Big Lake vs Rice Lake
Water quality, depth, fish species, and recreation comparison.
Big Lake reads lower on nutrients and algae than Rice Lake. Both are in Stearns County, Minnesota.
Big Lake and Rice 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 Rice 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
Moderate clarity, visible to about 6.9 ft.
Rice Lake
Very murky, less than 3 ft of visibility.
Side-by-Side Metrics
| Metric | Big Lake | Rice Lake |
|---|---|---|
| Water Clarity | 6.9 ft Better | 3 ft |
| Phosphorus | 26.5 µg/L Better | 50 µg/L |
| Chlorophyll-a (Algae) | 10.7 µg/L Better | 39.5 µg/L |
| Maximum Depth | 42 ft Better | 41 ft |
| Surface Area | 458 acres | 1,513 acres |
| Public Access | Yes | Yes |
| Fish Species | 16 | 21 Better |
| Trophic State | eutrophic | eutrophic |
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 Big Lake or Rice Lake against a different lake.
Verdict
Big Lake reads lower on nutrients and algae than Rice Lake. Water clarity: 6.9 ft vs 3 ft. For more fish-species variety, Rice Lake edges ahead with 21 documented species.
Source: EPA National Aquatic Resource Surveys, 2026.