DOCSLIB.ORG

Lakes Oconee and Sinclair Proposed Criteria Technical Support Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lakes Oconee and Sinclair Proposed Criteria Technical Support Document GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Lakes Oconee and Sinclair Proposed Criteria Technical Support Document Elizabeth A. Booth, Ph.D., P.E. and Victoria A. Adams 8/10/2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 6 2.0 PROPOSED LAKE CRITERIA ............................................................................................ 8 3.0 WATER QUALITY DATA .................................................................................................... 9 4.0 MODEL DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................................12 4.1 Watershed Modeling (LSPC) ......................................................................................... 12 4.1.1 Meteorological Data ..............................................................................................14 4.1.2 Land Cover ...........................................................................................................16 4.1.3 Soils .....................................................................................................................19 4.1.4 Stream Characteristics .........................................................................................19 4.1.5 Watershed Point Source Discharges ....................................................................22 4.1.6 Land Application Systems.....................................................................................24 4.1.7 Septic Tanks .........................................................................................................26 4.1.8 Water Withdrawals ...............................................................................................27 4.1.9 Agricultural Water Withdrawals .............................................................................27 4.1.10 LSPC Modeling Parameters ...............................................................................30 4.2 LSPC Model Calibration ................................................................................................. 34 4.3 Lake Hydrodynamic Modeling (EFDC) ............................................................................ 42 4.3.1 Tributary Inputs .....................................................................................................44 4.3.2 Point Sources Discharges.....................................................................................47 4.3.3 Water Withdrawals ...............................................................................................47 4.3.4 Meteorological Data ..............................................................................................47 4.4 Water Quality Lake Modeling (EFDC) ............................................................................. 48 4.4.1 Point Sources Discharge ......................................................................................53 4.4.2 Sediment Oxygen Demand ...................................................................................53 4.4.3 Nutrient Fluxes .....................................................................................................53 4.4.4 Modeling Parameters ............................................................................................54 4.5 EFDC Model Calibration and Verification ........................................................................ 56 5.0 MODEL SCENARIOS ........................................................................................................63 5.1 Description of Scenarios ................................................................................................ 63 5.1.1 Scenario 1A (Calibration) ......................................................................................63 5.1.2 Scenario 1B (All Forest) ........................................................................................64 5.1.3 Scenario 1C (No Point Sources – Current Landuse) .............................................64 5.1.4 Scenario 1D (Current Permit) ...............................................................................64 5.1.5 Scenario 1E (2050 Permitted Flows and Current Landuse) ..................................64 5.1.6 Scenario 1F (50% of P Strategy) ..........................................................................64 5.1.7 Scenario 1G (2050 Permitted Flows Maintaining Loads and Current Landuse) ....65 5.2 Model Calibration............................................................................................................ 65 5.2.1 Lake Oconee ........................................................................................................65 5.2.2 Lake Sinclair .........................................................................................................67 Georgia Environmental Protection Division 1 Atlanta, Georgia 5.3 Effects of Land Use Change and Point Sources ............................................................. 68 5.3.1 Lake Oconee ........................................................................................................68 5.3.2 Lake Sinclair .........................................................................................................70 5.4 Effects of Future Permitted Flows ................................................................................... 72 5.4.1 Lake Oconee ........................................................................................................72 5.4.2 Lake Sinclair .........................................................................................................74 5.5 Effects of Point Source Nutrient Management ................................................................ 76 5.5.1 Lake Oconee ........................................................................................................76 5.5.2 Lake Sinclair .........................................................................................................78 5.6 Scenario Summaries ...................................................................................................... 80 5.6.1 Chlorophyll a Results ............................................................................................80 5.6.2 Nitrogen Results ...................................................................................................81 5.6.3 Phosphorus Results..............................................................................................82 5.6.4 pH .........................................................................................................................83 6.0 DESIGNATED USE SUPPORT .........................................................................................85 6.1 Recreational Use Support .............................................................................................. 85 6.1.1 Lake Oconee ........................................................................................................85 6.1.2 Lake Sinclair .........................................................................................................88 6.2 Fisheries Use Support ................................................................................................... 90 6.2.1 Lake Oconee Fisheries .........................................................................................90 6.2.2 Lake Sinclair Fisheries ..........................................................................................92 6.2.3 Appropriate Phosphorus Criteria ...........................................................................96 6.3 Drinking Water Source Use Support .............................................................................. 97 6.3.1 Lake Oconee Intakes ............................................................................................97 6.3.2 Lake Sinclair Intakes .............................................................................................98 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................101 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................102 Appendix A Water Quality Data ...............................................................................................103 Appendix B Proposed Water Quality Standards for West Point Lake Memo ........................... 117 Georgia Environmental Protection Division 2 Atlanta, Georgia List of Figures 1-1. Location of Lakes Oconee and Sinclair ......................................................................... 7 3-1. Lake Oconee Monitoring Sites ...................................................................................... 10 3-2. Lake Sinclair Monitoring Sites ...................................................................................... 11 4-1. Linkage between LSPC and EFDC .............................................................................. 12 4-2. Sub-delineated 12-Digit HUC Coverage for the Lakes Oconee and Sinclair Watersheds ................................................................................................................. 13 4-3. Meteorological Stations Used in the Lakes Oconee and Sinclair LSPC Models ............ 15 4-4. Lakes Oconee and Sinclair Watersheds Land Cover from 2008 GLUT ........................ 17 4-5. Lakes Oconee and Sinclair Watersheds Impervious Coverage from 2005 GLUT ......... 18 4-6. Lakes Oconee
Load more

Recommended publications
  • High Clearance Vehicles 3
    Road Dates Length Road Name Category Maintenance Level Farrar Shady Rock Number Allowed (Miles) Dale 1228 Arnolds Mill Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 0.79 Eagle 1221 Beaver Dam Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 0.36 Lake 1068 Beaver Dam Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 3.65 Rock Eagle 1245 Billups Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 2.24 4-H Center 1099 Brown Stewart Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 3.28 1120 Burgess Road Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 2.08 1268 Cannon Point Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 0.73 1022 Chehaw Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 1.19 1038 Childs Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 2.99 1038A Childs-A Open Road Yearlong 2 - High Clearance Vehicles 0.11 Stewart 2 ­' 1223 Church Open Road Yearlong 2 - High Clearance Vehicles 0.34 1247 Cloverfield Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 1.63 ­'296 1216 Cold Springs Open Road Yearlong 2 - High Clearance Vehicles 0.18 1274 Copelan Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 1.33 1016 Dan Gun Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 2.33 Shady 1277 Deer Camp Open Road Yearlong 2 - High Clearance Vehicles 0.18 Dale 1276 Dyar Pasture Open Road Yearlong 2 - High Clearance Vehicles 0.43 1066 Ezell Mathis Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 1.67 277 1232 Fambrough Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger Cars 1.41 ­' 1203 Finch Open Road Yearlong 3 - Suitable For Passenger
    [Show full text]
  • Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards ( 1) Purpose. The establishment of water quality standards. (2) W ate r Quality Enhancement: (a) The purposes and intent of the State in establishing Water Quality Standards are to provide enhancement of water quality and prevention of pollution; to protect the public health or welfare in accordance with the public interest for drinking water supplies, conservation of fish, wildlife and other beneficial aquatic life, and agricultural, industrial, recreational, and other reasonable and necessary uses and to maintain and improve the biological integrity of the waters of the State. ( b) The following paragraphs describe the three tiers of the State's waters. (i) Tier 1 - Existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses shall be maintained and protected. (ii) Tier 2 - Where the quality of the waters exceed levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained and protected unless the division finds, after full satisfaction of the intergovernmental coordination and public participation provisions of the division's continuing planning process, that allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located.
    [Show full text]
  • July 3-9, 2011
    Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Resources Division Law Enforcement Section Field Operations Weekly Report July 3-9, 2011 This report is a broad sampling of events that have taken place in the past week, but does not include all actions taken by the Law Enforcement Section. Region I- Calhoun (Northwest) FLOYD COUNTY On Sunday June 26th, Cpl. Shawn Elmore was working along the Etowah River in Rome and overheard radio traffic from Rome PD about a vehicle getting broken into at the Etowah River boat ramp. Cpl. Elmore responded to the boat ramp and assisted Rome PD officer. Cpl. Elmore located one of the suspects hiding in the woods and the other suspect came out of the river. Three juvenile suspects were detained and charged with entering an auto and criminal damage to property by Rome PD. On June 26th, Cpl. Shawn Elmore was at the Heritage Park boat ramp on the Coosa River in Rome when he was approached by a parent of four teenagers that were caught in a storm on the Etowah River. Cpl. Elmore went to get his patrol vessel and while enroute to the Etowah River boat ramp the four teens called the parents and advised they had gotten out of the river safely and were waiting on a ride on Turner Chapel Rd. On the night of June 26th, Cpl. Shawn Elmore received a call from Floyd E911 about 3 adults and a 3 year-old child stranded on the Etowah River. Cpl. Elmore responded to the scene and assisted Rome/Floyd Fire with a search of the river and the four were located and safely returned to their vehicle.
    [Show full text]
  • July 28 – August 3, 2013
    Department of Natural Resources Law Enforcement Division Field Operations Weekly Report July 28 – August 3, 2013 This report is a broad sampling of events that have taken place in the past week, but does not include all actions taken by the Law Enforcement Division. Region I- Calhoun (Northwest) BARTOW COUNTY On August 3rd, Cpl. Byron Young patrolled the Etowah River below Allatoona Lake. Cpl. Young checked 49 vessels/ canoes / kayaks, 27 tubers, and 6 fishing licenses. The DNR officer located 2 people fishing without a license and several tubers without Personal Flotation Devices (PFD’s – “life jackets”). Cpl. Young gave verbal guidance for most of the violations and handed out 2 PFD’s for use on the river. On August 3rd, Sgt. Mike Barr and RFC Brooks Varnell were on patrol on Allatoona Lake in the area of Bethany Bridge. They witnessed a pleasure boat go through the no- wake zone leaving a wake. Before the end of the area, the operator increased speed and started under higher power leaving a larger wake. The DNR officers activated their blue lights but did not get the boat stopped until the area in front of Park Marine. Once stopped, RFC Varnell explained the violation and checked the boat for safety equipment. During the check, RFC Varnell noticed the operator had slurred speech and glassy eyes. The operator admitted to drinking a few beers. RFC Varnell checked the man’s level of impairment through field sobriety exercises. He was arrested and charged with boating under the influence and failure to obey the regulatory markers (the no wake zone).
    [Show full text]
  • Stream-Temperature Charcteristics in Georgia
    STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Prepared in cooperation with the GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA By T.R. Dyar and S.J. Alhadeff ______________________________________________________________________________ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 Prepared in cooperation with GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Atlanta, Georgia 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 3039 Amwiler Road, Suite 130 Denver Federal Center Peachtree Business Center Box 25286 Atlanta, GA 30360-2824 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Page Abstract . 1 Introduction . 1 Purpose and scope . 2 Previous investigations. 2 Station-identification system . 3 Stream-temperature data . 3 Long-term stream-temperature characteristics. 6 Natural stream-temperature characteristics . 7 Regression analysis . 7 Harmonic mean coefficient . 7 Amplitude coefficient. 10 Phase coefficient . 13 Statewide harmonic equation . 13 Examples of estimating natural stream-temperature characteristics . 15 Panther Creek . 15 West Armuchee Creek . 15 Alcovy River . 18 Altamaha River . 18 Summary of stream-temperature characteristics by river basin . 19 Savannah River basin . 19 Ogeechee River basin. 25 Altamaha River basin. 25 Satilla-St Marys River basins. 26 Suwannee-Ochlockonee River basins . 27 Chattahoochee River basin. 27 Flint River basin. 28 Coosa River basin. 29 Tennessee River basin . 31 Selected references. 31 Tabular data . 33 Graphs showing harmonic stream-temperature curves of observed data and statewide harmonic equation for selected stations, figures 14-211 .
    [Show full text]
  • GEORGIA's WATER 2017'S
    2017’s Worst Offenses Against GEORGIA’S WATER LAKE SINCLAIR Weak Regulations Send Toxins from Shuttered Power Plant to Premiere Lake INTRODUCTION: Given the opportunity to enact regulations to protect Georgia’s water and the health of communities downstream from coal-fired power plants, Georgia’s Environmental Protection Division (EPD) and legislators earlier this year did what has become all too common—they deferred to influential business interests. Now, Georgia Power Company is proceeding LAKE with plans to close 29 ash ponds at 11 of its coal-fired generation plants SINCLAIR across the state with inadequate oversight from EPD. These plans include efforts to drain water from those ponds and discharge it to the state’s waterways. Ash pond water is known to contain toxic substances like arsenic, mercury, lead and selenium. At the now closed Plant Branch near Milledgeville, Lake Sinclair will be on the receiving end of this pollution. Rather than set clear limits on how much toxins could be released during the closure of these ponds, EPD has instead agreed to allow Georgia Power to simply monitor for these toxins. Under the plan, EPD will limit toxic discharges only if the monitoring shows evidence of toxins being released above what it deems acceptable. Of course, by then, damage will already have been done. To make matters worse, the release of these toxins can take place at any time, with no requirement for Georgia Power to notify downstream water utilities, communities or other water users. THE WATER BODY: A man-made reservoir on the Oconee River, Lake Sinclair has been a recreation hot spot in middle Georgia since the completion of Sinclair Dam in 1953.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Habits of Blue Catfish (Ictalurus Furcatus) Introduced Into
    FOOD HABITS OF BLUE CATFISH (ICTALURUS FURCATUS) INTRODUCED INTO LAKE OCONEE, GEORGIA by GEOFFREY EARL MITCHELL (Under the Direction of Cecil A. Jennings) ABSTRACT Blue Catfish are native to the Coosa river drainage in northwest Georgia, but were discovered outside this range (in Lake Oconee) in 1997. In Lake Oconee, their abundance and growth rates have increased dramatically, but their food habits are unknown. Therefore, food habits of Blue Catfish were determined by examining the stomachs of 808 specimens from Lake Oconee’s upper and lower regions during all seasons from summer 2012 to summer 2013. Stomach contents were analyzed using the Index of Relative Importance. The dominant seasonal prey item was Asian Clams (Corbicula fluminea; 98%) during the summer, Asian Clams (46%) in the fall, Mayflies (Ephemeroptera; 23%) in the winter, and Mayflies (84%) in the spring. The results show that the diet of introduced Blue Catfish in Lake Oconee, Georgia, is omnivorous. More importantly, the results also show that they are not preying intensely on native bi-valves and fishes. INDEX WORDS: Diet, index of relative importance, Lake Oconee FOOD HABITS OF BLUE CATFISH (ICTALURUS FURCATUS) INTRODUCED INTO LAKE OCONEE, GEORGIA by GEOFFREY EARL MITCHELL B.S., The University of California, 2011 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE ATHENS, GEORGIA 2015 ©2015 Geoffrey Earl Mitchell All Rights Reserved FOOD HABITS OF BLUE CATFISH (ICTALURUS FURCATUS) INTRODUCED INTO LAKE OCONEE, GEORGIA by GEOFFREY EARL MITCHELL Major Professor: Cecil A. Jennings Committee: Michael T.
    [Show full text]
  • CSRA Regionally Important Resources Plan
    CENTRAL SAVANNAH RIVER AREA REGIONAL COMMISSION Regionally Important Resources Plan Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................4 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................4 Natural Resources ..............................................................................................................................7 Natural Resources: Parks & Forested Areas .............................................................................9 Magnolia Springs State Park ................................................................................................. 11 Elijah Clark State Park ............................................................................................................ 12 A.H. Stephens Memorial State Park ..................................................................................... 13 Hamburg State Park ................................................................................................................ 14 Mistletoe State Park ................................................................................................................ 15 Natural Resources: Wildlife Management Areas .................................................................. 17 Clarks Hill Wildlife Management Area ............................................................................... 18 Di-Lane
    [Show full text]
  • Premium Inland Map Overlays
    PREMIUM INLAND MAP OVERLAYS Available for select Garmin and Navionics chart cards and the Navionics Boating app. HIGH-RESOLUTION RELIEF SHADING SONAR IMAGERY Color and shadow combine for an easy-to-interpret, See changes to bottom hardness clearly and in bright clearer view of fish-holding structure, artificial reefs, color, highlighting both subtle and dramatic transition underwater shelves and more. areas on select U.S. lakes. Garmin Navionics States Name Relief Shading Sonar Imagery Relief Shading Sonar Imagery AL Bankhead Lake √ √ √ √ AL Jordan Lake √ √ √ √ AL Lake Martin √ √ √ √ AL Lake Tuscaloosa √ X √ X AL Lay Lake √ √ √ √ AL Lewis Smith Lake √ √ √ X AL Logan Martin Lake √ √ √ √ AL Mitchell Lake √ √ √ √ AL Neely Henry Lake √ √ √ √ AL Wheeler Lake √ √ √ √ Lake Eufaula AL/GA √ √ √ X (Walter F. George Reservoir) AL/MS/TN Pickwick Lake √ √ √ √ AL/TN Guntersville Lake √ √ √ √ AL/TN Wilson Lake √ √ √ √ AR Beaver Lake √ √ √ √ AR Greers Ferry Lake √ √ √ √ 03/21 Garmin Navionics States Name Relief Shading Sonar Imagery Relief Shading Sonar Imagery AR Greeson Lake √ X √ X AR Lake Dardanelle √ √ √ √ AR Lake Hamilton √ X √ X AR Lake Maumelle √ √ √ √ AR Lake Ouachita √ √ √ √ AR/MO Bull Shoals Lake √ √ √ √ AR/MO Norfork Lake √ √ √ √ AR/MO Table Rock Lake √ √ √ √ AZ Apache Lake √ √ √ √ AZ Canyon Lake √ √ √ √ AZ Lake Pleasant √ √ √ √ AZ Saguaro Lake √ √ √ √ AZ Theodore Roosevelt Lake √ √ √ √ AZ/CA Lake Havasu √ √ √ √ AZ/NV Lake Mohave X √** X X CA Castaic Lake √ √ √ √ CA Clear Lake √ √ √ X CA Folsom Lake √ X √ X CA Lake Isabella √ X √ X CT Candlewood Lake √ √ √ X FL Lake Eustis √ √ √ √ FL Lake Harris √ √ √ √ FL Lake Kissimmee √ √* √ X FL Lake Tohopekaliga √ √ √ √ FL/GA Lake Seminole √ √ √ √ GA Lake Oconee √ √ √ √ GA Lake Sidney Lanier √ √ √ √ GA Lake Sinclair √ √ √ √ GA West Point Lake √ √ √ √ Clarks Hill Lake GA/SC √ √ √ √ (J.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Results
    Review Draft Synopsis Report Current Assimilative Capacity Assessment SUMMARY OF RESULTS In support of the Georgia Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Plan (GA State Water Plan), the Surface Water Quality (or Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment was used to determine the capacity of Georgia’s surface waters to absorb pollutants without unacceptable degradation of water quality. Assimilative Capacity is defined as the amount of contaminant load that can be discharged to a specific waterbody without exceeding water quality standards or criteria. In other words, the assimilative capacity is used to define the ability of a waterbody to naturally absorb and use a discharged substance without water quality becoming impaired or aquatic life being harmed. The assimilative capacity resource assessment included developing water quality models of selected streams, rivers, lakes and estuaries throughout the State of Georgia. Results from these models were compared with applicable water quality standards. The current assimilative capacity results focus on dissolved oxygen, nutrients, specifically nitrogen and phosphorus, and chlorophyll-a. The water quality models were used to evaluate the impacts of current wastewater and industrial discharges and withdrawals, land use, and meteorological conditions on the waterbody. MODELS USED FOR ASSIMILATIVE CAPACITY RESOURCE ASSESSMENT For the Assimilative Capacity Resource Assessment, four different models were developed. GA Dosag Georgia Dosag (GA Dosag) was used to predict dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in a stream or river during critical time periods which include low flow and high temperatures. GaEst Georgia Estuary (GaEst) was used to predict the dissolved oxygen sag curve in the vicinity of waste discharge points in Georgia estuaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Wallace Dam Project (FERC No
    Southern Company Generation. 241 Ralph McGill Boulevard, NE BIN 10193 Atlanta, GA 30308-3374 404 506 7219 tel November 21, 2017 Wallace Dam Project (FERC No. 2413-117) Wallace Dam Relicensing Preliminary Licensing Proposal Ms. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Room 1-A- Dockets Room Washington, D.C. 20426 Dear Secretary Bose: On behalf of Georgia Power Company, Southern Company is filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the Wallace Dam Preliminary Licensing Proposal in compliance with the Commission’s Integrated Licensing Process regulations at 18 CFR § 5.16. If you require further information, please contact me at 404.506.7219 or [email protected]. Sincerely, Courtenay R. O’Mara, P.E. Hydro Licensing & Compliance Supervisor Attachment cc: FERC/OEP – Allan Creamer Geosyntec – Steve Layman, Ph.D. Troutman Sanders – Hallie Meushaw, Fitzgerald Veira Preliminary Licensing Proposal Wallace Dam Hydroelectric Project FERC Project Number 2413 Prepared with: Southern Company Generation Hydro Services and November 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. v Project Setting ....................................................................................................... v Current Operation ................................................................................................ vi Preliminary Licensing Proposal ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bankhead Lake AL Jordan Lake AL Lake Martin AL Lay
    Bankhead Lake AL Jordan Lake AL Lake Martin AL Lay Lake AL Logan Martin Lake AL Mitchell Lake AL Neely Henry Lake AL Wheeler Lake AL Pickwick Lake AL/MS/TN Guntersville Lake AL/TN Wilson Lake AL/TN Beaver Lake AR Greers Ferry Lake AR Lake Dardanelle AR Lake Maumelle AR Lake Ouachita AR Bull Shoals Lake AR/MO Norfork Lake AR/MO Table Rock Lake AR/MO Apache Lake AZ Canyon Lake AZ Lake Pleasant AZ Saguaro Lake AZ Theodore Roosevelt Lake AZ Lake Havasu AZ/CA Castaic Lake CA Lake Eustis FL Lake Harris FL Lake Tohopekaliga FL Lake Seminole FL/GA Lake Oconee GA Lake Sidney Lanier GA Lake Sinclair GA West Point Lake GA Clarks Hill Lake (J. Strom Thurmond Reservoir) GA/SC Lake Hartwell GA/SC Richard B. Russell Lake GA/SC Coeur d'Alene Lake ID Dale Hollow Reservoir KY/TN Red River Pool #3 LA Red River Pool #5 LA Toledo Bend Reservoir LA/TX Sebago Lake ME Big Cut Foot Sioux MN Cass Lake MN Gull Chain MN Kitchi Lake MN Lake Bemidji MN Lake Minnetonka MN Lake Vermilion MN Lake Winnibigoshish MN Pug Hole Lake MN White Bear Lake MN St. Croix River MN/WI Lake of the Ozarks MO Stockton Lake MO B. Everett Jordan Lake NC Badin Lake NC Falls Lake NC Fontana Lake NC High Rock Lake NC Hiwassee Lake NC Lake Norman NC Lake Tillery NC Lake Wylie NC/SC John H. Kerr Reservoir NC/VA Lake Gaston NC/VA Lake Winnipesaukee NH Canandaigua Lake NY Keuka Lake NY Lake George NY Oneida Lake NY St.
    [Show full text]