Iowa DNR
Iowa DNR
ADBNet
Water Quality Assessments
Impaired Waters List

Meadow Lake IA 04-LDM-1089

Adair County S17T76NR31W 5 mi N of Greenfield.

Assessment Cycle
2012
Result Period
2008 - 2010
Designations
Class B(LW) Class A1 Class HH
Assessment Methodology
Assessment Type
Monitored
Integrated Report
Category 5a
Trophic
Eutrophic
Trend
Stable
Legacy ADBCode
IA 04-LDM-02870-L_0
Overall Use Support
Partial
Aquatic Life Use Support
Fully
Fish Consumption
Fully
Primary Contact Recreation
Partial
Documentation
Assessment Comments

Assessment is based on: (1) results of the statewide survey of Iowa lakes conducted from 2006 through 2010 by Iowa State University (ISU), (2) results of the statewide ambient lake monitoring program conducted from 2006 through 2008 by University Hygienic Laboratory (UHL), (3) information from the IDNR Fisheries Bureau, and (4) results of U.S. EPA/IDNR turtle contaminant (RAFT) monitoring in 2010.

Basis for Assessment

SUMMARY: The Class A1 (primary contact recreation) uses are assessed (monitored) as “partially supported” due to aesthetically objectionable conditions caused by poor water transparency and algae blooms.   The Class B(LW) (aquatic life) uses are assessed (monitored) as “fully supported.”  Fish consumption uses are assessed (monitored) as "fully supported" based on results of turtle tissue monitoring in 2010.   Sources of data for this assessment include (1) results of the statewide survey of Iowa lakes conducted from 2006 through 2010 by Iowa State University (ISU), (2) results of the statewide ambient lake monitoring program conducted from 2006 through 2008 by University Hygienic Laboratory (UHL), (3) information from the IDNR Fisheries Bureau, and (4) results of U.S.  EPA/IDNR turtle contaminant (RAFT) monitoring in 2010.

EXPLANATION: For the 2012 assessment/listing cycle, results from the ISU and UHL lake surveys suggest that the Class A1 uses at Meadow Lake are “partially supported.”  Using the median values from these surveys from 2006 through 2010 (approximately 16 samples), Carlson’s (1977) trophic state indices for Secchi depth, chlorophyll a, and total phosphorus were 68, 65, and 70 respectively for Meadow Lake.   According to Carlson (1977) the Secchi depth and chlorophyll a values place Meadow Lake in between the eutrophic and hypereutrophic categories, while the total phosphorus value places Meadow Lake in the hypereutrophic category.   These values suggest high levels of chlorophyll a and suspended algae in the water, poor water transparency, and very high levels of phosphorus in the water column.  

The level of inorganic suspended solids is only moderately high at this lake and suggests that non-algal turbidity contributes somewhat to poor water clarity at this lake.   The median inorganic suspended solids concentration at Meadow Lake was 4.5 mg/L, which was the 60th highest of the 134 monitored lakes.

Data from the 2006-2010 ISU and UHL surveys suggest a large population of cyanobacteria exists at Meadow Lake, which causes an impairment due to nuisance aquatic life.   These data show that cyanobacteria comprised approximately 100% of the phytoplankton wet mass at this lake.   The median cyanobacteria wet mass (92.8 mg/L) was also the 6th highest of the 134 lakes sampled.   This median is in the worst 25% of the 132 lakes sampled.   The presence of a large population of cyanobacteria at this lake suggests a potential violation of Iowa’s narrative water quality standard protecting against the occurrence of nuisance aquatic life.   This assessment is based strictly on the distribution of the lake-specific median cyanobacteria values from 2006-2010.   Median levels greater than the 75th percentile of this distribution were arbitrarily considered to represent potential impairment.   No other criteria exist, however, upon which to base a more accurate identification of impairments due to cyanobacteria.    The assessment category for assessments based on level of cyanobacteria will be considered "evaluated" (indicating an assessment with relatively lower confidence) as opposed to "monitored" (indicating an assessment with relatively higher confidence) to account for this lower level of confidence.    

The Class B(LW) (aquatic life) uses are assessed (monitored) as “fully supported” based on information from the IDNR Fisheries Bureau and results from the ISU and UHL lake surveys.   Nutrient loading to the water column, moderately high levels of algal turbidity, and siltation in the lake, however, remain water quality concerns at this lake that may affect support of the Class B(LW) uses.   The ISU and UHL lake survey results show generally good chemical water quality at Meadow Lake.   During 2006-2010 there were no violations of the Class B(LW) criterion for ammonia in 16 samples and no violations of the Class A1,B(LW) criterion for pH in 16 samples.   There were three violations of the Class B(LW) criterion for dissolved oxygen in 16 samples (19%).   Based on IDNR’s assessment methodology, however, these violations are not significantly greater than 10% of the samples and therefore do not suggest an impairment of the Class B(LW) uses.    

NOTE: Meadow Lake was drawn down in the winter of 2008-2009 and sediment and nutrient retention structures were built in the watershed in 2010.  

Fish consumption uses were assessed (monitored) as “fully supported” based on results of U.S.   EPA/IDNR turtle contaminant (RAFT) monitoring at Meadow Lake in 2010.   The shoulder samples from snapping turtle had low levels of contaminants.   Levels of primary contaminants in the shoulder sample of snapping turtle were as follows: mercury: 0.119 ppm; total PCBs: 0.09 ppm; and technical chlordane: <0.03 ppm.   The existence of, or potential for, a fish consumption advisory is the basis for Section 305(b) assessments of the degree to which Iowa’s lakes and rivers support their fish consumption uses.   The turtle contaminant data generated from the 2010 RAFT sampling conducted at this lake show that the levels of contaminants do not exceed any of the advisory trigger levels, thus indicating no justification for issuance of a consumption advisory for this waterbody.

Monitoring and Methods
Assessment Key Dates
9/16/2010 Fixed Monitoring End Date
7/30/2010 Fish Tissue Monitoring
5/3/2006 Fixed Monitoring Start Date
Methods
120 Surveys of fish and game biologists/other professionals
222 Non-fixed-station monitoring (conventional during key seasons and flows)
340 Primary producer surveys (phytoplankton/periphyton/macrophyton)
260 Fish tissue analysis
Monitoring Levels
Biological 3
Habitat 0
Physical Chemistry 3
Toxic 0
Pathogen Indicators 0
Other Health Indicators 0
Other Aquatic Life Indicators 0
# of Bio Sites 0
BioIntegrity N/A
Causes and Sources of Impairment
Causes Use Support Cause Magnitude Sources Source Magnitude
Noxious aquatic plants Aquatic Life Support Moderate
  • Agriculture
  • Internal nutrient cycling (primarily lakes)
  • Source Unknown
  • Moderate
  • Moderate
  • Moderate
Algal Grwth/Chlorophyll a Primary Contact Recreation Moderate
  • Agriculture
  • Internal nutrient cycling (primarily lakes)
  • Source Unknown
  • Moderate
  • Moderate
  • Moderate
Turbidity Primary Contact Recreation Moderate
  • Agriculture
  • Sediment resuspension
  • Source Unknown
  • Moderate
  • Moderate
  • Moderate