Skip to main content
LakeQuality

Big Lake reads lower on nutrients and algae than Irving Lake. Both are in Beltrami County, Minnesota.

Reviewed by LakeQuality Editorial Team · Updated

Big Lake and Irving Lake are both in Minnesota — a same-state head-to-head where the comparison comes down to lake-specific differences in depth, watershed, and monitoring history rather than the broader state-level water-quality regime. Big Lake reads materially cleaner than Irving Lake on nutrients and algae. A gap that wide is unlikely to close in a single year of remediation work; it reflects multi-decade differences in the lakes themselves.

For a recreational visitor, the wider gap in the readings is decisive: Big Lake has the lower nutrient and algae numbers. For a researcher, the gap is the interesting part: what is different about the two watersheds, and which of those differences is mutable?

Big Lake

Beltrami County, Minnesota

Moderate clarity, visible to about 9.7 ft.

Irving Lake

Beltrami County, Minnesota

Murky, only visible to about 5.6 ft.

Side-by-Side Metrics

MetricBig LakeIrving Lake
Water Clarity9.7 ft Better5.6 ft
Phosphorus15 µg/L Better32 µg/L
Chlorophyll-a (Algae)4.8 µg/L Better10.2 µg/L
Maximum Depth35 ft Better19 ft
Surface Area3,598 acres662 acres
Public AccessYesYes
Fish Species1720 Better
Trophic Statemesotrophiceutrophic

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.

Verdict

Big Lake reads lower on nutrients and algae than Irving Lake. Water clarity: 9.7 ft vs 5.6 ft. For more fish-species variety, Irving Lake edges ahead with 20 documented species.

Source: EPA National Aquatic Resource Surveys, 2026.