Lost Land Lake vs Moose Lake
Water quality, depth, fish species, and recreation comparison.
Lost Land Lake reads lower on nutrients and algae than Moose Lake. Both are in Sawyer County, Wisconsin.
Lost Land Lake and Moose Lake are both in Wisconsin — 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. These two sit close on the readings, Lost Land Lake versus Moose 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.
Lost Land Lake
Good clarity, visible to about 10 ft.
Moose Lake
Very murky, less than 2 ft of visibility.
Side-by-Side Metrics
| Metric | Lost Land Lake | Moose Lake |
|---|---|---|
| Water Clarity | 10 ft Better | 2 ft |
| Phosphorus | 17.1 µg/L Better | 28.9 µg/L |
| Chlorophyll-a (Algae) | No data | No data |
| Maximum Depth | 21 ft | 21 ft |
| Surface Area | 1,264 acres | 1,559 acres |
| Public Access | Yes | Yes |
| Fish Species | 6 Better | 5 |
| Trophic State | mesotrophic | 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 Lost Land Lake or Moose Lake against a different lake.
Verdict
Lost Land Lake reads lower on nutrients and algae than Moose Lake. Water clarity: 10 ft vs 2 ft. For fishing diversity, Lost Land Lake also leads with 6 species.
Source: EPA National Aquatic Resource Surveys, 2026.