Lake Benefit:Cost Assessment

This dataset was formulated to rank lakes as they relate to the state's priority of focusing on <q>high-quality, high-value lakes that likely provide the greatest return on investment.</q> For each lake, a benefit:cost assessment priority score was calculated. This score is a function of phosphorus sensitivity (see Lakes of Phosphorus Sensitivity Significance (LPSS) dataset), lake size, and catchment disturbance. Lakes were then grouped based on this score and assigned a priority rating. <br/><br/>Many Minnesota lakes have not been sampled for lake phosphorus, and this list will be periodically revised as additional data become available.<br/><br/><b> For a detailed description of criteria and analysis used, see: </b> <a href=" Benefit Cost Assessment 2023.pdf" target=_blank>Lake Benefit:Cost Assessment Score (LBCA) - 06/27/2023</a> (pdf, 457 KB)

Additional Info

Field Value
dsAccessConst None
dsCurrentRef Polygon re-delineations and edits are frequent and occur as needed. See the attributes DELINEATION_DATE and DELINEATION_SRC for date and source of each polygon. See CONTENT_DATE for last date of attribute updates.
dsModifiedDate 2023-10-13 23:49:12
dsOriginator Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) - Ecological and Water Resources (EWR)
dsPurpose To support planning, natural resource management, research and other resource protection-related activities.
gdrsDsGuid {f71cd339-e689-48c9-974a-ef2670ab50b3}
spatial {"type":"Polygon","coordinates":[[[-97.23, 43.5],[-97.23, 49.37], [-89.53, 49.37], [-89.53, 43.5], [-97.23, 43.5]]]}

Dataset extent

Tiles © Esri — Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, iPC, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and the GIS User Community