.5 022 2008 1.238 +299 lee 6.9 1061.5 256.4
422681 1 IG-P/SWOL 3462 33.0 0.028 +007 1.006 2442 ae 1.2 177.7 78.1
422601 1 IG-P/SWOL 2867 26.2 © 022 2006 +681 2453 965 2.6 379.6 195.2


1000Km

\

(MEAN TOTAL

PHOSPHORUS.
CONCENTRATIONS (mg/l)

@0000000

Figure 6.

Areal distribution of mean total phosphorus concentrations

in streams draining study areas in the eastern United States.

20


OTHER PROCEDURES

Explanations of the following procedures are given in NES Working
Paper No. 1 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974); and NES
Working Paper No. 175 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975):

1. Tributary sampling methods and handling.

2. Analytical methods (stream samples).

3. Nutrient loading estimates.

4. Stream flow estimates.

It should be noted that nutrient exports were computed using "nor-
malized" flow data (adjusted for seasonality and sampling year) from
the USGS and drainage area measurements as determined by NES. For a
few tributary sampling sites, where the USGS had not provided flow
estimates, they were calculated by NES from runoff patterns in adja-
cent, overlapping, or nearby areas for which USGS estimates were
provided. Loadings for all drainage areas in this study were estimated
according to the following equation:

Annual Load = (C)(F)(31,356)

where: C = Mean annual concentration in milligrams per liter, and

Mean normalized annual stream flow in cubic meters per
second.

The factor 31,356 is used to adjust the concentration and flow
data in order to obtain loads in kilograms per year. The annual loads
were then divided by the area (in square kilometers) of their respec-
tive watershed.

16


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
STORET NO.

TENNESSEE

66

BOONE RESERVOIR
470481
47T04C1
470461
4T04HL
410491
4T04K1
4704L1

CHEROKEE LAKE
4T07TBL
4707C1

CHICKAMAUGA LAKE
4708D1
4708E1
4708K1
4708M1
4708R1

DOUGLAS LAKE
471181
471101
47T11K1

FT» LOUDOUN LAKE
471201
47T12E
4T1L2F1
4712H)
471251
4712.1
4712P)
47121

NICKAJACK RESERVOIR
4TI7EL
4TLTM)
4STLINI
47TL7PL
4T17TQ)
47TL7RI
47l7T)

bee PR REE eR ue

Wore RLUU wee

6
FLAG

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS bY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

GEOLOGY

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

SED
SED

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

SED
SED
SED

SED
SED
SED
SED
SEO
SED
SED
SED

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

W/O L

W/O L

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

ToT P

TOT .N

77.8
7364
6461
5468
31.5
1664
15.5

31.7
17.5

S2el

3565

7560
3961
69.2

1564
662

65.9
68.9
33.1

mooocon Cfo

ToT P

2039
2040
097
2019
2029
0024
2027

204)
0057

2031
0037
2041
2033
030

0026
2032
2022

e113
0107
2092
+039
2022
2049
2083
2048

2009
2007
2006
+006
0006
2005
2006

(MG/L)
ORTHO P TOT N
0014 1.802
016 20274
2046 2.315
010 2.378
013 1.486
2011 0494
2016 1.037
0016 1.115
2041 1.363
015 1.152
018 6896
2018 971
2020 771
2011 1.050
2013 1.482
2016 2978
2013 2.013
2052) 1.797
2055 2.508
2030 1.930
2018 1.350
2007 12420
2018 851
2048 1.668
0023 1.842
2005 461
2007 1.107
2005 2407
2005 0495,
005 415
005 0374
2005 +546

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS.
INORG N

1.315
1,852
21,631
1.845
0967
2199
e411

573
350

2571
381
358
302
557

1.028
2279
2988

1.157
1,699
1.072
2815
753
0375
1.197
1.413

elle
0249
087
2060
2078
2065
083

TOT P

EXPORT

(KG/SQ_ KM)

ORTHO P

~

TOT N

64062
761.6
844.1
784.9
740.8
242.3
514.0

469.3
55364

600.3
4Bled
533.0
42702
768.9

449.9
565-1
640.8

933.4
1307.3
99367
886.1
952.0
570.5
901.8
958.3

367.3
89364
326.5
4l2e1
334.5
295.6
545.5

INORG N

46762
620.3
594.7
609.0
482.1

97.6
203.7

241.2
142.1

297.5
204.6
196.5
167.3
407.9

312.1
161.2
314.5

600.9
885.6
551.9
535.0
504.8
25164
447.1
73561

89.2
201.0
69.8
49.9
62.9
51.4
82.9


82

NUMBER
oF SUBS

MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS EXPORT
LAND USE

DATA ON 473 SUBDRAINAGE AREAS IN
EASTERN UNITED STATES.

53° FOREST
other types negligible
170 MOSTLY FOREST
other types present
52) MIXED
11 MOSTLY URBAN
ther types present
96 MOSTLY AGRIC.
91 AGRICULTURE
° 10 20 30 40
KILOGRAMS PER SQUARE KILOMETER PER YEAR
MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN EXPORT
LAND USE
DATA ON 479 SUBDRAINAGE AREAS IN
orsues EASTERN UNITED STATES
53 FOREST
other types negigie
170 MOSTLY FOREST
52 MIXED
11 MOSTLY URBAN E 788.6
96 MOSTLY AGRIC,
other types present
91 AGRICULTURE ~ J] 982.3
ther types. present 1
° 500 1000.
KILOGRAMS PER SQUARE KILOMETER PER YEAR
Figure 11. Relationships between general land use and stream exports of total

Phosphorus and total nitrogen.


2g

{mg/1)

MEAN INORGANIC NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS

0344

r= 0.82

to inorganic nitrogen concentrations in streams.

1
100 %o

024
iy
o T T T T T T T T
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
% IN AGRICULTURE + % IN URBAN
Figure 25. Scattergram of “contributing” land use types related


TECHNICAL REPORTDATA
Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO,

j
i
[7 REPORT NO. 2.

EPA~-600/3-76-014

iy 5. REPORT DATE

The Influence of Land Use on Stream Nutrient Levels

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE

Is. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.

L
3OTITLE ANO SUBTITLE
}
L
j?, AUTHORS)

James M. Omernik

Washington, DC 20460

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

| Eutrophication Survey Branch 1BA029

{ Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory [i7, CUNTRACT/GRANT NO.

! Environmental Protection Agency

i 5B S, W. 32th St.

i_ Corvallis Bkeoon 97330

; 12, SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13, TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
' Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory Final, 1972 - 1974

| Office of Research and Development 74, SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
t U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA-ORD, CERL

t

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES.

16, ABSTRACT

| National Eutrophication Survey (NES) data for 473 non-point type drainage areas
in the eastern United States were studied for relationships between drainage area
characteristics (particularly land use) and nutrient levels in streams. Both the
total and inorganic forms of phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations and loads in
streams were considered.

The objectives were to (1) investigate these relationships, as they were eviden-|
ced by the NES data and (2) develop a means for estimating stream nutrient levels
from knowledge of “macro” drainage area characteristics.

Mean nutrient levels were considerably higher in streams draining agricultural
watersheds than in streams draining forested watersheds. The levels were generally
proportional to percentages of land in agriculture, or the combined percentages of
agricultural and urban land use. Variations in nutrient loads (exports) in streams,
associated with differences in land use categories, were not as pronounced as the
variations in nutrient concentrations. This was apparently due, in large part, to
differences in areal stream flow from different land use types.

Regression analysis of the combined percentages of agricultural and urban land
uses against both the total and inorganic forms of phosphorus were performed. E
Equations for these analyses, together with maps illustrating the equations residuals

offer a_limited predictive capability and some accountability for regional character-
UTTS.

17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
s DESCRIPTORS DAIDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS [c. cosaTi Field/Group
Land Use* Eutrophication Non-Point source “02A
Nutrients* Stream Flow Nutrients O2E
Watersheds* Animal Unit Density 04A
Phosphorus* Soils 04C
Nitrogen* Geology O5A
Loadings Eastern U.S. 05C
Concentrations 056
ISTRIBUTION STATEMENT 19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report) 21. NO. OF PAGES
UNCLASSIFIED 112
RELEASE TO PUBLIC 120. SECURITY CLASS (This page) 22. PRICE
_ UNCLASSIFIED
Form 2220-1 (9-73)

106


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NOw (SQ KM) FOR CL AG URB WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH = (%) (CM) = (CMS/SQ
ALABAMA
GANTT RESERVOIR
Oi03b1 40 21.26 74.5 26 24.9 0 0 0 Me. FOR. U06-01 4.5 BoB 147 0073
GUNTERSVILLE RESERVOIR
010401 30 53.92 52.2 3.4 43.5 0 0 oD Me. FOR. u05-01 4.5 11.0 137 20261
OLO4ED 30 78.55 34.9 265 6168 “5 0 3 Ms AGRIC u05-01 4.5 Se9 137 0201
010461 30 55.06 24.4 lel 74.3 0 a) Pra Ms. AGRIC uus-01 4.5 3.6 132 20195
O104J1 30 127.74 42.8 166 5564 al 0 ol Me AGRIC uos-01 4.5 4eT7 132 0192
ol4ul 30 22017 60.0 1.3 24.0 0 O 1467 Me FOR. uos-01 4.5 9.3 132 20208
HOLT LOCK AND DAM
o10Sbi 30 5244 93.8 1.4 264 0 0 204 FOREST 108-06 5.0 1662 135 0162
0105C1 30 3.11 92.5 3.5 1.0 340 0 a FOREST 108-06 5-0 29.6 135 +0162
010501 30 29.86 85.0 1.0 0 0 0 1420 FOREST 108-06 5.0 2169 135 20162
LAY LAKE
0106C1 30 22.07 74.7 1.5 23.8 0 oO 0 Me FOR. bo6-11 46S 606 140 +0175
010601 30 45.38 69.0 266 2767 el 0 26 Me FOR. udo-11 465 1003 140 +0189
MARTIN LAKE
O107C1 40 40.71 73.3 6.0 19.5 del tt) ol Me FORe U0S-03 4.5 962 135 +0176
x O107H) 40 43.36 79.41 1.30 1961 0 o ) FOREST U05-03 4.5 723 135 20075
MITCHELL LAKE
010881 40 26.94 63.2 07 3507 0 3 el Me FOR. U0S=04 4.5 940 142 +0201
PICKWICK LAKE
0109C1 34 174.80 64.8 920 24.6 oD 0 oT Me FOR. vo6-1L 4.5 1360 127 20131
010901 34 134.32 74.8 4e1 20.7 ol 0 oJ Me FOR. U06-11 4.5 1667 127 20135
O109K) 40 42.48 76.6 4e2 1961 0 0 el Me FOR. ud6-11 4.5 15.8 127 20244
0109M] 40 173.63 80.2 365 1662 a 0 ol Me FOR, Uoe-1) 4.5 1862 127 20160
010901 40 111.63 80.4 11.3 8.3 0 0 0 Me FOR. u04-01 46S 1905 132 20164
we F. GEORGE RESERVOIR
011181 40 31.44 84.6 203 11.2 0 oD 1.0 Me FOR. u05-03 4.5 Bee 135 20145
OLLICL 40 117.85 81.6 S.3 12.6 O 3 22 Me FOR. U05-03 4.5 940 135 20115
OlbiJ1 40 25.74 72.9 Se6 1968 2 165 oO Me FOR. U06-01 45 1001) 132 0126
1111 40 32.50 58.0 3.9 37.5 0 4 or Me FOR. v06-01 4.5 7.9 135 20126
wEISS LAKE
0112C1 40 26642 89.2 1.4 904 0 0 0 Me FOR. U06-11 4.5 20.4 132 +0170
OL12E1 40 23.65 50.3 45.2 4.5 oO 0 0 Me FOR. U06-11 4.5 7.5 132 0165
WILSON LAKE
OLI4FL 30 7.30 25.7 8.1 66.1 0 ) ol Me AGRIC U06-01 4.5 3.6 127 20141
LAKE PURDY
011501 30 B44 89.8 1.3 8.8 0 0 al M, FOR. 108-06 5.0 19.8 140 20214
0115C1 30 3.99 72.5 9 26.9 3 0 3 Me FORK. 108-06 5.0 12.1 140 20214


MEAN ANNUAL STREAMFLOW

(m/sec. hem’
aitseciem? sya
010.008 — O
osteo — Oo
oe os — O
ose - Oo
Ow 0 — O
ose - @
Se’

4

| \

Figure 8.

Distribution of mean annual areal flows in
study areas in the eastern United States.

22

streams draining


83

SUBUKATNACE AREAS
STORET NOw

NEW YORK

OTTER LAKE
362581

ROUND LAKE
3630A1
36308)
3630C1)

SCHROON LAKE
363401
363402
3634E)
3634F1
363461

SENECA LAKE
3635U1
3635F 2
363561
3635H1
36351
3635M1

SWAN LAKE
3636A1

SWINGING BRIDGE RES.
3637H1

CONESUS LAKE
3639AL
363981
3639C1
363902
3639F 1
36394)

LOWER ST.
3640A1

ALLEGHENY
3641C1
3641H1
364141
3641K)
3641L1
3641M1
3641N1

REGIS
RES (PENN)

1
REGION

20

10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
10
20
20
10

10

AREA
(SQ KM)

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

FOR

16.9

87.8
44.5
34.5

B9.1
93.7
94.0
92.3
88.8

43.0
42.5
55.7
40.6
20.3
538.8

60.5
51.0

25.0
25.2
23.8

6e7
15.4
39.6

92.7

50.0
93.0
96.0
9901
98.3
95.1
93.8

LAND USE PERCENTAGES

ck

3.8

2

AG

62.2

UKB

0
Sed
0
58
406
7
8

268
2

06
ol
04
2.5
4e2
1.7
4.9

1566

2e1

4607

WET

OTHER

OVERALL
LAND USE
CATEGORY

Me AGRIC

Me FOR.
Me AGRIC
MIXED

Me FOR,
FOREST
FOREST
FOREST
FOREST

MIXED
MIXED
Me FOR.
MIXED
MIXED
Me. FOR.

Me FOR.
Me FORe

Me AGRIC
MIXED
Me AGRIC
Me URBAN
Me. AGRIC
MIXED

FOREST

My FOR,
FOREST
FOREST
FOREST
FOREST
FOREST
FOREST

SOILS

MAP UNIT

110-02

110-02
110-02
110-02

$04-05
$04-05
$04-05
$04-05
$04-05

110-04
A0Q7-01
A07-01
A07-01
AQ7-01
A07T-01

110-01
110-01

A07-01
AQ7T-01
A07T-01
A07-01
A07-01
A0T-01

S04-05

110-04
110-04
108-02
108-02
108-02
108-02
108-02

MEAN
4 SLOPE

PH — ()
5.0 729
7.6

eT

406

4S 1209
4.5 1369
4.5 1202
4o5 1766
4S Led
5.0 1664
6.3 Gal
6.43 6.3
663 464
6.3 204
663 1262
5.5 12.6
SS 1202
6.3 4.3
6.3 602
6.3 640
6.3 5-0
6.3 3e1
6.3 903
4.5 5.8
5.0 10.6
500 1764
5.0 1868
520 1865
S.0 1668
5.0) 1461
S.0 17.6

AVE ANN
PRECIP
(CM)

a1

104
104
104

oT
oT
97

99

81
84
81
84
al
81

114
114
9

719
19

93
97

112
114
114
114
117
17
117

Flow

(CMS/SQ

20137

20158
20158
60158

20163
+0163
©0163
+0163
00163

0148
00147
20042
20157
20049
20148

20214
20154

+0120
20120
2012)
0122
0120
0122

0182

+0181
20248
20293
20147
+0122
+0105
0173

KM)


SECTION II
INTRODUCTION

HISTORY AND OBJECTIVES

The initial planning for the National Eutrophication Survey (NES)
visualized a detailed watershed land use study for each of the approxi-
mately 750 lakes which was to be done parallel to the field sampling
program. The idea stemmed from a desire to better understand the rela-
tionship between lake trophic state and watershed land use. It was hoped
that the "fruits" of this effort would be the development of a quick,
relatively accurate method of assessing nutrient loadings to lakes based
on land use analysis of their watersheds.

The original concept pictured identification and mensuration of overall
land use types through aerial photo and topographic map interpretation of
the entire watershed of each lake included in the NES. For many reasons,
including the unavailability of good photo and/or map coverage for many
watersheds or parts of watersheds, the original concept was considerably
modified. Presently, the project consists of a study of about 1,000 non-
point type drainage areas, mostly within watersheds of lakes being studied
by the NES.

As it is now envisioned, the basic objectives of the NES land use study
are to investigate the relationships between "macro” drainage area character-
istics (particularly general land use) and nutrient runoff in streams with
an aim of developing a means for estimating nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus)
runoff based on land use and related geographic characteristics. The project
is part of a massive stream and lake sampling program being conducted by NES
and includes a large number of drainage areas covering a nationwide variety
of climatic and geographic conditions. This affords a unique opportunity
to look at the land use--nutrient loadings--eutrophication relationships on


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

ANIMAL DENSITY MEAN CONCENTRATIONS. EXPORT
SUBORAINAGE AREAS 6 7 (AN UNITS/SQ. KM) (MG/L) (KG/SQ_KM)
STORET NO~ FLAG GEOLOGY TOTP TOT N TOTP ORTHOP TOT N INORG N TOT P ORTHOP TOT N INORG N
ALABAMA
GANTT RESERVOIR -
010361 1 SEO W/O L 23.0 23.1 6018 +005 +805 2215 4e1 lel 18460 49.2
GUNTERSVILLE RESERVOIR
O104AL 4 SED 65.8 680.072 2017 1.433 +688 59.0 1349 1175.0 564.1
OL04EL 1 SEO 9344 102.3 042 20120 24129 1.318 26.5 766 1342.8 831.3
010461 a SED 11562 125.6 6051 «010 24492 1.497 30.8 640 1504.3 903.7
0104/1 1 SED S702 6069-6044 2011 26145 1.511 2604 666 1284.7 905.0
0104L1 2 SED 18.6 19.3 027 +007 1.465 2.405 1766466 121364 1564.7
HOLT LOCK AND DAM
010581 1 SEO W/OL 2.0 200 021 +007 1.235 +736 10.9 3.6 640.7 381.8
01051 1 SED W/O L +8 +9 4020 +008 1.314 2774 1061 4.0 66264 390.2
010501 2 SED W/O L 0 0.012 +006 +897 2508 509 360 44267 25067
LAY LAKE
0106C1 1 SED/MET 3967 39.3 .039 +012 +650 +270 21.6 646 360.2 149.6
010601 L SED/MET 46.3 45.5 040 2018 2892 2253 22.9 103 51166 145.1
MARTIN LAKE
O107CL 1 MET 2406 2467 2021 +008 +450 #116 1165 44 24601 6364
= OLO7H1 1 MET 2565 2763045 2017 +691 150 1064 369 15969 34.7
MITCHELL LAKE
010881 1 MET/SWOL 3364 3364 6032 2012 eval +327 2061 765 641.7 205.5
PICKWICK LAKE
0109C1 1 SEO 19.2 18.4 4035 010 +729 +264 14.4 Gel 299.5 108.4
010901 1 SEO 13.0 12.9 039 012 2531 2193 1665 406 22464 81.5
0109K1 4 SED W/O LL 12.8 12.6 011 +006 +532 2205 B4 406 40864 157.4
0109M1 4 SEO W/O L 1165 11.4 014 +009 2674 2225 O69 ae 331-1 110.5
010901 1 SED 5.2 5.0 029 2011 “71 2134 14.9 5.6 36462 68.6
We Fe GEORGE RESERVOIR
oliiBt 1 SEO W/O L lUe2 10.0 015 +006 +840 +091 667 2.7 377.0 40.8
OLLICL 1 SED W/U L164 11.2 027 +007 +527 2092 964 2a 18367 32.1
vhilJi 1 SED W/O L 1360 12.9 4024 008 2079 2224 964 Bel 303-7 87.3
o1liMi 1 SED W/O L 2406 24.4 = 052 +008 2797 +373 12.7 362 315-3 147.5
WEISS LAKE
611201 1 SED W/U0 LL 1068 10.5 014 +006 +055 +137 766 3.3 35746 74.8
oll2ed 1 SED W/O L 464 464 4030 +009 1.137 +107 15.5 4? 58769 95.3
WILSON LAKE
vLi4Fl 1 SEO 414 Gel 046 2019 1.713 +893 1768 7.3 66242 345.2
LAKE PURDY
011581 1 SWOL/MET 14.7 14.5 4052 2016 1.177 +106 34.8 1067 T8761 70.9

o11sch 1 SWOL/MET 4a? 44,5 «G57 Uli 2605 100 40.3 7.8 42769 TU67


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
STORET NO.

ILLINOIS
SHELBYVILLE RESERVOIR

173981

1739C1

173961

1739H1
SPRINGFIELD LAKE

174281
VERMILION RESERVOIR

1748A3

174881

1748C1

1748E1

1748F1

174861
SANGCHRIS LAKE

175381

1753C1

175301

1753E1
HOLIDAY LAKE

1754A2
RACCOON LAKE

1762A2
LAKE VANDALIA

1764A2

176461

1764C)

176401

at

INDIANA
CATARACT LAKE
180501
1805E}
1805€2
GEIST RESERVOIR
181101
MISSISSINEWA RESERVOIR
1827C1
1827D1
1827F1

6
FLAG GEOLOGY

ererery

forererererey

Mu

SED
SED
SED
SED

SED

SED
SED
SED
SED
SEO
SED

SED
SED
SED
SED

SED
SED

SEO
SED
SED
SED

SED
SED
SED

SED
SED

SED
SED

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS.

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

TOT P

27.2
2364
15-8
1661

2925

1969
1764
1

18.0
17S

17.8
18.3
1861
26.0

66.0
2665

3169
30.6
31.0
3207

2968
37.0
34.7

35e1
55e1

3501
4408

TOT N

26.7
2209
1563
1766

2868

19.6
1762
17.8
1768
17.8
1763

1704
17.9
17.7
25.5

67.0
2661

3165
30.2
30.6
30.3

29.2
36.3
34.0

34.6
53.2

33.8
43.5

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

(MG/L)
TOT P ORTHO P TOT N
2123 0074 5.370
2094 2033 6-660
e211) 102 70269
2270 0136 7.082
o1ld 050 72332
2092 2027 7.186
2089 0026 8.025
2079 2015 7.827
2153 2019 8.842
0076 017 82394
0067 0014 7.809
o12l 0049 6.624
2052 2038 6.109
el2i 2046 66510
182 0093 72641
0123 2051 Tol4d
0191 20045 2.775
0164 089 26260
0169 2069 2.550
19) 069 26108
313 0133 3.042
2135 2036 1.222
2259 0142 36215
2044 0014 1.155
2096 0047 50143
0172 2118 S.226
0105 2038 2.616
2096 052 5.781

INORG N

4e694
66157
66359
5.961

6.533

7.011
7.444
T2247
7.848
7.630
Tel77

5.915
5.229
5.607
6.876

6.292
2599

+888
791
0575
16444

0675
1.834
0532

46424
4.210

1.295
4.730

TOT P

23.2
18.1
42.6
S302

22.1

18.4
18.6
1563
29.0
146)
12.5

2360
10.3
2420
35.5

2468
3766

3164
3062
3907
621

35.8
7509
13.2

2920
49.7

3068
27.9

EXPORT
(KG/SQ@ KM)
ORTHO P TOT N
14.0 1014.7
664 1284.6
20.6 146861
26.8 1396.0
10.1 147662
Sou 1440.9
Seo 167868
2.9 151566
366 1678.6
362 1558.8
206 145261
903 1261.2
7.6 1215-2
Gel 1291.69
18.1 1489.5
10.3 1442.65
8.9 54509
17.0 43265
12.3 45562
146.3 43767
2604 603.7
9.5 323.8
41.6 94261
42 346.7
14.2 155362
341 1511.3
11.2 768.4
15.) 1678.4

INORG N

887.0
1226.5
1284.3
1175.1

1315.3

1405.8
1557.2
1403.3
1489.9
1416.9
1334.6

1126.2
1040.2
1112.7
1340.4

1271.0
117.8

169.9
141.2
119.4
286.7

178.9
53764
159.7

1336.1
1217.5

380.4
1373.3


V7
18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

Land resource regions in the eastern United States.
Regional relationships between general land use and

total phosphorus concentrations in streams.

Regional relationships between general land use and

total nitrogen concentrations in streams.

Regional relationships between general land use and

stream export of total phosphorus.

Regional relationships between general land use and

stream export of total nitrogen.

Scattergram of "contributing" land use types
phosphorus concentrations in streams.

Scattergram of "contributing" land use types
nitrogen concentrations in streams.

Scattergram of "contributing" land use types
orthophosphorus concentrations in streams.

Scattergram of "contributing" land use types

inorganic nitrogen concentrations in streams.

Scattergram of "contributing" land use types
stream exports of total phosphorus and total

Scattergram of "contributing" land use types

related to
related to
related to
related to
related to

nitrogen.
related to

exports of orthophosphorus and inorganic nitrogen.

Areal distribution of residuals from a prediction model
for total phosphorus concentrations in streams studied

jin the eastern United States.

Areal distribution of residuals from a prediction model

for total nitrogen concentrations in streams
the eastern United States.

vii

studied in

36

37

38

39

40

43

47

51

52

53

54

56

57


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
STORET NOo

WISCONSIN

LAKE WISSOTA
S556D1

BIG EAU PLEINE RES
556581
5565C1

BEAVERDAM LAKE
5577C2
SST7E2

eaeeesee FOOTNOTES
1. REGION
1066
206
30

oNe

oEe

AND NeEe

Poaneees

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

6
FLAG GEOLOGY

1 SED w/0
1 IGNEOUS=!
1 IGNEOUS-|
1 SED

L SED

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SU KM)

ToT P TOT N

t 5265 S204
P 6348 6366
P S869 58.8
6765 6765
100.0 9901

FORAGE AND FOREST REGION
«CORN BELT AND DAIRY REGION
AND CENTRAL GENERAL FARMING AND FOREST REGION

ToT Pp

085

2102
+066

0224
+136

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

4Q0eeeePIEDMONT AND COASTAL PLAIN MIXED FARMING AND FOREST REGION

NOTE ==-- WHERE DRAINAGE AREAS COVER PARTS OF TWO REGIONS»

(MG/L)

ORTHO P TOT N INORG N
2050 1.872 92)
0048 1.666 +700
2036 20453 1.352
2089 20723 0735
0094 70449 6.510

THE FIRST

NUMBER IDENTIFIES THE REGION HAVING THE MOST EXTENSIVE COVERAGEs AND THE SECOND
3 NUMBER IDENTIFIES THE REGION WITH LEAST EXTENT

AFTER AUSTIN

(1972)

2e Cheeses eCLEARED UNPRODUCTIVE

3. Us Se

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (1970)

4. FROM UNPUBLISHED ESTIMATES BY GUY O, SMITH (1975)

BeeeeNO PROBABLE POINT SOURCE EVIDENTs BUT URBAN INFLUENCE
«NO PROBABLE POINT SOURCE EVIDENTs BUT AGRICULTURAL CONCENTRATION NEAR SAMPLING SITE

Se
6. FLAG
1
2
4
7. GEOLOGY

SED... eSEDIMENTARY ROCKS (OR DEEP ALLUVIUM)
SED W/O L OR SWOL.e.eSEDIMENTARY ROCKS

«NO PROBABLE POINT SOURCE EVIDENT
«NO PROBABLE POINT SOURCE EVIDENT»

CMS/SQ MI eeeeeeCUBIC METERS/SECOND/SQUARE KILOMETER

BUT INFLUENCE FROM STRIP MINING

1G-Veeee IGNEOUS ROCKS OF VOLCANIC ORIGIN

IS=P OR

1G-P.

»METAMORPHIC ROCKS
«IGNEOUS ROCKS UF PLUTONIC ORIGIN
WHERE COMBINATIONS EXIST THE PREDOMINANT TYPE IS SHOWN FIRST

INCLUDING LIMESTONE
(OR DEEP ALLUVIUM) NOT INCLUDING LIMESTONE

TOT P

16.6

2365
15-0

4409
29.8

EXPORT

(KG/SQ KM)

ORTHO P TOT N
10.9 40909
11.0 42965
B.2 55704
17.9 546.2
20.6 1629.6

INORG N

201.7

161.1
307.2

147.4
1424.1


SUMMARY OF LANO USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

ANIMAL OENSITY MEAN CONCENTRATIONS tXPORT
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS 6 7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM) (MG/L) (KG/S@_KM)
STORET NO. FLAG GEOLOGY TOTP TOT N TOTP ORTHOP TOT N INORG N TOT P ORTHOP TOT N INORG N
GEORGIA
NOTTELY RES.
1312C1 1 MET 4164 38.5 037 +009 619 2185 2201 5.4 37065 110.7
131101 4 MET 3865 35.0 4035 +010 0759 «110 1965 5.6 422.7 1.3
SEMINOLE LAKE
131201 1 SED W/O L165 20.5 106 2047 +794 +098 3762 1665 278.5 34.4
BLUE RIDGE LAKE
13L6AL 1 MET 13.5 1361 018 +006 +769 0174 1662 5.4 69266 © 156.7
1316C) 1 MET 1861 17.6 .031 +007 2487 2108 2661 6.3 44160 97.8
131601 1 MET 1366 1362 6046 +007 +729 +070 42.3 664 67063 64,4
1316E1 4 MET 968 114 6010 +007 2470 2043 901 6.3 42568 39.0
BURTON LAKE
131881 1 MET 363 3.8 008 +005 2422 +080 8.5 5.3 450.9 85,5
1318C1 L MET 1.0 lel 6015 +010 2466 2066 15.7 1065 488-7 69.2
131801 1 MET 1.3 265.009 +005 +342 2052 967 564 36668 55.8
~ 131861 1 MET 165 1.7 008 2005 +353 2082 8.5 5.3 376.2 87.4
© HIGH FALLS POND
131981 1 MET 38.7 38.6 025 +007 $522 2227 11.2 361 23461 101.8
ILLINOIS
CARLYLE RESERVOIR
170601 1 SED 2767 27.3 2243 2105 24095 «750 4704 20.5 857.0 146.4
1706E1 1 SEO 21.7 2164 6134 2045 1.720 +529 26.7 9.0 342.8 105.4
17064) 1 SEO 2901 28.7 «273 2093 2.305 0734 54.4 1862 45063 143.4
CRAB ORCHARD LAKE
a7i2C1 1 SED 2868 26.4 089 +021 2.236 1.395 17.2 4.0 431.62 269.0
LAKE DECATUR
171481 1 SEO 1263 12.2 122 2041 64399 5.093 23.8 8.0 1248.0 993.3
1714C1 1 SED 1169 Ale? 6153, +078 = 50292 4897 3064 1545 1049.8 971.5
17141 1 SED 1265 12.4 092 2032 64 B4s 5.832 18.3 664 1363.6 1161.3
1714F1 1 SEO 1566 15.4 078 +026 5.510 4.920 15.0 5.0 1061.8 948.1
171461 1 SEO 1364 13.2 160 +089 544534 B09 3064 = 16.9 1037.4 914.9
1714H) 1 SEO 15.4 W561 6115 +035 64227 5.645 2149 6.5 116364 1054.7
L714J1 1 SED 12.1 12.0 0 6127 2044 6.955 6.051 2201 7.7 1209.9 1052.6
LAKE LOU YEAGER
1726C1 1 SED 3869 3861 6177 +090 74205 6.066 33.6 0 1761 1381.1 1153.2
RENO LAKE
173581 1 SED 25.4 24.9 198 2041 2.390 710 39.6 6.2 47765 141.8
1735F1 1 SED 2920 2864 2143 2026 © 24138 2685 2766 5.0 413.3 132.4


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
iTORET NO.

"ENNESSEE

OLD HICKORY LAKE
4720C1
4T20F1

PERCY PRIEST RESERVOIR
4723F1

TIMS FORD RESERVOIR
472461
4724F)

REELFOOT LAKE
472701

ERMONT

ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN LAKE
$0102)
501031

WATERBURY RESERVOIR
SOLL31
SO114)

ro) 501151
VIRGINIA

CLAYTOR LAKE
510381
S103E1

JOHN W FLANNAGAN RES.
510501
Si0SE1
S105F1

OCCOQUAN RESERVOIR
510801

SMITH MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR
S110E1
S110F1
511061

LAKE CHESDIN
S211B)
Shiicl
SiLllel

6
FLAG GEOLOGY

eon ee ree

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

SEO
SED

SED

SED
SED

SED W/O L

SWOL/MET
MET/SED

SEO/MET
SED/MET
SED/MET

SED
SEO

SED
SED
SED

1G-P/MET

MET
MET
MET

MET
MET/SWOL
MET/SWOL,

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

ToT P

63465
70.9

6567

5361
29.8

12.8

61.5
35.3

1729
13.3
13.8

a7
109.3

3.8
660
361

15.8

2201
38.7
4605

19.7
14.2
8638

TOT N

63.5
70.8

65.6

S207
29.6

12.6

ole7
3542

17.8

13.2
13.7

113.2

ToT P

0149
2166

132

2035
032

2127

2031
2036

2021
2013
020

2022
2022

2023
2020
0022

2041

2075
+099
2036

2049
037
2040

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS.

(MG/L)
ORTHO P= TOT N
+086 975
+102 14260
2079 2753
2012 2774
2011 2729
+058 +556
+007 1.029
+007 1.034
+007 +697
+005 2745
2006 +835
+007 +433
010 1.374
+008 1.400
+010 +917
+009 +842
2028 +924
<027 +893
2024 +990
0014 710
+022 +889
+012 #540
2013 2640

INORG N

2226
0416

2277

0239
0245

0134

0426
2499

0324
2373
2375

2131
2996

2450
2209
2152

.277

2336
313
2339

e179
2057
2068

ToT P

8661
9664

57.9

18.0
16.9

45.5

18.5
21.5

14.6
9.0
13.7

exo No
Dao Ne

lle

27.68
3469
13.5

14.8
11.3
11.8

EXPORT
(KG/SQ KM)
ORTHO P

TOT N

$63.7
73164

330.3

39764
38561

19964

614.0
616.3

484.8
516.9
574.0

118.8
35461

544.8
35862
327.7

250.0

331.0
348.5
265-7

26964
164.5
189.4

INORG N

130.7
241.5

121.5

122.7
129.4

48.1

254.2
297.4

225.3
258.8
257.8

35.9
256.7

175.1
81.6
59.2

74.9

124.5
110.2
126.9

54.2
17.4
20.1


98

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS 6Y SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANW
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STURET NU» (SQ KM) FOR cL AG UR6 WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH § (%) (cM) (CMS/S0
NEW YORK
CANNONSVILLE RESERVOIR
360581 10 11.29 88.6 5.3 641 0 0 0 FOREST Tl0-01 5.5 20.7 109 +0162
360501 10 32.01 77.6 3.1 18.8 “5 0 0 OM. FOR. 110-01 5.5 14.9 109 20162
3605€1 410 51.52 66.2 15.5 17.8 3 2 0 Me FOR. 110-01 5.5 1640 109 +0182
3605F 1 10 3411 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 FOREST 110-01 5.5 26.0 109 20191
CARRY FALLS RESERVOIR
360681 10 4.92 41.3 0 0 0 S646 2.1 FOREST $0405 4.5 4.5 97 +0190
CASSADAGA LAKE
360781 10 «75 62.8 3.9 33.3 0 0 0 Me FOR. 110-03 5.0 10.8 97 20177
3607C1 10 1.27 7664 1866 5.0 0 0 0 FOREST AQ7T-15 640 1466 97 +0176
CAYUGA LAKE
360862 2a 6681 20.6 27.8 51.6 0 Cy) 0 Ms. AGRIC AG7T=01 6.3 4.0 86 20117
3608H1 20 22.02 27.9 23.1 45.8 5 247 0 MIXED A07-01 643 34 86 20135
3608M1 20 6016 2161 663 7201 0 25 0 Me AGRIC A07=01 6632 86 +0049
3608P2 20 6.29 11.9 7.0 80.6 35 0 0 AGRIC AQ7-01 6.3565 89 20119
36081 20 37.30 22.9 4.0 71.0 +3) 168 0 Me AGRIC AO7-01 643-342 89 +0116
CHAUTAUQUA
361081 12 27.97 47.7 604 3862 142 644 +1 MIXED AQ7-15 660 646 107 20184
3610C1 10 60.66 66.8 1467 14.6 22 364 +3 Me FOR. 110-03 5.0 89 107 +0188
361001 10 24.94 45,9 4.4 45.8 +2 345 22 MIXED 110-03 5.0 7.9 107 -0091
361081 10 75.73 56.8 6.6 31.6 2.7 2.1 rr Me FOR. 110-03 5.0 6.9 107 20185
3610F1 10 412 35.9 1060 663 47.8 0 0 . URBAN 110-03 5.0 5.8 107 +0084
3610H1 10 15444 53.5 1166 34.4 5 C) 0 Me FOR. 110-03 5.0 8.3 107 +0190
3610J1 10 31.473 62.9 1365 19.9 8 2.7 2 Me FOR. 110-03 5.0 8.3 107 +0188
3610K1 10 35.77 57.4 5.0 35.8 300145 0 My FOR. 110-03 5.0 0 744 107 20181
GOODYEAR LAKE
361381 10 29650 51.9 146 40.4 lel 5.0 0 Me FOR, 110-04 5.0 11.4 102 20161
3613C1 10 567 41.3 165 S604 0 +8 0 Ms AGRIC 110-04 5.0 8.9 102 +0163
361301 10 10623 74.4 Se9 1766 0 2.2 0 Ms FOR. 110-04 5.0 1144 102 +0162
3613E1 10 32.58 58.3 5.0 32.4 lel 3e1 ol Me FOR. 110-04 5.0 1143 102 +0160
LAKE HUNTINGTON
361501 10 244 7764 604 0 1269 3.3 0 Me FOR, 110-01 5.5 624 114 +0153
KEUKA LAKE
361781) - 10 3.37 39.9 13.6 38.1 Bee 0 oO MIXED 110-04 5.0 10.5 86 +0082
36171 10 5.96 2867 843 62.4 0 +6 0 Ms. AGRIC 110-04 5.0 6.7 86 +0081
361701 2a 89072 4162 2024 35.3 22 2a +8 9 MIXED AQ7T-01 6.3 9.0 86 +0080
3617F1 rat 8.21 27.3 22.6 48.4 +8 9 0 MIXED 07-01 663 4.7 86 +0081
3617H1 10 4.12 26,0 2641 47.8 0 el 0 = MIXED 110-04 5.0 7.5 86 +0083


MEAN ORTHOPHOSPHORUS EXPORT (kgs/km’/yr.)

(kgs. /km?/yr.)
i

MEAN INORGANIC NITROGEN EXPORT

34

sane Eb

T " T T
o % Ey * so »

60
% IN AGRICULTURE + % IN URBAN

ed
e

. 10.61 . .

Figure 27.

|
T T T T T T T 1,

~ 40 so o 7 0 ° 10%
% IN AGRICULTURE + % IN URBAN

Scattergram of "contributing" land use types related
to stream exports of orthophosphorus and inorganic nitrogen.

54


"Contributing" Land Use Types and Nutrient Export

Figures 26 through 27 illustrate the relationships between nutrient
export and "% agriculture plus % urban". These figures show less
significant relationships between nutrient export and "contributing"
land use than were shown between nutrient concentrations and "contribu-
ting" land use. From an earlier analysis of overall land use and nutrient
runoff, lower correlations (r = 0.41 between total P export and "% agric. +
% urban", 0.36 between orthophosphorus export and "% agric. + % urban",
0.46 between total nitrogen export and "% agric. + % urban", and 0.61 for
inorganic nitrogen export and "% agric. + % urban") were to be expected.
Because of the covariants mentioned earlier, and other effects on the
"flow" portion of the export computation, a more accurate method of
predicting export values (or stream loads) would be to use the appro-
priate model for concentration prediction and then multiply by flow.
Stream flow data are available for most of the United States from the
U.S. Geological Survey. For drainage areas where flow data are not
available, good estimates can be made for USGS flow records on overlapping,
‘adjacent, or nearby areas, together with some general knowledge of the
topographic and climatic characteristics of the particular area.

Regionality

Figures 28 and 29 illustrate the regional aspects of the two simple
models [(1) and (5)] for predicting nutrient concentrations in streams
from combined percentages of agricultural and urban existing land use.
These maps offer some qualitative refinement of the models by revealing,
on the basis of data gathered for this study, geographical areas where
nutrient concentrations can be expected to be greater, much the same as,
or less than those predicted by the models.

The data in Figure 28 illustrate some fairly obvious regional patterns.
They indicate that phosphorus concentrations in streams are generally

50


SECTION III
DATA COLLECTION METHODS

DRAINAGE AREA MEASUREMENT AND LAND USE IDENTIFICATION

Following tributary site selection, individual drainage areas were
delineated on U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps and their
areas determined by use of a compensating polar planimeter or an elec-
tronic planimeter. General land use identifications were made using
late-date aerial photography and/or recent land use maps. Land use
categories included: (1) forest, (2) cleared-unproductive, (3) agri-
culture, (4) urban, (5) wetland, and (6) other (including barren,
extractive and open water). These types roughly correspond in level of
classification to Level I of the recently developed USGS Land Use Classi
fication System (U.S. Department of Interior, 1972).

LAND USE PERCENTAGE COMPUTATION

For each drainage area, percent coverage of each land use type was
compiled by use of equidistant dot pattern overlays. The dot patterns
were placed non-selectively over the USGS map overlays on which land
use units had been outlined. To determine the land use percentage for
a given drainage area, the number of dots that fell on each land use
category was totaled; each total was multiplied by 100, and the resuit-
ing products were divided by the number of dots falling in the drainage
area. Dot pattern densities varied from one drainage area to another
depending on the overall size of the drainage area; generally. the
larger the area the less dense the dot pattern. At least 400 dots per
drainage area, but preferably less than 800 were needed for a valid
determination of percent coverage.

12


sample sizes for a particular land use category are small, the concen-
tration or export values for that category are of questionable use. For
example, it is not safe to assume that, based on data for two drainage
areas, streams draining "agriculture" areas in the Piedmont and Coastal
Plain Mixed Farming Region (P.C. Region) are going to have generally
higher total nitrogen concentrations than streams in the Corn Belt and
Dairy Region (C.D. Region). As a matter of fact, from looking at the
data for "mostly agriculture" areas, where the sample size was fairly
Jarge for both regions, one would probably estimate total nitrogen
concentrations to be slightly lower in the P.C. Region than the C.D.
Region. Also, because of the "room" within these overall land use
categories (e.g. drainage areas categorized "forest" may contain from
75 to 100 percent forest and 0 to 6.9 percent agriculture), where
sample sizes are small on either end of the overall land use category
"scale" for a given Land Resource Region, the amount of that land use
type within those few drainage areas can be expected to be smaller than
it would be with a region where sample sizes are larger on the same end
of the "scale".

INDIVIDUAL RELATIONSHIPS AND PREDICTION CAPABILITY

"Contributing" Land Use Types and Stream Nutrients

Figures 22 through 27 illustrate the relationships between land uses
generally considered nutrient contributing (% agriculture plus % urban)
and nutrients in streams. Several ways of looking at the effects of
land use on nutrient concentrations or loads in streams were investigated.
In general, nutrient loads increased with increased percentages in agri-
cultural land usage, and decreased percentages in forested land. Little
to no correlation was found between nutrient levels and percent of land
in either cleared-unproductive, urban or wetland. This was expected
because of the probable masking effects by agriculture and forest.

4]


However, the root mean square deviation using this model is only
0.26 as compared to 0.27 for the first model (1), which means it is not
appreciably better for prediction. In other words, although the model
does predict somewhat different average phosphorus concentrations
because of some regional characteristics, the unexplained variation
around this prediction is so great that the change is really not
significant. Differences in predicted values using the two models are
shown in Table 3.

TABLE 3. PREDICTED MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS
(mg/1) FOR SIMPLE AND REGIONAL MODELS

Simple Model Regional Model
Avg. PCONC in Avg. PCONC in
% Ag + % Urb Avg. PCONC Region B Regions A, C and D
0 0.015 0.021 0.016
25 0.025 0.034 0.025
50 0.043 0.054 0.040
75 0.074 0.085 0.063
100 0.126 0.136 0.101

Finally, a model which incorporates every variable on file in this
study (listed in Appendix A) that has a statistically significant effect,
adjusted for other related variables on file, is the following:

Lodi 9 (PCONC) = -2.576 - 0.0046 slope + 0.0021 precip. +
0.129 pH + 0.0071 (% agric. + % urban) (4)

The correlation coefficient for this model is 0.75 and the root mean
square deviation is 0.255 meaning that again, predictions using this model
are not appreciably better than those derived from the simple model.
Inclusion of this model is primarily to show the effect of the statisti-
cally significant variables used, holding everything else constant. It

45


SUBORAINAGE AREAS
STORET NO.

GEORGIA
NOTTELY RESe
A3L1CL
VSL
SEMINOLE LAKE
131201
BLUE RIDGE LAKE
1316AL
1316C)
131601
1316E1
BURTON LAKE
131881
13160)
131801
1318E1
= HIGH FALLS POND
131981]

ILLINOIS

CARLYLE RESERVOIR
170601
17061
1706H)

CRAB ORCHARD LAKE
1712C1

LAKE DECATUR
172481
1714C1
1714E1
LTL4FL
171461
471441
17141

LAKE LOU YEAGER
1726C1

REND LAKE
173581
1735F1

1
REGION

30
30

40

30
30
30
30

30
30
30
30

40

20
20
20

20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20

20
20

AREA
(SQ KM)

TLe77
29.84

55.43

9.40
36.36
10.23
16.96

16.14
20.33
17.25
14.71

99.30

134.89
223.41
59.39

43.90

20.90
109.06
53.54
45.56
26.37
57.06
21.63

S1.13

229.14
130.82

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AKEAS

FOR

73.9
82.0

67.7

85.9
83.4
86.0
96.0

98.0
9964
99.2
99e1

54.9

1.4

LAND USE PERCENTAGES
2

ch

169
3

Jbre
wuNw~A

ecco

AG

24.2
1762

2761

11.4
15.3
11.5

3.2

2.0
06

oo

40.7

80.5
66.2
80.8

$2.6

9764
93.8
9901
9849
93.9
97el
9568

97.3

68.0
76.0

URB

© eo

ecoo

coco

WET

ecco oo

ecco

eocooco oc

°

oo

OTHER

ocooo co

ecco

onn

8

oconrocne

OVERALL

LAND USE
CATEGORY

My
Me

Me

FOR.
FOR.

FOR.
FOR.

FOR.
FOR.

FOREST

FOREST
FOREST
FOREST
FOREST

Me

FOR.

AGRIC

Me AGRIC

AGRIC

Me AGRIC

AGRIC
AGRIC
AGRIC
AGRIC
AGRIC
AGRIC
AGRIC

AGRIC

Me AGRIC

AGRIC

SOILS

3
MAP UNIT

U0S-06
05-04

U06-01

U0S-06
U05-06
U0S~06
U0S5-06

U0S-03
U0S5-06
05-03
UOS=06

U05-01

A01-03
A01-03
A01-03

A06-07

M06-06
M06-06
MU6-06
M06-06
M06-06
06-06
M0o-06

M06-06

A01-03
A01-03

4

PH

PE

CHHH HAGE UV uM

Dae
www

a
°

Dorcaon
Soo0000

6.0

MEAN

SLOPE

(8)

17.8
2764

31.1
2546
20.5
35.5

34.3
38.0
39.9
36.6

6.8

1.5
203
1.5

be

22
1.7

AVE ANN
PRECIP
(CM)

135
135

132

132
132
132
132

165
165
165
165

12e

104
102
102

94
94
94
94
94
94
94

91

107
107

Flow

(CMS/SQ

20192
+0176

0112

00287
+0285
+0292
+0289

20340
+0330
+0332
20332

20141

+0063
20064
+0062

+0061

+0061
20063
0062
20062
+0061
20062
20061

+0061

20064
0061

KM)


drawn from those already selected for support of NES lake reports, or
had to be selected within a reasonable distance of NES study lake areas
to accomodate sampling by the National Guard. At the time selections
were being made of drainage areas within the 1972 study area, tributary
sampling sites had already been selected and the actual field sampling
was underway. Moreover, at that time, the major thrust of the Survey
was on point source impact to lakes, particularly that due to municipal
wastewater treatment plant discharges. Generally, only “problem” lakes
had been selected for study and many of these were in watersheds having
"problem" type land uses. Hence, it was somewhat difficult to find
drainage areas without point sources; and obtain adequate coverage of
all land use types.

At the time tributary sites were being selected for 1973 NES study
area lakes, emphasis was still on point sources. However, tributary
sampling had not yet begun in several of the 1973 area states which
allowed an opportunity to choose additional sites where their inclusion
was warranted by land use homogeneity and other factors suitable for
land use and nutrient runoff analyses.

Selection of tributary sampling sites for land use study drainage
areas in the 1974 area (west of the Mississippi) was made under more
ideal conditions. By this time water research mandates had been revised
by passage of Public Law 92-500. These revisions resulted in a broaden-
ing of Survey objectives to include assessment of relationships of
non-point sources to lake nutrient levels. In addition, lake selection
criteria were modified to no longer include just "problem" lakes, but
lakes representative of a full range of water quality. This presented
a better balance of lake watersheds and land use types as well as lake
types. In several instances, where it was necessary to achieve a
better geographic distribution of drainage areas or obtain a better
balance of land use categories, sites were selected outside NES lake

watersheds.


A third model using all variables on file which are statistically
significant, adjusted for other related variables on file, is the
following:

Log, (NCONC) = 0.237 - 0.0018 (% Forest) - 0.002 slope - 0.0018
precip. - 0.0012 animal unit density + 0.0013 (%
agric. + % urban) + 0.000055 (% agric. + % urban)? (8)

This model has a root mean square deviation of about the same as the
previous two models (0.17) and a correlation coefficient of 0.84, indi-
cating it is not significantly better for predictive purposes than the
simple model. It does show, however, which variables have statistically
significant effects when other variables are held constant. It is
interesting to note that animal unit density has a significant ‘effect
on mean total nitrogen concentrations!.

Figures 24 and 25 show the relationships between "% agriculture
plus % urban" and both mean orthophosphorus concentrations and mean
inorganic nitrogen concentrations. The equation for the regression
line shown in Figure 24 is:

Logi 9 (OPCONC) = -2.208 + 0.0089 (% agric. + % urban) (9)
The equation for the regression line shown in Figure 25 is:
Logig (INCONC) = -0.873 + 0.0136 (% agric. + % urban) (10)

The correlation coefficients (r = 0.70 for OPCONC and % agric. +
% urban, and 0.82 for INCONC and % agric. + % urban) for these relation-
ships are a little lower than similar relationships for total phosphorus
and total nitrogen shown in Figures 22 and 23.
T Data from the three drainage areas with extremely high animal unit
densities were not used to fit the above model. In these three cases,

county figures were apparently not appropriate and gave distorted
animal unit density values.

49


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study would not have been possible without the volunteer
Manpower supplied by the National Guard of each state. The Guardsmen
were responsible for collecting, preserving, and shipping the monthly
samples from each designated stream site. Their contribution is
sincerely appreciated.

Also gratefully acknowledged are the efforts of Mr. Robert R.

Payne (Coordinator, National Eutrophication Survey, Washington, D.C.),
who worked with each State water pollution control agency in initiating
the survey, and Lt. Col. Louis R. Dworshak (Coordinator of Military
Resources, Washington, D.C.), who arranged for the participation of
the National Guard in each state.

Most of the data compilation (land use photo interpretation,
drainage area and slope measurement, etc.) was accomplished by the
following persons: June Fabryka, Madeline Hall, Thomas Jackson, Rose
McCloud, Martha McCoy, Ted McDowell, Nola Murri, Michael Ness, James
Sachet, and Leta Gay Snyder. Many of these individuals also assisted
in graphics compilation and various aspects of basic research.

Dr. Don A. Pierce was primarily responsible for the construction
of the prediction models. Both Dr. Pierce and Dr. Dale H. P. Boland
provided assistance with computer programming and statistical data
manipulation.

Many of the staff at the Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
contributed input to this study through the logistic support, constructive
suggestions, and technical editing. Especially deserving of recognition
are Dr. Jack H. Gakstatter and Dr. Norbert A. Jaworski for their solid
support and invaluable guidance.

iv


10.

i.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

Goldschmidt, V. M. 1958. Geochemistry. London: Oxford University
Press. 730 pp.

Hammond, E. H. 1964. Analysis of Properties in Land Form Geography:
An Application to Broad-scale Land Form Mapping. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers 54:11-23.

Harper, J. A. 1975. Personal communication: Turkey Production
Characteristics. Poultry Science Department, School of Agriculture,
Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

Hohenboken, W. D. 1975. Personal communication: Sheep Production
Characteristics. Animal Science Department, School of Agriculture,
Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

Holt, R. F., D. R. Timmons, and J. R. Latterell. 1970. Accumulation
of Phosphates in Water. Agricultural Food and Chemistry 18(5):781-784.

Holt, R. F. 1971. Surface Water Quality is Influenced by Agricul-
tural Practices. Presented at the 1971 Winter Meeting of the
American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Chicago, Illinois.

Johnson, T. H. and G. J. Mountney. 1969. Poultry Manure Production,
Utilization, and Disposal. World's Poultry Science Journal 25(3):
202-217.

Likens, G. E. and F. H. Bormann. 1974. Linkages between Terrestrial
and Aquatic Ecosystems. Bioscience 24(8):447-456.

Loehr, R. C. 1974. Characteristics and Comparative Magnitude of

Non-point Sources. Journal Water Pollution Control Federation
46(8):1849-1872.

66


|

\

MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN
CONCENTRATIONS. (mg/!)

9rm13— Oo
131%20— 0
20t030— O

>30- @

4

Figure 7.

Areal distribution of mean total nitrogen concentrations in

streams draining study areas in the eastern United States.

2]


largely made up of aluminosilicate minerals and containing little to

no apatite. Apparently all of the southern Ontario watersheds classified
igneous by Dillon and Kirchner contained "low phosphorus" rocks. Meta-
morphic rocks might be fit into one of the above groups depending on the
type or types of rocks metamorphosed.

Although this scheme represents a better breakdown of igneous and
some metamorphic rocks for studying the effects of general rock types on
Phosphorus in streams, it may present difficulties. For many parts of
the United States, geologic maps with the level of detail necessary to
accomplish this breakdown, may be lacking or difficult to obtain.

64


o ® RESIDUALS EXPRESSED IN
3G ae STANDARD DEVIATION. UNITS
ee FROM THE LOG MEAN
RESIDUAL OF THE MODEL:
109,,(N) = -.278+.0088x in Ag. + % in Urban)

2 500 1gp0Km

| \

Figure 29. Areal distribution of residuals from a prediction model
for total nitrogen concentrations in streams studied in

the eastern United States.

57


following equation:

, foe c+ a
pL AQ 1 1
and

, om c+ a
nop A, 1 1
where: A_ = Animal units per square kilometer for Total P;
A Animal units per square kilometer for Total N;
Total agricultural land (by county) in square kilometers;
Percent of subdrainage area in agriculture;
Total cattle and calves (by county);
Total hogs and pigs (by county);
Total sheep and lambs (by county);
1 = Total layers (by county) s
P, = Total broilers (by county); and
P, Total turkeys (by county).

For drainage areas located in more than one county, weighted unit
densities were determined based on the amount of each drainage area's
agricultural land in each county. The coefficients have been adjusted
to reflect average. animal weights relative to an average weight for
cattle and calves (same sources as for Table 1). It should be noted
that coefficients for poultry take into consideration average life
spans and broods per year.

A

2» 2 oo sO
oon on ow

w

D
Cc
H
s
Pp

GEOLOGY IDENTIFICATION
Some recent works on non-point source nutrients in streams have

given as much or more emphasis to the effects of geology than to the
effects of land use (Dillon and Kirchner, 1975; Likens and Bormann,

14


themselves to agricultural land use. Conversely, where the terrain

is too mountainous or dissected or the soil too poor for agriculture
to be economically feasible, such as in much of New England, forests
are allowed to predominate.

The fact that study subdrainage area sizes vary, and that those
categorized as forest were considerably smaller than any other category,
suggested that size might have a bearing on nutrient concentrations
and/or stream flow. If either factor was related to size, then export
would also be related. However, analysis of these data revealed no
significant correlations.

The frequency polygons (Figures 13 through 16) illustrate how the
nutrient concentration and export data were distributed for each land
use type. Comparison of these polygons with Figures 9 through 12 show
the data for forested drainage areas were grouped more tightly around
the mean values than were data for agricultural drainage areas. The
irregular data distributions for urban drainage areas are of question-
able significance, mainly because of the small sample size.

Regionality

To refine the relationships of land use to nutrient runoff shown by
the bar graphs and frequency polygons, a regional analysis is presented
(Figures 18 through 21). Because the data appeared to be more closely
related to land use than any other one "macro" element, it seemed a
regional breakdown should be based on general land use and related geo-
graphical aspects that were instrumental in determining land usage. A
modified breakdown of Austin's Land Resource Regions (1972) fits this
description and the overall data distribution (Figure 17).

These graphs help explain where, within a given data distribution
(in Figures 13 through 16), one is most likely to find concentration or
export values based on regional location, but their use is limited. Where

31


LS

05

034

0244

1-4

MEAN ORTHOPHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/1)

1 = 0.70 .

005] mam 8 as wee . « .

T T T T T qT q
10 20 30 40 50 60 70

% IN AGRICULTURE + % IN URBAN

e4
s4
at

Figure 24. Scattergram of “contributing" land use types related to
orthophosphorus concentrations in streams.


SECTION IV
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

This section discusses the analysis of land use, other drainage area
characteristics, and stream nutrient runoff data compiled for drainage
areas within the first two groups of states covered by the NES. The
raw data are presented in Appendix A and the distribution of the 473
data points (comprising the 1972 and 1973 areas) are illustrated in
Figure 1. Subsequent reports will present data on the 524 drainage
areas west of the Mississippi River where tributary sampling is still
in progress.

AREAL DISTRIBUTIONS OF DATA

After compiling the data presented in Appendix A, several types of
these data were sorted into classes and plotted on maps of the eastern
half of the United States using a graduated color scheme. It was
theorized that this might aid in uncovering correlations, regional
patterns, and (by comparison with maps of other “macro” aspects such as
physiographic regions, geology, soils, and climate) possible covariants.
Maps were compiled for total P concentrations, total N concentrations,
total P export, total N export, % agriculture plus % urban, flow per unit
area per year, and mean slope. Maps illustrating the most significant
patterns are included in black and white as Figures 5 through 8.

The map (Figure 5) of various classes of percent of drainage area
in agricultural land use plus the percent in urban land use (% agriculture
+ % urban) revealed what might be expected from a knowledge of general
land use patterns in the eastern United States. High percentages of land
in agricultural and urban uses were present in the midwest farming and

7


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINALE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LANO USE 3. 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NO. (SQ KM) FOR cL AG URB WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH  (%) (CM) (CMS/SQ_ KM)
MISSISSIPPI
ROSS BARNETT RESERVOIR
2804C1 40 183.79 59.8 +7? 3965 0 0 0 Me FOR. A07-09 6.0223 127 +0134
SARDIS LAKE
2805C1 40 8.91 62.7 1065 26.1 0 0 +7) Me FOR. A07-09 6.0646 132 +0055
2805E1 40 69.00 50.7 11.6 37.7 0 C) 0 Me FOR. AQ7T=09 640 B44 132 +0140
2805F 1 40 31.31 56.8 6.7 35.5 4 0 +60 Me FOR. 407-09 660 668 132 20122
26uSH) 40 27.38 45.8 5.0 48.8 0 0 +4 = MIXED A07-09 6.0 1044 132 +0146
28051 40 23.98 51.8 1.7 45.3 0 0 142 Me FOR. A07-09 660 1064 132 20072
GRENAVA LAKE
2806F1 40 56.62 49.0 +9 50.0 0 al 0 Me AGRIC A07=06 6.0 366 132 20152
NEw HAMPSHIRE
LAKE wINNIPESAUKEE
330341 10 17.09 87.3 2.3 7.5 +1 2.5 +3) Me FOR, S04-04 4.5 8.4 109 +0193
330301 10 273° 74.2 342 1661 665 0 0 Me FOR. $0404 4.5 15.1 114 20192
330361 10 6614 77.1 4.9 7.8 +B 744 240 Me FOR, S04-05 4.5 1167 114 +0193
3303F 1 10 3.06 80.0 5.0 1540 0 0 0M. FOR. S04-04 4.5 1164 114 20193
3303J1 10 7.02 82.8 4.4 12.4 “4 0 0 Ms FOR. $04-04 4.5 12.4 114 +0193
330 3K 1 10 18.36 93.5 1.0 4.8 0 0 +7 FOREST $04-04 4,5 181 114 20193
© 3303L1 10 40.51 91,5 1466 245 166 2.1 +7? FOREST $04-04 4.5 1266 112 +0193
s 3303N1 10 8.65 79.4 762 863 168 3.3 0 Me FOR. $04-04 4.5 5.7 109 +0193
3303U1 10 23.00 95.0 2 oD el 2.5 1.3 FOREST S04-04 4e5 1409 107 20193
3303V1 10 8.96 94.9 el 203 0 6 167 FOREST 504-04 4.5 12.7 107 +0193
3303X1 10 7256 9663 +7 3.0 0 o 0 FOREST $04-05 4.5 16.5 109 +0193
3303Y1 10 9.84 91.3 2.9 5.8 0 0 0 FOREST S04-04 4.5 17.4 107 +0193
NEW JERSEY
SPRUCE RUN RESERVOIR
3420A2 40 40.32 48.2 8469 40.4 262 0 «3 MIXED U0S-05 4.5 5.6 122 +0142
342081 40 30.35 46.2 640 46.5 35 0 28 = MIXED Uos-05 4.5 1142 122 20137
3420C1 40 7.38 46.7 Sel 48,2 O) 0 0 MIXED y0S-05 4.5 12.9 122 +015)
342001 40 6437 57.9 10.6 30.3 162 0 0 Me FOR, U0S-05 4.5 14.8 122 20141
342061 40 4.61 69.2 2.7 28.1 0 0 0 Me FURS U0S-05 4.5 1564 122 20151
UNION LAKE
342281 40 38.95 49,5 165 45.1 364 ol 4 MIXED uos-11 4.5 1.5 112 0123
NEw YORK
CANADIAGUA LAKE
3604A3 20 14,56 22.0 3.3 73.4 Oo 1.3 0 MM, AGRIC AO7-01 663 346 84 +0064
3604C1 21 12.07 56.4 1367 29.9 0 0 0 Ms FOR. AO7-01 6.3 12.8 84 +0063
360401 20 3.34 40.0 28.5 31.5 0 0 0 = MIXED AQ7-01 6.3 15.3 84 «0059
3604E) 20 16.24 50.0 1968 29,0 162 0 0 Me FOR, AO7T-01 643 1364 84 «0064
3604H1 10 114.48 68.9 9.66 18-2 162 168 23) Me FOR. 110-04 5.0 1761 Bl +0113


MJMBER
OF SUBS

18

44

14

2

25

5

12

26
80

34
64
13

27

57
3

18

OVERALL LAND
USE CATEGORY
FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST
MIXED

MOSTLY URBAN
MOSTLY AGRIC.
AGRICULTURE

FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST
MIXED

MOSTLY URBAN
MOSTLY AGRIC.
AGRICULTURE

FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST
MIXED

MOSTLY URBAN
MOSTLY AGRIC
AGRICULTURE

FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST
MIXED.

MOSTLY URBAN
MOSTLY AGRIC
AGRICULTURE

Figure 19.

MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS 'mg/I
vs
LAND USE
BY LAND RESOURCE REGION

ete the North and Northeastern Forest
eager I and Forage Region
bs wa 1
Y if
— T al T T T T T T T
10 2.0 3.0 40 50
Corn Belt and Dairy Region
Y 7 Z 7, ZA
+ + + + + f + + T : T
10 20 30 40 50

Eost and Central General Farming
and Forest Region

ed,

_
MMMM.

10 20 30 40 50

Piedmont and Coastal Plain Mixed
Farming and Forest Region

Regional relationships between general land use and
total nitrogen concentrations in streams.

38


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
STORET NOw

INDIANA

MORSE RESERVOIR
182981

WAWASEE LAKE
1836C)

WINONA LAKE
184081
1840C1

MAXINKUCEE LAKE
184381
1843C1

OLIVER LAKE
184781

VERSAILLES LAKE
185081
185001

PIGEON LAKE
1855A2
185581

MARSH LAKE
18568)

HAMILTON LAKE
185781

S 1857C1

185701

KENTUCKY

LAKE CUMBERLAND
2101C1
2101H1
2201u1
2101K1
2101S1

DALE HOLLOW RESERVOIR
210281
2102C1
2102Fi

KENTUCKY LAKE
2104)
210401
2104E1
2104F1
2104K1
21u4t)
21041
2104N1
2104V1
210401
210441
210471
210421

6
FLAG GEOLOGY

arererens ~

era emer

SED
SED

SED
SED

SED
SED

SED

SED
SED

SED
SED

SED

SED
SED
SED

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

SED
SEO
SEO

SED
SED
SED
SED
SEO
Sev
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SEO

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

W/O
W/O
w/0
W/O
W/O

w/0

7

ereeee

ANIMAL DENSITY
(AN_UNITS/SO KM)

TOT P

2lel
4604

47.7
4B

38.3

48.8
48.3
34.6

4067
4709
6166
T7467

263

53.2
50.6
19.0

3069
20.0
2409
1661

566
12.8
19.9
19.5
14.6
12.6

73
Lied
13.5

TOT N

42.8
48.7

62.5
6464

45.1
40.7

7765

20.7
4503

47.9
4901

3864

49.0
48.5
34.7

4664
4707
61.2
7463

2.5

S269
50.3
20.9

30.6
19.8
24.6
15.9

94
12.6
19.6
19.2
19.5
12.4

Tee
11.3
13.3

TOT Pp

2070
2043

0073
2054

+163
+130

2035

2031
+080

2078
0 1b4

161

0087
2074
2052

021
2025
020
021
2009

2015
eO1l
0012

+129
2025
2013
2042
2008
2009
2010
+020
2019
018
012
2023
2008

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

(MG/L)
ORTHO P TOT N
2045 4.029
023 5.048
2020 2.781
2014 26928
2045 46731
+039 22630
2015 3.285
2013 ©927
2037 1.336
020 3.301
2042 5.098
+105 2.509
2031 36109
+009 1.700
2013 1.567
2008 1.554
2014 1.205
+009 1.223
«O11 12150
+007 +607
+008 +681
2005 16342
+007 2658
2037 1.865
2013 1.304
+030 1.630
2009 +544
2006 2598
+006 2818
2006 +565
2007 #300
2008 +580
+009 295)
6007 +869
+010 16173
+006 2271

INORG N

3.356
4.241

1.527
1.687

3.373
1.489

2.221

2413
+603

1.991
3.597

1.328

1.820
2736
713

2811
+676
0779
2786
+103

2485
S27
2241

461
2448
0483
0124
+096
337
2224
2218
0193
2177
2195
2239
+142

TOT P

24.2
1169

21.5
1064

5366
40.0

909

8.8
2368

2268
3169

4507
24.9

2146
18.0

EXPORT
(KG/SQ KM)
ORTHO P TOT N

15.6 1394.3
6.4 1397.7
5.9 81961
4.3 891.4

28.0 155744

12.0 808.5
4.3 933.0
3.7 263.2

11.0 397.9
Seo 966.5

12.9 1563.4

29.8 712.6
8.9 890.7
2.6 495.9
465 542.9
364 65669
5.9 505.3
368 512.8
4.7 493.7
2.9 254.5
47 $13.2
2.8 759.8
4.6 432.2

17.0 89562
5.9 593.2

13.7 745.8
4.0 243.5
2.9 29267
2.8 37662
267 25543
3.1 358.6
3.7 20602
4.1 25161
362 39/62
4.0 534.6
208 125.0

INORG N

1161.4
1174.2

449.7
513.6

1110.4
457.7

630.8

117.3
179.6

582.9
1103.1

337.2

521.4
214.7
247.0

342.8
28365
326.7
337.4

43.2

282.5
298.4
158.3

211.4
203.8
221.0
55.5
47.0
155.0
101.2
97.7
88.6
80.7
BI.)
109.0
65.5


RESIDUALS EXPRESSED IN
STANDARD DEVIATION. UNITS
FROM THE LOG MEAN

RESIDUAL OF THE MODEL:
Log, ,(P)® 1.831 + 0093 (xin Ag. +2 in Urban)

| \

Figure 28. Areal distribution of residuals from a prediction model
for total phosphorus concentrations in streams studied
in the eastern United States.

56


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NO (SQ KM) FOR CL AG URB WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH = (%) (CM) (CMS/SQ_ KM)
MAINE
MATTAWAMKEAG LAKE
230881 10 65.01 82.4 262 1368 ol 1.5 to) Me FOR. $04-03 4.5 oe5 102 0169
2308C3 10 56.88 73.5 2el1 21.5 +2 1.8 9 Me FORS $04-03 4.5 5.9 oe 20169
MOOSEHEAD LAKE
2309K) 10 18.75 97.3 0 0 0 Oo 2.7 FOREST S04-04 4.5 1566 102 20204
RANGELEY LAKE
231061 10 39.08 99.3 0 0 oO 0 a7 FOREST S04-04 45 1260 102 20174
SEBASTICOOK LAKE
2312Fi 10 53.02 54.6 72 3269 Oo 3.6 1.7 Me FOR. S04-04 4.5 360 99 20196
MARYLAND
DEEP CREEK LAKE
240281 30 31.93 67.2 3.1 18.7 i) 965 1.5 Me FOR. 108-04 365 S65 le2 #0153
2402C1 30 7.20 86.0 6.0 6.0 0 2.0 QO FOREST 108-06 5.0 16.3 122 20241
240201 30 9.32 30.3 +7 69.0 O 0 0 Me AGRIC 108-06 5.0 905 l2e +0130
240261 30 Se23) 45.3 oS 54.2 0 oO 0 Me. AGRIC 108-06 520 11.2 lee +0290
LIBERTY RESERVOIR
240381 40 18.10 35.1 60.6 1.3 0 el M. AGRIC U0S-05 465 1065 12 0115
2403C1) 40 73.45 31.3 63.3 164 0 ol Me AGRIC U0S-05 4.5 13.1 lle 20109
gs 240301 40 16.06 20.8 74.2 lel 0. AGRIC U0S5-05 4S 7.7 112 20126
240361 40 37648 25.3 63.5 666 0 3 » AGRIC U05=05 4.5 960 112 20115
LOCH RAVEN RESERVOIR
240881 40 53.90 39.9 2666 1763 0 1.2 MIXED UOS-05 4.5 7.5 114 +0119
2408C1 40 150.82 35.2 8.7 54.3 168 0 0 Me AGRIC U05-05 45 1le2 1l2 20107
240801 40 10.57 43.2 BoB 39.4 8.6 ) ) MIXED U05-05, 4.5 11.2 112 0135
240861 40 8.60 34.) 6260 1563 44.6 0 0 Me URBAN U05-05 4S 1268 112 0063
2408F 1 40 7695S 3361 Tel 37.66 22.2 i) 0 MIXED J05-05, 4.5 12.2 di2 +0161
240861 40 4.14 33.0 906 S364 4.0 0 oO Me AGRIC U0S-05 45 lel lie 0158
24084) 40 2667 1265 2965 0 58.0 0 oO M. URBAN U05-05 4.5 966 114 20114
2408/1 40 3.76 5.0 8.1 0 86.9 0 o M. URBAN U05-05 4.5 Tel 114 +0086
MICHIGAN
LAKE CHARLEVOIX
261781 20 29.09 52.9 6.0 40.7 ot) 4 0 Me FOR, S04-07 5.0 11.2 76 20175
261701 12 44.88 40.6 362 54.3 6 6 oT Me. AGRIC $04-07 5.0 8.6 76 20117
26176) 12 202.15 73.4 Tel 18.6 02 5S 2 Me FOR. S04-07 5-0 11.2 76 20264
MACATAWA LAKE
2648A3 20 171.30 4.8 Se9 88.0 1.2 0 ol AGRIC S$04-06 5.5 168 Bo 0085
264881 20 39.73 9.5 2163 55.7 7.3 5.8 4 Me AGRIC S$04-06 5.5 lel 84 0085


From analysis of other values in the same geographical region, an average
regional value would probably be somewhat smaller. By the same token,
one would expect higher concentrations in streams draining "mostly agri-
culture" areas in the Corn Belt. Obviously, other interrelated factors
such as agricultural practices, slope, soils, climate, etc., are important.

However, Figures 9 through 12 illustrate some significant overal1
relationships. Nutrient concentrations are significantly lower in
streams draining forested areas than in streams draining areas that
are used primarily for agricultural purposes. This is true for both
nutrients but to a greater degree for total phosphorus than total
nitrogen. Total phosphorus concentrations are roughly 10 times higher
in streams draining predominantly agricultural watersheds than in
streams draining forested watersheds. On the other hand, mean total
nitrogen stream concentrations only show a difference of 5-fold from
forested watersheds to agricultural watersheds. Interestingly, based
on these mean concentration values, phosphorus would be expected to be
limiting in surface waters draining either forest or agricultural: areas.
The total nitrogen to total phosphorus ratios are 60:1, 25:1, 32:1, 27:1
and 31:1 for "forest", "mostly forested", "mixed", "mostly agriculture"
and "agriculture" areas, respectively. Generally phosphorus is the
limiting nutrient as long as the N:P ratio exceeds 14:1 (Vollenweider,
1968). Also noteworthy is the fact that Figure 9 shows nearly the same
Mean values as did similar graphs prepared earlier for the 143 subdrain-
age areas covered by Working Paper No. 25 (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1974).

Figure 10 shows the relationships of overall land use categories
to mean concentrations of orthophosphorus and inorganic nitrogen. For
orthophosphorus, the relationships appear about the same as those between
total phosphorus and land use. Regardless of land use, mean orthophos-
phorus concentrations represented from 40% to 43% of the mean total phos-
phorus, except with predominantly urban drainage areas of which there
were only 11.

25


SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of drainage area characteristics and stream nutrient
runoff data compiled for 473 non-point source-type drainage areas in
the eastern United States indicate that:

1. Streams draining agricultural watersheds had, on the average,
considerably higher nutrient concentrations than those draining forested
watersheds. Nutrient concentrations were generally proportional to the
percent of land in agriculture. Mean total phosphorus concentrations
were nearly ten times greater in streams draining agricultural lands
than in streams draining forested areas. The difference in mean total
nitrogen concentrations was about five-fold.

2. In general, inorganic nitrogen made up a larger percentage of
total nitrogen concentrations in streams with larger percentages of land
in agriculture. The inorganic nitrogen component increased from about
27% in streams draining forested areas to over 75% in streams draining
agricultural watersheds. The inorganic portion (orthophosphorus) of
the total phosphorus component stayed roughly at the 40% level regardless
of land use type.

3. Differences in nutrient loads in streams associated with different
land use categories were not as pronounced as differences in nutrient
concentrations. Mean total phosphorus export from agricultural lands was
3.7 times greater than that from forested lands; mean total nitrogen export
was 2.2 times greater. Differences in magnitude between the relationships
of concentration to land use and export to land use appear to be due mainly
to differences in areal stream flow from different land use types, and to
a lesser degree, to differences in the mean annual precipitation patterns
and mean slope of study areas.


MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN EXPORT [Kg/kmr?)
vs
LAND USE
BY LAND RESOURCE REGION

NUMBER OVERALL LAND

OF SUBS USE CATEGORY

18
As
14
2
25
5

12

2%
80

34

13

27

57
13

18

FOREST ZA,

MOSTLY FOREST ZZ) North and Northeastern Forest
MIXED ZA, ond Forage Region
MOSTLY URBAN, ZA

MOSTLY AGRIC
AGRICULTURE ZA

200 400 600 800 1000 1200

FOREST
MOSTLY FOREST LA Corn Belt ond Dairy Region

MIXED YY mm

MOSTLY URBAN, Li

MOSTLY AGRIC YY

AGRICULTURE LA,

200 4b0 600 800 1000 1200

FOREST ZA East ond Central General Forming

MOSTLY FOREST Yj ‘and Forest Region

MIXED Yj

MOSTLY URBAN 44)

MOSTLY AGRIC Yi"

AGRICULTURE 77,

200 400 600 800 1000 1200

FOREST

mosriy Forest Y Piedmont and Coostal Plain Mixed
MIXED Z Y Farming ond Forest Region
MOSTLY URBAN

MOSTLY AGRIC

AGRICULTURE

Figure 21. Regional relationships between general land use and

stream export of total nitrogen.

40


LIST OF TABLES

Animal nutrient production.
Predicted mean total phosphorus concentrations.

Predicted mean total phosphorus concentrations for
simple and regional models.

Predicted mean total nitrogen concentrations.

Predicted mean total nitrogen concentrations for
simple and regional models.

Ranges and mean values for export of total phosphorus
from 31 southern Ontario watersheds.

Ranges and mean values for export of total phosphorus
from 43 watersheds. Values include data given in
Table 6 and additional data from the literature.

Geologic classification and mean values for stream
nutrient concentrations and exports from 223 sub-
drainage areas in the eastern United States. Data
grouped by overall land use category.

viii

Page

13
42

45
46

48

60

60

62


Forest (N*59) ...
Mostly forest (N
Mixed (N=52)....
Mostly agriculture (N=96)

Agriculture (N=9
Mostly urban (W:

FREQUENCY (in % per interval)

m ae ee oe co" & OR
MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS EXPORT (kgs/km/yr)

»
204 Forest (N=59).....

Mostly forest (N=170).. —_———

Mixed (N=52)

Mostly agriculture (N=96)...mmsaeemmsems am sme
a

Agriculture (N=

Mostly urban (*

5

FREQUENCY (in % per interval)
i

go 1800 W 36027

To” obo” iso bo” whe soo
MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN EXPORT (kgs/km?)

Figure 15. Frequency polygons of mean total phosphorus and mean total
nitrogen stream exports by overall land use category.

34


ANIMAL UNIT DENSITY COMPUTATIONS

It is generally accepted that animal wastes are major contributors
to the nitrogen and phosphorus in agricultural land runoff (Holt, Timmons,
and Latterell, 1970; Holt, 1971; Robbins, Howells, and Kriz, 1971). Early
in this study, it seemed some mechanism should be developed to analyze
this aspect of agricultural runoff. Because of shifts in agricultural
land use, particularly from season to season and year to year, it seemed
impractical or impossible to accurately separate pasture from cropland.

A more expeditious method was to determine overall animal densities (i.e.,
animal units per acre of subdrainage area).

For the most part, animal unit densities for each drainage area were
computed from U.S. Census of Agriculture figures, other literature sources
and personal communications (Johnson and Mountney. 1969; Miner and Willrich,
1970; Miner, 1971; Anonymous, 1972; Anonymous, 1973; Anonymous, 19743
Arscott, 1975; Harper, 1975; Hohenboken, 1975; and Miner, 1975). The
quantities of total nitrogen and total phosphorus produced annually by
common farm animals were also compiled from these sources (Table 1).

TABLE 1. ANIMAL NUTRIENT PRODUCTION (kgs/yr/animal)

Total P Total N
Cattle 17.60 57.49
Hogs 3.23 9.68
Sheep 1.47 10.06
Poultry
Layers 0.16 0.42
Broilers 0.09 0.39
Turkeys 0.39 0.84

These data, together with Census of Agriculture figures by county,
were used to compile animal unit densities per drainage area using the

13


OVERALL STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION

The geographic area for which data are presented encompasses most
of the United States east of the Mississippi River including Minnesota.
All of Florida, some of the Gulf and Atlantic coasts and northwestern
Minnesota were not included because of insufficient relief to allow
accurate drainage area delineation and/or to enable surface runoff to
be a significant factor. Although the overall study area does not
exhibit the physiographic or climatic extremes found in the remainder
of the conterminous United States west of the Mississippi River, there
is considerable diversity. Landforms range from flat to rolling plains
along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts and in the interior lake states, to
hills, dissected plateaus and low mountains in the northeast-southwest
trending Appalachian Highlands. Physical subdivisions are shown in
Figure 2, and the general geology of the area is shown in Figure 3.
The climate in the northern half of the area is humid continental and
in the southern half, humid subtropical. The northern half is char-
acterized by humid, warm to hot summers and cold winters; the southern
half, hot humid summers and cool winters. Yearly temperature ranges
are generally greater toward the interior. Most of the study area
receives between 80 to 120 centimeters of precipitation per year (Figure
4). Extreme mean annual precipitation varies from less than 60 cm. in
western Minnesota to over 160 cm. in parts of the Appalachians.


CONTENTS

Abstract
Acknowledgements
List of Figures
List of Tables

Sections

I Conclusions
II Introduction
History and Objectives
Literature
Study Area Selection Criteria
Overall Study Area Description
IIIT Data Collection Methods
Drainage Area Measurement and Land Use Identification
Land Use Percentage Computation
Animal Unit Density Computations
Geology Identification
Slope Computations
Other Procedures
IV Discussion of Results
Areal Distribution of Data
Overall Land Use--Nutrient Runoff Relationships
Category Definitions
General Analysis
Regionality
Individual Relationships and Prediction Capability
"Contributing" Land Use Types and Stream Nutrients

"Contributing" Land Use Types and Nutrient
Concentrations

"Contributing" Land Use Types and Nutrient Export
Regionality
Nutrient Runoff--Soils Relationships
Nutrient Runoff--Geology Relationships
Vv References
VI Appendix

ti
iv
vi
viii

DAP ww

12
12
13
14
15
16
V7
7
23
23
23
31
4]
41

42

50
58
59
65
69


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION
>TORET NO.
WISCONSIN
LAKE WISSOTA
s55601 10
BIG EAU PLEINE RES
SSo5u1 10
556SC) 10
BEAVERDAM LAKE
ss77ce 20
SS7TE? 20

OL

1

AREA
(SQ KM)

143.20

183.09
59.34

60.97
4.30

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

FOR

37.7

31.8
34.7

10.0
Q

LAND USE PERCENTAGES
2

cl

AG

56.1

63.0
SB.2

The?
99ek

URB

wer

OTHER

OVERALL
LANO USE
CATEGORY

Me. AGRIC

Me AGRIC
Me AGRIC

Me AGRIC
AGRIC

SOILS

3

4 SLOPE

MAP UNIT PH

a07-12

A0T-12
A0T-12

A0T-11
AOT=11

6.

bu w&

MEAN

(6)

AVE ANN
PRECIP.
(CM)

1”

79
9

716
76

FLOW
(CMS/SO

+0070

20073
20072

20064
+0069

KM)


value was about 25% greater for sedimentary watersheds than for
igneous-plutonic watersheds, the mean orthophosphorus export value
was about 27% less. Analysis of the remaining data revealed no
significant differences in orthophosphorus to total phosphorus
relationships with different geological classifications.

It was difficult to study these data for the possible effects of

igneous rocks of volcanic origin (as compared with igneous rocks of
plutonic origin) on stream nutrient’ concentrations or loads. No
drainage areas in either the "forest" or "mostly forest" data sets
were classified as completely or predominantly igneous-volcanic.
However, there were four drainage areas in one data set where igneous
rocks of volcanic origin were present but not predominant. Comparison
of these data with those of other geological classifications revealed
relatively insignificant differences.

It should be emphasized that the above analysis does not suggest
that geology has no effect on nutrient concentrations or loads in streams.
It does point out that no clearly significant effects are apparent using
this type of classification and the NES data. That the NES data did not
support the conclusions in Dillon and Kirchner's paper regarding phos-
phorus export may lie in the method of classification. :

Perhaps a more appropriate classification scheme should be based on
the mineral composition of the rocks rather than being based entirely or
primarily on origin. A simplified version of such a scheme might have
just two groups or classes--a class containing rocks generally considered
as being high in phosphorus content and a class containing rocks having
very little phosphorus. Rocks included in the first, or "high phosphorus",
group would be the gabbros, diorites, and basalts, or rocks largely com-
posed of ferromagnesian minerals and containing considerable apatite
(Taylor, 1975; and Goldschmidt, 1958, pp. 454-459). Apatite is the mineral
containing nearly all of the phosphorus in igneous rocks (Rankama and
Sahuma, 1950, pp. 584-586). Conmon rocks in the "low phosphorus" group
would be granite, syenite, granodiorite, rhyolite and andesite; or rocks

63


i

\

of lond in Urban)

IK
i

a
o

ySSSSse
8888835
pretetet
@0000000

Figure 5.

Areal distribution of percentages of land in agricultural and
urban land use in study areas in the eastern United States.

18



a national scale, and to develop a system utilizing coefficients, or a
range of coefficients, to reflect geographical or regional differences.

Because of its ties with the NES field sampling program, which is
being accomplished in three phases, the NES land use study follows the
same pattern. In the area in which tributary sampling began in the
summer of 1972, 133 drainage areas were selected for land use analysis.
In the NES study area where sampling was initiated in 1973, 340 drainage
areas were selected; and in the remainder of the conterminous United
States, where sampling began in 1974, 524 drainage areas were defined.
Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of the individual study drainage
areas, as well as the overall areas covered by each of the three phases.

Upon completion of data compilation for each of these phases, a
report was to be written to present the data collected to date and to
present some analyses of these data. This report, as well as providing
an explanation of the overall project, presents the data compiled for
the first two phases. National Eutrophication Survey Working Paper No.
25 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974) presented data compiled
through the first phase.

LITERATURE

Recently several extensive literature reviews have been published
relating watershed characteristics to non-point source nitrogen and
Phosphorus concentrations and loads in streams (Uttormark, Chapin, and
Green, 1974; Loehr, 1974; Dillon and Kirchner, 1975; and Dornbush,
Anderson, and Harms, 1974). These reviews have gathered many of the
investigations that, for the most part, have based their results on
data collected from a small number of drainage areas within specific
geographic regions. In attempting to develop systems for estimating
nutrient runoff from land use based on coefficients developed entirely,
or in part, from the literature, most reviewers have summarized their
findings by presenting a range of values and, in some cases, midpoints


OVERALL LAND USE-NUTRIENT RUNOFF RELATIONSHIPS

Category Definitions

Individual drainage areas were assigned overall] land use categories
according to the following criteria:
1. Forest; other types negligible
a. >75% forest (including forested wetland)
b. <7% agriculture
c. <2% urban
2. Mostly forest; other types present
a. >50% forest
b. not included in forest category
3. Mostly agriculture; other types present
a. >50% agriculture
b. not included in agriculture category
4. Agriculture; other types negligible
a. >75% agriculture
b. <7% urban
5. Urban
>39% urban
6. Mixed; not included in any other category

General Analysis

The relationships between these overall land use categories and
nutrient runoff are illustrated in Figures 9 through 12. It should
be emphasized that these graphs contain mean annual nutrient stream
values from the entire 24-state area and do not reflect regional
relationships. For example, one should not conclude from Figure 9
that total phosphorus concentrations in streams draining “mostly
agricultural" areas in Vermont and New York will average about 0.066.

23


26

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUSORAINAGE AREAS

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3. 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NO. (SQ KM) FOR cu AG URB WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH (8) (CM) (CMS/SQ
OHIO
CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
39058) 10 19.76 18.4 0 79.8 1.3 0 5S AGRIC A06-09 6.0 503 89 20095
3905C1 10 42017 16.6 09 81.3 7 22 3 AGRIC A06-09 6.0 2.9 Bo 20094
DEER CREEK RESERVOIR
39068) 20 31.57 3.0 «8 96.0 0 0 2 AGRIC AQ7-04 6.3 1.3 99 +0100
3906C1 20 15.41 2.3 26 97a) 0 0 0 AGRIC A07T=04 6.3 ol 99 +0100
DILLON RESERVOIR
390681 30 11.86 35.9 13.3 50.8 0 0 0 Me AGRIC 108-04 5.5 1566 102 20107
3908C1 30 9014 46.6 14.1 39.3 0 ) 0 MIXED 108-04 525 1567 99 20105
3908E1 20 12.71 38.3 Be4 52.4 9 0 0 Me AGRIC A07-04 663 1165 99 +0106
3908F 1 20 50.30 33.0 9.5 57.3 0 0 2 Me AGRIC AQ7-04 663 15.0 102 20104
390861 30 40.46 50.9 10.65 38.5 0 0 ol Me FOR. 108-04 SoS 1467 102 20104
LAKE GRANT
3912A1 20 52089 15.9 169 82.0 0 QO 02 AGRIC A06-03 6.0 38 109 0108
391281 20 5.00 11.2 +8 86.6 ie2 0 2 AGRIC A06-03 6.0 164 107 20110
HOOVER RESERVOIR
3914C1 20 32.30 11.3 +9 87.0 4 0 4 AGRIC A07T-04 63 o7 7 +0099
MOS@UITO CREEK RESERVOIR
3921A1L 10 47.63 30.9 Se4 62.8 0 oe oT Me AGRIC AQ7T=-15. 6.3 1S 99 0102
392181 10 9017 25.9 SeB 6764 0 Ss 4 Me AGRIC A0OT-15 6.3 202 99 20102
PLEASANT HILL LAKE
392481 10 28236 29.0 6.0 64.3 «7 0 t) Me. AGRIC A06-09 6.0 903 91 +0101
3924C1 10 31.03 35.4 1266 51.3 7 0 0 Me AGRIC A06-09 6.0 1563 a1 +0102
392401 10 16.08 29.8 8.9 6001 1.2 0 0 Me. AGRIC 108-04 Se5 11.6 91 20103
3924E1 20 21.52 28.0 5e6 6602 02 0 0 Me AGRIC 108-04 5.5 1265 Oo 20105
GRAND LAKE OF ST. MARYS
3927B1 20 18.60 6.0 29 9360 0 o ol AGRIC A0T-04 603 1.0 94 +0096
3927C1 20 45484 5.5 34 9263 1.68 0 0 AGRIC A07-04 6.3 1.6 94 +0096
392701 20 47.22 6.7 34 9264 2 0 3 AGRIC A0T-04 603 1.8 94 20096
3927F 1 20 8.62 15.2 0 84.8 0 0 0 AGRIC A07-04 6.3 205 94 20097
392761 20 12.10 4e4 0 95.0 6 0 0 AGRIC A07T-04 6.3 1.2 94 +0097
ATWOOD RESERVOIR
392881 30 15620 38.7 20.6 40.2 0 0 oS MIXED 108-04 5.5 18.0 91 0105
3928C1 . 30 20.98 38.5 8.2 52.7 3 0 3 Me. AGRIC 108-04 5.5 13.0 91 20104
BERLIN RESERVOIR
392981 10 47.14 25.8 404 6765 0 7 1.6 M. AGRIC A06-09 6.0 406 91 +0096
3929F 1 10 18.93 3961 4.2 S2e1 4% ol 4el Me AGRIC A06-09 6.0 167 a1 +0100
HOLIDAY LAKE
3930C1 20 6.595 11.7 0 87.5 “4 0 4 AGRIC A0T-04 6.3 4.0 89 0097

KM)


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
STORET NO.

MISSISSIPPI

ROSS BARNETT RESERVOIR
2804C1

SARDIS LAKE
2805C1
2805E1
2805F1
2805H)
2805V1

GRENADA LAKE
2806F 1

NEW HAMPSHIRE

LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE
330341
330301
330361
3303F1
3303/1
3303K)
33u3L1
3303N1
3303U1
3303V1
33034)
330371

SB

NEW JERSEY

SPRUCE RUN RESERVOIK
3420A2
34206)
3420C1
342001
3420E1

UNION LAKE
342281

NEW YORK
CANADIAGUA LAKE
3604A3
3604C1
360401
3604E1
3604H1

FLAG

Bee

6

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUSDRAINAGE AREAS

GEOLOGY

SED

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

SED

MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET/1G-P
MET/IG=P.
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET

MET/SWOL
MET/SWOL
MET/SWOL
MET/SwOL
MET/SWOL

SEO w/O L

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

Tor Pp

6462

15.3
2520
2602
3661
33.5

3868

6.7
1364
665
12.5
11-0

265
468

3269
37.9
39.3
247
2209

1768

3462
12.2
14.7
13.6

B.S

TOT N

69.5

15.3
24.9
26.5
36.5
33.8

3867

31.2
3549
37.2
23.4
21.7

15.4

34.3
12.2
14.7
13.6

8.5

TOT P

2219

2031
2034
2047
2070
2064

20866

2017
+017
+030
2018
013
2015
2018
2018
2017
020
017
+020

+035
2023
2022
0024
+032

0026

2050
2064
022
2017
+030

(MG/L)
ORTHO P TOT N
2088 1.672
2010 2850
2013 1.059
2015 1.732
2019 1.268
0017 1.433
2016 801
2008 S17
2010 0348
2010 #622
+008 +358
007 807
+006 9589
010 +676
007 9504
+006 2544
007 2855
2006 0343
+006 +304
021 1.582
2014 1.541
+009 1.638
2012 1.098
2018 1.350
2012 1.909
2015 2.826
0044 1.392
0010 +390
2007 +896
+007 694)

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

INORG N

2405

3344
+288
2645
2419
+470

2144

+106
2074
2129
9164
599
2329
0172
2092
2082
2127
0075
109

0939
1.101
2839
2506
#550

1.249

2.036
3949
6528
572
+662

ToT P

10.0
14.6
18.4
1lel

Bel

920
10.9
1lel

369
11.9
11.3
leek

15.5
10.0
10.3
10.6
1562

10.0

EXPORT
(KG/SQ_ KM)
ORTHO P

Feu
ONG

7
B66
bel
409
464

TOT N

701.7

149.6
466.8
65961
590.0
337.3

381.5

303.5
299.0
381.1
22061
504.6
352.1
408.1
310.6
12661
508.7
227.6
184.1

701.3
668.7
765.5
486.4
642.8

737.7

547.7
289.3
167.1
173.0
358.3

INORG N

17060

60.5
127.0
245.5
191.9
110.6

68.6

62.2
63.6
7961
100.3
374.6
196.7
103.8
56.1
19.0
75.6
49.8
66.0

416.2
477.7
392.1
22402
261.9

500.0

394.6
197.2

9901
101.8
252.0


DISTRIBUTION OF
N.E.S. LAND USE
STUDY DRAINAGE AREAS

Each of the 997 dots
represent a tributary sampling
site ond its associated
drainage _orea

"73,73, and '74 refer to
the yeors tributory sampling
began in each group of states.

Figure 1. Distribution of individual NES land use study drainage areas.


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBORAINAGE AREAS

16

ANIMAL DENSITY MEAN CONCENTRATIONS EXPORT
SUBORAINAGE AREAS 6 7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM) (MG/L) (KG/SQ_KM)
STORET NO» FLAG GEOLOGY TOTP TOT N TOTP ORTHOP TOT N INORG N TOTP ORTHOP TOT .N INORG N
NORTH CAROLINA
BADIN LAKE
370181 L MET/IG~V 1964 2061 2034 2008 #830 2188 diel 206 271.0 61.4
BLEWETT FALL LAKE :
370281 1 SWOL/IG-P 2061 17.6 2025 0013 “S75 108 6.6 364 152.4 28.6
3702C) 1 SWOL/IG-P 21.2 18.6 0032 012 803 2093 8.9 364 224.3 26.0
370261 4 SEO W/0 L 68.8 82.2 0045 0016 1.048 230 12.2 43 283.3 62.2
3702H) 1 SWOL/1G-P 3204 3567 2025 2008 716 0138 11.9 368 34167 65.9
FONTANA LAKE
3T04Ch 1 SWOL/MET 1361 12.9 0027 2006 612 0202 3165 7.0 714.8 235.9
3704E1 1 SED W/O L 1.0 1.0 2015 2007 2293 +120 10.5 409 205.7 84.2
3704F) 1 SED W/O L 8.6 8.6 2034 O11 893 0283 4004 13.1 1059.9 335.9
HIGH ROCK. LAKE
370681 1 MET/IG=V 24.6 2404 027 2013 2817 204 609 363 210-0 52.4
370601 1 IGNEOUS-P 41.6 4162 2040 0017 2844 0408 1064 4eh 220-3 106.5
370661 a IGNEOUS~P 3968 3907 2038 0023 +566 2158 1169 702 176.9 49.4
HIWASSEE LAKE
370781 1 SED W/O L 3067 2861 014 2005, 0316 2070 10.9 369 24501 54.3
3707C1 1 SED w/O0 L 16.0 14.6 2048 0006 2510 2179 3665 46 38861 13662
LOOKOUT SHOALS LAKE
371081 1 MET S204 51.4 2033 014 ©824 0376 17.8 7.5 44308 202.5
RHODHISS LAKE
371561 L IG=P/MET 5408 5904 2054 2016 1.294 2295 30.0 3363 71920 163.9
371S5H) 1 SEO W/O L 3502 3861 022 012 2659 ©230 14.3 7.8 42801 149.4
SANTEETLAH LAKE
3716A2 L SED w/0 L 11.2 11.2 2029 006 2490 2186 2620 5.4 43920 166.7
371681 1 SED w/0 L 1964 19.4 2037 2008 +663 2187 37.0 8.0 663.7 187.2
3716C1 1 SED W/O L 965 905 2024 2008 0452 2154 2407 8.2 464.6 158.3
371601 1 SED W/O L leo 1.6 2011 007 2384 2083 14.0 8.9 489.8 105.9
371681 a SED W/O L 1.6 1.6 2010 2005 9469 elll 10.1 Sel 474.3 1l2.2
3716F 1 t SED W/O L 2 02 2006 2005 2619 0177 5.0 4el 511.3 146.2
LAKE TILLERY
3717C1 i MET/IG-V 4508 44.5 050 2026 12190 2487 1720 4.8 40468 165.6
OHIO
BEACH CITY RESERVOIR
3901C1 1 SED T9el 77.6 165 2068 2.772 26130 50.3 20.7 845.1 649.6
390101 1 SED 86.9 85.3 12) 2019 2.751 1.949 36.6 5.8 832.9 590.1
39U1EL 1 SED 50.5 50.5 0032 2006 26011 1.465 1061 1.9 63364 461.64
3901F1 1 SED Teel T1407 2100 022 2.071 1.833 3168 720 849.7 583.1
3901G1 1 Sed BBel 86.5 0145 2050 3.714 2.596 46.9 16.2 120164 839.7
390141 1 SED 91.7 9001 2121 32225 2.213 36.7 10.3 97767 670.9
3901K1 2 SED 5506 S567 197 007 32304 2.492 6263 202 1044.5 787.8


SUMMARY OF LANO USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

96

L LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVt ANN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NO. (SQ KM) FOR cL AG URB = WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH = (%) (CM) (CMS/SQ_ KM)
PENNSYLVANIA
LAKE WALLENPAUPACK
4229C1 10 10.08 90.0 364 5.2 0 0 1.4 FOREST 110-04 5.0 12.3 109 +0162
422901 10 3.65 63.8 362 2342 0 0 928 Me FOR. 110-04 Se6 1063 lle +0169
SOUTH CAROLINA
HARTWELL RES
450581 40 76.82 59.0 1.0 40.0 0 0 0 Me FOR. U05-03 4.5 8.5 132 20139
4S05F 1 30 26.21 45.1 5-6 48.6 7 o 0 MIXED Y05-03 4e5 1168 137 0168
MARION LAKE
4506F 1 40 25615 40.3 +6 58.6 0 2 3 Me AGRIC U01-02 4S 3.3 li2 +0086
4506J1 40 55.24 47.0 203 48.0 200 7 0 MIXED U06-05 405 1.9 1l2 20108
MURRAY LAKE
450781 40 18.44 51.3 320 44.4 7 0 +6 Me FOR. U06-10 4.5 5.8 11g 60142
4507C1 40 46.10 S7.9 0S 3964 oT 0 1.5 Me FOR. U06-10 4.5 4.7 122 0142
ROBINSON LAKE
4508C1 40 16.71 30.3 33.0 33.7 0 2.6 4 MIXED U06-10 4.5 408 122 20105
450801 40 21.19 31.68 23.9 43.1 ) 26 6 MIXED U06-10 4.5 45 122 20104
4508F1 40 25.18 41.0 26462 31.6 0 1.0 02 MIXED U06-10 4S 402 119 20103
KEOWEE LAKE
4S13€1 30 77.78 94.6 26 3.9 3 0 26 FOREST U0S-06 4S 1867 188 20245
4513F1 34 19,99 90.0 Pe) 960 0 el 4 Me FOR. U05-06 4.5 2368 152 20242
451361 30 30-64 95.1 0 48 0 0 el FOREST 05-06 45 26.0 173 20244
SECESSION LAKE
4S514E1 40 8.39 39.3 203 58.1 0 0 3 Me AGRIC U0S-03 4.5 603 122 20125
WILLIAM C. BOWEN LAKE
451681 40 11.50 49,5 905 39.3 7 0 1.0 MIXED U0S-03 4.5 8.5 137 +0110
4516C1 40 9e1l2 40.2 207 55.3 1.65 ) 3 Ms. AGRIC U05-03 4.5 904 127 +0099
TENNESSEE
BARKLEY LAKE
4701F1 30 78.3 304 1708 0 22 3 Me FOR. U06-06 4e5 1602 119 20145
470161 30 54.4 2760 18.3 2 0 ol Me FOR. U06-06 4.5 12.8 122 +0146
4701451 30 48.9 967 4064 8 0 2 MIXED U06-06 4.5 15.7 122 +0140
4TOINI 30 53.8 Se4 40.3 3 0 2 Me FOR. U06-06 465 1867 122 +0140
4701P1 30 58.0 6.0 35.2 3 ol 4 Me FOR. U06-06 405 1664 122 20140
4TOIRI 30 87.0 2.7 1060 3 ) 0 Me FOR. U06-06 4eS 2063 127 +0140
470181 30 82.2 166 1568 ol 22 el Me FOR, U06-06 4.5 lel 130 +0140
4701T1 30 90.5 oT 8.6 1 0 22 Me FOR. U06-06 465 19.0 130 +0140
4701U) 30 7964 8 19.4 0 0 4 Me FOR. U06-06 40S 1602 127 +0140



surface soil] pH for each of the 473 drainage areas was not available
except through time-consuming work with numerous large-scale maps from
widely scattered sources and contact with local soils scientists.. The
time and expense ruled this approach out, at least for the present.
Considering time and expense, the best available source was a
collection of estimates of surface soil pH ranges for map units appearing
on the National Atlas soils map (Smith, 1975; and U.S. Geological Survey,
1970). Each drainage area was identified with a midpoint of the pH range
for the soils map unit predominant within it. This system left much to
be desired for the actual surface soil pH values probably varied con-
siderably with land use within the area covered by a given soils map
unit. For instance, for a given soils map unit in central South Carolina,
the surface soil pH is probably a great deal higher in the active cropland
areas than in the parts where pine forests predominate. Even with these
limitations, which if anything would have a "diluting" effect on the pH
to stream nutrient concentration correlations, there appear to be suffi-
ciently significant correlations to warrant a more detailed examination
of the relationship. The correlation coefficients for the relationships
between surface soil pH and mean nutrient concentrations in streams were
as follows:

pH and Total Phosphorus, r = 0.58
pH and Orthophosphorus, r = 0.57
pH and Total Nitrogen, r = 0.61

pH and Inorganic Nitrogen, r = 0.55

Nutrient Runoff--Geology Relationships

Discussions of water quality differences from one lake watershed to
another, particularly with respect to nitrogen and phosphorus loads and
concentrations, often include some mention of geological effects.
However, little data are available on the specific effects of geology

59


SECTION V
REFERENCES

Anonymous. 1972. 1969 Census of Agriculture. Vol. I, Parts 1-4, 6,
7 and 13-15. U.S. Bureau of Census, Washington, D.C.

Anonymous. 1973. 1973 Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics. Wisconsin
Stat. Rept. Serv., Madison, Wisconsin.

Anonymous. 1974. Livestock Waste Management with Pollution Control.
North Central Regional Publication 93. Manuscript.

Arscott, G. H. 1975. Personal communication: Poultry Production
Characteristics. Poultry Science Department, School of Agriculture,
Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

Austin, M. E. 1965, revised 1972. Land Resources Regions and Major
Land Resource Areas of the United States Exclusive of Alaska and
Hawaii. Agriculture Handbook 296. Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.

Dillon, P. J. and W. B. Kirchner. 1975. The Effects of Geology and
Land Use on the Export of Phosphorus from Watersheds. Water Research
9:135-148.

Dornbush, J. N., J. R. Anderson, and L. L. Harms. 1974. Quantification
of Pollutants in Agricultural Runoff. EPA Environmental Protection
Technology Series #EPA-660/2-74-005. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C.

65


oe me
oe
[sedentary Roce
QUATERNARY Racn JURASSIC ond TRIASSIC =
UPPER TERTIARY Phocene —FTTT3] UPPER PALEOZOIC Ferman YOUNGER PRECAMHRAN
ond Miocene oa Pennsylvanian, ond Mississippion. {Sedimentary and Metamorphic Rocks]|
Zoe temAsy tan MDOLE PALEOLOIC Oavonen OLDER PRECAMBRIAN
Y Eocene, ond Paleocene ‘and Silurian (Metomorphic ond igneous Racks}
LA
y
NN cretactous LOWER PALEOZOIC Ordovieion PALEOZOIC igneous Rocks of
IN cod Conbrion Poon Ongel

Figure 3. Geology of the eastern United States. Adapted from
U.S. Geological Survey (1970).

10



SUBDRAINAGE AREAS.
STORET NOW

OHO

CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
3905B1
3905C)

DEER CREEK RESERVOIR
390681
3906C1

DILLON RESERVUIR
390881
3908C1
390861
3908F 1
390861

LAKE GRANT
391201
391281

HOOVER RESERVOIR
3914C1

MOSQUITO CREEK RESERVOIR
3921AL
392181

PLEASANT HILL LAKE
392461
39240)
392401
3924E1

GRAND LAKE OF ST. MARYS
392731
392701
392701
3927F 1
392761

ATWOOD RESERVOTR
392881
3928C1

BERLIN RESERVOIR
392981
3929F 1

HOLIDAY LAKE
3930C1

£6

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

6
FLAG GEOLOGY TOT P

SED
SED

SED
SED

SED
SED
SEO
SED
SED

SED
SED

SED

SED
SED

SED
SED
SED
SED

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

SED
SED

SED
SED

SED

494
Boed

2201

TOT N

S9al
39.3

50.8
Slee

43.0
33.2
3265
35.6
2608

41.2
43.9

44.3

41.1
43.9

31.1
24.8
2961
32.0

57.6
62.6
62.7
47S
64.5

2669
35.2

4767
35.4

23.1

TOT Pp

2029
6035

2065
+088

028
023
2046
2041
018

2213
2215

061

2069
087

2049
2025
0039
2036

«216
2318
0278
2226
0435

2028
038

6057
2044

2104

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

(MG/L)
ORTHO P TOT N
2014 1.574
021 1.747
2022 34532
2040 3328
201) 14336
2008 1-220
0016 16525
2012 1.687
2007 0194
2059 1-858
2046 1.632
2032 20338
2014 1.632
2025 26088
6022 20118
2010 1.340
2013 1.649
2013 2.023
0097 46476
0148 3.896
127 3.915
0074 4.504
2358 46954
#010 “916
0012 1.370
2019 2.608
008 1.518
2029 4377

INORG N

6850
1,000

2.684
2.585

0462
0412
+668
972
2337

0452
0319

1.377

2583
0975

1.449

2945,
1.240
1.510

3.196
2.466
2.617
2.965
4.038

2937
1.117

1.312
0593

3.027

ToT P

8.7
10.7

21.3
26.9

96
Tel
1569
1363
600

7362
80.9

2502

21.8
2967

1567

Bel
12.9
L201

61.9
9507
8361
7400
135.3

9.2
11.9

17.8
13.8

2909

EXPORT
(KG/SQ_KM)
ORTHO P TOT N
402 474.6
O04 53266

72 1157.7
1262 1015.8
368 459.2
265 37667
5.5 $26.7
369 546.8
2.3 264.6
20.3 638.9
17.3 61461
969 72603
404 515.7
865 71400
Tel 67961
362
4.3 612.9
44 678.0
27.8 1282.8
44.5 1172.6
37.9 1169.9
2402 1474.5

111.3 1540.5
363 302.3
368 586.9
569 815.3
265 477.7
8.3 1257.2

INORG N

256.3
304.9

879.7
789.0

158.8
127.2
299.8
31Seh
112.3

155.4
120.0

427.8

184.2
33344

404.6
305.6
41l.l
506.0

915.9
742.2
782.0
970.7

1255.7

177.2
350.6

410.2
186.6

869.4


1974; Thomas and Crutchfield, 1974). Using the paper by Dillon and
Kirchner as a guide, the following general breakdown was used to
classify NES study subdrainage areas:

1. Sedimentary rocks or deep alluvium (>61 meters) with

some or all limestone.

2. Sedimentary rocks or deep alluvium (>61 meters) without

any mapped limestone.

3. Igneous rocks of volcanic origin.

4. Metamorphic rocks.

5. Igneous rocks of plutonic origin.

Where drainage areas included two of the above classifications,
combinations were shown with the predominant type first. Sources for
these data were mostly state and federal government geologic maps of
varying dates and scales; although most were of individual states at
scales ranging from 1:250,000 to 1:500,000.

SLOPE COMPUTATIONS

For each drainage area mean slope was calculated using an equidis-
tant dot pattern overlay. Less dense patterns were used for this work
than were used for computing land use percentages. For this procedure,
40-80 dots per drainage area were used. The overlays were placed
randomly over the topographic maps on which the drainage areas had been
outlined. Then, using an appropriate slope indicator, the percent of
slope for the points under each dot was calculated. The data were then
totaled and divided by the total number of points falling in the drainage
area. The slope indicators used were transparent templates indicating
percent of slope from distances between map contours, adjusted for map
scale and contour interval.

15


TABLE 2. PREDICTED MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/1)

% Ag + % Urb Avg. PCONC 67% Limits 95% Limits
) 0.015 0.008-0.027 0.004-0.050

25 0.025 0.014-0.046 0.007-0.086

50 0.043 0.023-0.079 0.013-0.146

75 0.074 0.040-0.135 0.022-0.249
100 0.126 0.068-0.231 0.037-0.427

For example, for streams draining areas with a combined agriculture
plus urban land use percentage of 25%, mean total phosphorus concentrations
average 0.025 mg/1. However, because of the variation around this pre-
diction, there is only a 67% probability that the true value will fall in
the range 0.014 to 0.046 mg/1, and there is a 95% confidence that the
value will be within the wider range of 0.007 to 0.086 mg/1.

The next most complex model makes a correction in the sense that
streams in the Corn Belt and Dairy Land Resource Region (region B) have
somewhat higher mean total phosphorus concentrations than one would
predict from data for the other Land Resource regions (regions A, C
and D)-only. Equations for this model are:

Logyg (PCONC) = -1.805 + 0.0081 (% agric. + % urban) (2)
for region B and
Logi (PCONC) = -1.676 + 0.0081 (% agric. + % urban) (3)
for regions A, C and D.
This model explains that for drainage areas having similar: combined
agriculture plus urban land use percentages, streams in region B will

have predicted phosphorus concentrations about 37% higher than those
in regions A, C and D.


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

ANIMAL DENSITY MEAN CONCENTRATIONS EXPORT
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS 6 7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM) (MG/L) (KG/SQ_ KM)
STORET NO. FLAG GEOLOGY TOTP TOT N TOTP ORTHOP TOT N INORG N TOTP ORTHOP TOT N INORG N
NEW YORK
OTTER LAKE
362581 1 SED 3701 36.6 023 +009 24302 1.724 668 2.7 681.0 510.0
ROUND LAKE
3630A1 3 SED W/O L led 1.2 061 2010 +963 2275 3064 5.0 480.6 137.2
363081 4 SEO W/O L 3548 35.6 097 2023 loll 2237 53.4 1267 611.2 130.4
3630C1 1 SED W/O L 1846 18.5 4050 018 2912 2266 25.7 9.2 468.1 136.5
SCHROON LAKE
363401 3 MET/SWOL 0 0.019 +006 +890 2222 967 3068 45664 = 113.8
3634D2 1 MET 0 0 015 2006 1.110 2157 766 361 564.8 79.9
3634E1 1 MET/SEO 0 0 012 2006 +864 2251 59 3.0 427.8 124.3
3634F 1 1 MET/SED 0 0.010 +005 +832 2159 5.2 266 436.3 83.4
363461 1 MET/SEO 0 0 013 +005 1.293 0143 669 2.6 682.6 = 75,5
SENECA LAKE
363501 1 SED 19.5 19.8 = 021 +009 1.106 2593 10.3 4e4 540.3 289.7
3635F 2 1 SED 8.8 8.8 024 2011 2937 2468 llel Sel 432.1 215.8
363561 1 SED 11.3 11.4 010 +007 1.582 2923 164 1.0 220.1 128.4
3635H1 3 SED 92 9-2 017 +009 1.575 1.069 B86 465 796.0 540.3
3635L1 3 SED B69 8.8 025 2011 1.007 +579 368 1.7 15467 88.9
3635M1 3 SED 13.1 13.2 021 +008 +837 2347 968 367 389.1 161.3
SWAN LAKE
2 3636A1 3 SED W/O L 5440 46.6 041 2015 1.183 +389 2762 9.9 784.6 258.0
‘© SWINGING BRIDGE RES«
3637H1 3 SED W/O L 1865 16.0 033 2014 1.044 2452 15.9 6.7 502.7 217.6
CONESUS LAKE
3639A1 1 SEO 34.65 35.0 069 +039) 26349 1.487 2668 1562 913.1 578.0
363981 1 SEO 2540 25.4 4050 2027 1.554 2751 18.6 10.0 S76.7 278.7
3639C1 1 SED 3667 3763 043 2018 1.827 2956 1767 704 75001 394.5
363902 3 SEO 22.8 23.1 078 +057 1.588 1.077 3164 © 22.9 638-4 433.0
3639F 1 1 SEO 3766 38-2 4098 2058 26448 1.205 32.3 1961 806.9 397.2
3639H1 L SED 25.5 25.9 022 +008 16153 +382 B64 3.1 439.9 145.7
LOWER ST. REGIS
3640A1 1 MET 0 G 6013 2007 2798 2315 72 369 439.0 173.3
ALLEGHENY RES (PENN)
3641C1 L SED W/O L 4548 45.8 033 OL +531 +280 1844 6el 296.6 = 156.4
364141 1 SED Tel Tel = 012 +006 1.303 +628 10.0 . 1084.0 522.5
364151 1 SED 1.7 1.7 4015 +006 +783 +336 13.8 5.5 720.4 309.1
3641K1 1 SED 0 0 010 +006 14198 2437 4eT 2.8 559-2 204.0
3641L1 1 SED 0 0 021 +006 14153 3564 4.3 264 454.8 222.5
3641M1 1 SED 0 0.010 +005 1ell5 «554 3.3 1.7 372.3 185.0
3641N1 1 SED a) 160 0014 2005 16164 2341 766 2.7 632.5 185.3


By comparing Figure 9 with Figure 10, one can see that mean inorganic
nitrogen concentrations represent an increasing percentage of mean total
nitrogen concentrations with increased amounts of agricultural land use.
The percentages are 27%, 39%, 53%, 57% and 76% for "forest", "mostly
forest", "mixed", "mostly agriculture” and "agriculture" categories,
respectively. This probably reflects the use of inorganic nitrogen
fertilizers and the high water solubility of inorganic nitrogen com-
pounds.

Mean inorganic nitrogen represented nearly 98% of the mean total
nitrogen in the 11 "mostly urban" drainage areas. As mentioned
earlier, no industrial or municipal waste treatment facilities or out-
falls were known within these urban areas. However, the time and
expense that would have been involved did not allow field checking.

The data probably reflect effects of runoff from streets and lawns,
and to some extent, the effects of septic tanks.

The nutrient loads per unit area of watershed for both forms of
phosphorus and nitrogen are shown in Figures 11 and 12. These data
indicate that the differences in export from different land use cate-
gories are considerably less pronounced than the differences in nutrient
concentrations. Total phosphorus export was only 3.7 times greater from
agricultural lands than from forested lands and total nitrogen export,
only 2.2 times greater. Partial explanation of the difference in the
relationships of concentrations to land use and export to land use
apparently lies in the differences in stream flow (per unit area per
year) between agricultural lands and forested lands. Regression analysis
of flow (cubic meters per square kilometer per year) to the percent of
subdrainage area in forest revealed a fairly good correlation (r = 0.64).
This was probably due to greater slopes and thinner soils in the forested
areas as opposed to the agricultural areas. The correlation coefficient
between mean slope and the percent of drainage area in forest was 0.65 and
the correlation coefficient for flow and the mean slope was 0.60. One
would expect direct surface runoff to increase with increased slope, but

27


MEAN ANNUAL PRECIPITATION

Centimeters

° 400 800Km
$$,
81 o 200 400Mi
Scale
0

Figure 4. Mean annual precipitation in the eastern United States. Adapted
from U.S. Geological Survey (1970).

0]


higher than those predicted by the prediction model in a region extending
from eastern Ohio through central and southern Indiana to southern Illinois.
This region May extend around through the western tips of Kentucky and
Tennessee into Mississippi, north-central Alabama and parts of northern
Georgia. Another area where phosphorus concentrations are generally
higher than those predicted by the model comprises much of Wisconsin and
south-central and southeastern Minnesota. Still another "high" area may
exist in a region extending from west-central Virginia through eastern
Virginia and into central Delaware, but large gaps in data points make
definition of this area difficult to support. A very large region where
phosphorus concentrations are nearly the same as, or lower than, those
predicted by the model includes most of the Northeast from West Virginia,
Maryland, and Pennsylvania through Maine, with the exception of the area
centered on southeastern New York and Connecticut. Other smaller areas
where phosphorus concentrations are mostly lower than those predicted,
are central Illinois, central Ohio, west-central Tennessee, and a small
region extending from south-central Kentucky to the northwestern tip

of Georgia.

The regional patterns were even more evident for total nitrogen (Figure
29) than they were for total phosphorus (Figure 28). Interestingly though,
the regional patterns illustrated by residuals of the nitrogen prediction
model show little to no resemblance to those of the phosphorus model. It
is also noteworthy that, neither map reveals patterns that appear to have
any clear correlation with map units of the macro-aspects (such as physio-
graphic regions, climatic characteristics, soil types, and geology), that
one might expect to affect the regional patterns of the residuals.

Figure 29 reveals two major areas where the data show nitrogen
concentrations in streams to be near or above those predicted by the
model. The first area is centered on eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey
and southeastern New York and includes much of Delaware, east-central
Maryland, central Pennsylvania, northeastern New York and Connecticut.

The second area extends from southeastern Wisconsin, through central

55


a Pw nr

10

VW

12

13

14

15

16

LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Distribution of individual NES land use study drainage
areas.
Physical subdivisions of the eastern United States. 9
Geology of the eastern United States. 10

Mean annual precipitation in the eastern United States. 11

Areal distribution of percentages of land in agriculture
and urban land use in study drainage areas in the eastern
United States. 18

Areal distribution of mean total phosphorus concentra-
tions in streams draining study areas in the eastern
United States. 20

Areal distribution of mean total nitrogen concentrations
in streams draining study areas in the eastern United

States. 21
Distribution of mean annual areal flow in streams draining
study areas in the eastern United States. 22

Relationships between general land use and total phosphorus
and total nitrogen concentrations in streams. 24

Relationships between general land use and orthophosphorus
and inorganic nitrogen concentrations in streams. 26

Relationships between general land use and stream exports
of total phosphorus and total nitrogen. 28

Relationships between general land use and stream exports
of orthophosphorus and inorganic nitrogen.

Frequency polygons of mean total phosphorus and mean total
nitrogen concentrations in streams by overall land use
category. 32

Frequency polygons of mean orthophosphorus and mean inor-
ganic nitrogen concentrations in streams by overall land
use category. 33

Frequency polygons of mean total phosphorus and mean
total nitrogen stream exports by overall land use
category. 34

Frequency polygons of mean orthophosphorus and mean
inorganic nitrogen stream exports. 35

vi


SUBDRAINAGE AREAS
STORET NO.

NEw YORK

8

CANNONSVILLE RESERVOIR
360581
360501
3605E1
3605F1

CARRY FALLS RESERVOIR
36060)

CASSADAGA LAKE
360781
3607C1

CAYUGA LAKE
360862
3608H1
3608M1
3608P2
3608u1

CHAUTAUQUA
36106)
3610C1
361001
3610E)
3610F1
3610H)
3610J1
3610K)

GOODYEAR LAKE
361361
3613C1
361301
3613E1

LAKE HUNTINGTON
3615A1

KEUKA LAKE
361761
3617C1
361701
3617F1
3617H1

6
FLAG

Hoe bee

Beeb PEDWYUE EO Hee ee

ay

eee

GEOLOGY

SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUdSDRAINAGE AREAS

SED W/O L
SED W/O L
SED W/O L
SED W/O L

MET/SWOL

SED
SED

SED
SED
SED
SEO
SED

SED
SEO
SED
SED
SED
SED
SED
SEO

seD
SED
SED
SED

SED

SED
SED
SED
SED
SED

W/O
W/O

W/O
w/0
w/0
w/0
W/O

W/O
W/O
W/O
W/O
w/0
w/0
W/O
W/O

W/O
W/O.
W/O
W/O

w/0

ce

reerrrer ere

cere

c

ANIMAL DENSITY
7 (AN UNITS/SQ KM)

ToT P

602
19.2
18.2

0

0

363
1509

2560
1664
5509
48e1
4204

32.8
12.5
39.3
27el

29.5
17el
3067

37.5
52.3
1663
30.0

2162
3lel
1404
19.68
2666

TOT N

15.9

31.6
16.4
S502
4765
41.8

32.7
12.5
39.2
27.0

Se
2964
17.0
30.6

3702
51.9
1662
29.8

2164
313
14.4
19.8
26.9

TOT P

2016
2021
2018
0014

018

2029
2010

021
022
2027
2051
203)

2032
2034
2027
+051
2094
2032
oO1L
2023

2025
2026
0018
2035

2038

2045,
2017
2033
2027
2034

(MG/L)
ORTHO P TOT N
2009 492
2010 0899
009 1.216
0007 803
006 1.171
2007 +856
2005 0799
008 14428
006 1.039
012 20579
2028 1.745
010 1.943
+013 1-006
012 0853
008 +816
010 +607
032 14340
2009 0878
2006 +706
2006 1.180
2008 1.191
2008 6982
2006 +960
2009 1.058
2022 1.178
2029 1.108
2008 1.551
2008 1.058
2014 1.939
2018 2.044

MEAN CONCENTRATIONS

INORG N

+181
2515S
0759
2378

2260

0457
0458

1.017

2635
1.765
1.101
1.512

390
2460
0384
+330
399
0365
«366
751

2715
3427
3482
S42

+416

+905
ed5]
2715
1.345
1.338

ToT P

Be
10.7
10.3

8.5

10-3

2402
409

ToT
964
4el
17.8
11.7

18.3
19.9

7.5
19.4
21.5
19.5

664
11.9

12.5
12.9

eh
17.5

e7el
les
4.5
Bed

1064

EXPORT

(KG/SQ_ KM)

ORTHO P

465
Sel
Sel
402

364

TOT N

24600
457.9
69567
485.8

671.7

71568
394.5

526.0
443.9
393.8
608.9
735.0

S75.2
498.2
22567
504.5
30569
552.8
411.6
610.3

595.0
488.8
500.2
529.5

839.5

30963
408.0
277.3
518.4
622.2

INORG N

90.5
262.3
434.2
228.7

149.1

382.1
226.2

374.6
271.3
269.5
384.2
572.0

223.0
268.7
106.2
206.3

91el
229.8
214.4
388.4

357.2
212.5
251.2
271.3

296.5

252.6
223.9
187.4
359.6
407.3


607

so

i

FREQUENCY (in % per interval)
8

FREQUENCY [in % per interval)

Forest (N=5°

Mixed (N=52).....-
Mostly agriculture (N
Agriculture (N=9)).
Mostly urban (N=11)

Forest (N=53)
Mostly forest (N=170)
Mixed (N=52)...
Mostly agriculture (N=96).
Agriculture (N=91)
Mostly urban (N=11).

Figure 13.

ne ee ener ee
MEAN TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/l)
Frequency polygons of mean total Phosphorus and mean total

nitrogen concentrations in streams by overall land use
category.

ba 7

32


SUMMARY OF LAND USE PARAMETERS BY SUBDRAINAGE AREAS

v6

1 LAND USE PERCENTAGES OVERALL SOILS MEAN AVE ANN
SUBDRAINAGE AREAS REGION AREA 2 LAND USE 3. 4 SLOPE PRECIP FLOW
STORET NO. (SQ KM) FOR CL AG URB- WET OTHER CATEGORY MAP UNIT PH (%) (CM) (CMS/SQ_KM)
OHIO
ONSHAUGHNESSY RESERVOIR
3931CL 20 27.40 10.0 0 89.2 3 0 +5 AGRIC A0T-04 643 143 94 +0097
ROCKY FORK CREEK
393201 20 86.14 19.2 5.4 73.6 1.8 0 0 Me AGRIC A06-03 6.0 83 112 +0116
3932C1 20 15415 11.8 167 86.0 35 0 Q AGRIC A06-03 640 440 107 20115
LAKE SHAWNEE
3933A2 20 21624 244 +3 9406 206 0 +1 AGRIC A07-04 663 Led 94 +0105
TAPPAN RESERVOIR
393481 30 53.82 35.5 8469 30.7 2 0 24.7 MIXED 108-04 5.5 24.3 99 +0107
393481 30 23.13 30.9 9.2 30.4 7 0 28.8 MIXED 108-04 5.5 19.5 99 +0107
393401 30 8.96 47.3 564 47.3 0 0 0 MIXED 108-04 5.5 22.8 99 +0107
PENNSYLVANIA,
BLANCHARD RESERVOIR
420181 40 29.79 51.2 22 46.6 2 0 1.8 Me FOR, 108-05 5.0 21.6 102 20057
4201C1 40 42.79 40.1 140 5766 “4 0 9 = Me AGRIC A0B-01 523 1540 102 +0023
420101 30 12.90 82.1 0 1767 0 0 22 Me FOR. 108-05 5.0 237 102 +0038
CONNEAUT LAKE
420401 10 2625 42.3 3.0 54.0 “4 0 +3) Me AGRIC 110-03 540 Ge 102 20232
PYMATUNING RESERVOIR
421381 10 14,71 32.3 168 65-2 4 0 +3 Me AGRIC 110-03 5.0347 94 +0087
4213C1 10 9.89 50.0 368 43.5 el 7 «9 Me FOR. 110-03 5.0 240 94 20044
4213F1 10 39.70 42.1 lel 5604 0 el 23) Me AGRIC 110-03 5.0 2.4 7 +0147
4213H1 10 17.33 38.6 3.0 57.6 4 0 +4 Me AGRIC 110-03 5.0 267 97 20123
SHENANGO RESERVOIR
4216F1 10 7067 33.1 542 6167 ) 0 0 Ms AGRIC 110-03 5.0 742 102 20073
421661 10 22.79 3064 907 5765 202 0 +2 My AGRIC 110-03 5.0 5.7 99 +0054
421641 10 9648 26.7 1366 S81 166 0 0 Me. AGRIC 110-03 5.0 4.2 97 +0049
BEAVER RUN RESERVOIR
421981 30 Te10 48.3 263 48.0 104 0 0 MIXED v05-02 445 949 102 +0569
LAKE CANADOTHA
422181 10 8.03 48.6 12.0 36.6 0 2.8 0 MIXED 110-03 5.0 765 107 +0159
4221C1 10 7o28 4363 945 4742 0 0 0 MIXED 110-03 5.0 4.9 107 +0207
INDIAN LAKE
4223C1 30 8.73 92.3 0 164 360 2.1 162 FOREST 108-05 5.0 868 112 +0137
422301 30 19.30 88.1 0 364 368 364 163 FOREST 108-05 5.0 8.3 112 20111
CONEWAGO LAKE (PINCHOT)
4226A1 40 21.21 64,5 129 33.0 5 0 ol Me FOR. v0S-05 4.5 1243 99 -0272
422681 40 3655 5165 343 4542 0 0 0 Me FOR. v0S-05 4.5 79 99 +0067
4226C1 40 6.55 S667 Se4 3769 0 0 0 Me FOR. U05-05 4.5 1360 7 +0140


Forest (N=53}...
Mostly forest (N=170}.
Mixed (N=52).
Mostly agriculture
Agriculture (N=91
Mostly urban (N=1)

FREQUENCY (in % per interval)

Forest (N=53)
Mostly forest
Mixed (N=52).....
Mostly agriculture (N=96].
Agriculture (N=3
Mostly urban (W

3
2
2
&

FREQUENCY (in % ps

abo 00 sb abo
MEAN INORGANIC NITROGEN EXPORT (kgs/ ro")

Figure 16. Frequency polygons of mean orthophosphorus and mean
inorganic nitrogen stream exports.

35