Bad Medicine Lake vs Long Lost Lake
Water quality, depth, fish species, and recreation comparison.
Bad Medicine Lake and Long Lost Lake read the same on nutrients and algae. Both are in Minnesota.
Both Bad Medicine Lake and Long Lost Lake sit in Minnesota. A same-state comparison strips out the state-level water-quality regime as a variable: any differences in the readings here are about the lakes themselves, not the agencies sampling them. These two sit close on the readings, Bad Medicine Lake versus Long Lost Lake. The deciding factors for a recreational visitor are likely physical (depth, access, fish species) rather than water-quality differences.
With readings this close, the choice between the two lakes turns on non-water-quality factors: depth, fish species, public access, distance from home. The per-lake pages below cover all of those.
Bad Medicine Lake
Crystal clear, you can see 25 ft down.
Long Lost Lake
Crystal clear, you can see 22 ft down.
Side-by-Side Metrics
| Metric | Bad Medicine Lake | Long Lost Lake |
|---|---|---|
| Water Clarity | 25 ft Better | 22 ft |
| Phosphorus | 6 µg/L Better | 10.5 µg/L |
| Chlorophyll-a (Algae) | 1.6 µg/L Better | 2.4 µg/L |
| Maximum Depth | 84 ft Better | 63 ft |
| Surface Area | 803 acres | 539 acres |
| Public Access | Yes | Yes |
| Fish Species | 13 Better | 11 |
| Trophic State | oligotrophic | oligotrophic |
A green ✓ marks the better value for that metric (lower phosphorus / chlorophyll = cleaner; higher Secchi / depth / species count = better). Surface area and trophic state carry no tick — a bigger lake is not a better lake.
Swap a lake
Compare Bad Medicine Lake or Long Lost Lake against a different lake.
Verdict
Both lakes earn the same Grade A. The tiebreakers come down to clarity (Bad Medicine Lake: 25 ft, Long Lost Lake: 22 ft) and what you want from the lake. Bad Medicine Lake supports more documented fish species.
Source: EPA National Aquatic Resource Surveys, 2026.