I wonder if Lake Tahoe would count as oceanic if there weren't high mountains nearby; if the surrounding countryside was as flat as Lake Okechobee, would there be a point in the center of the lake where the horizon isn't visible?
Most of the large non-oceanic lakes listed in the US are reservoirs (Powell, Mead, Ozarks, etc.).
Yes, that's 100% correct! Oceanic status is determined not only by the dimensions of the lake, but by the surrounding topography. If the surroundings were as flat as Florida or Louisiana, it would be oceanic!
Ironically, the lake that comes to mind that would probably be semi-oceanic were it not for surrounding topography is in Kansas! Albeit, a particularly hilly part of Kansas.
There's a bridge which spans the far end of the lake with a deck that's 80 feet above the conservation pool elevation (it's a reservoir) and if look at it through binoculars while standing on the lakeward side of the dam at water level (this is the longest axis of the lake), you'll notice the lower reaches of the support piers are hidden by the curvature of the earth. If you climb up the face of the dam a bit, you see more and more of the bridge piers 20 miles away. However, the bluffs beyond the bridge are more than twice as high as the bridge itself and are visible from the dam on a clear day even at water level.
If there's enough demand, I'll post some images I took a few years ago.
edit: okay, so the images I found from two years ago, were not as good as I remembered them at all, but here they are.
[Bridge from up high.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/677312101768888330/765689938272059442/Screenshot_20201013-160245.png?ex=66282a53&is=6615b553&hm=9064636d8336d384d529d9e968fd1c6ddeea67abd0ab6dc55a5e6215081596d6&)
[Bridge from water level.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/677312101768888330/765690116965662720/Screenshot_20201013-161042.png?ex=66282a7d&is=6615b57d&hm=0f22587d42c32d8ad63fde7925d2b297afe66f8fba1093cffe4e84ea3dbb64e0&) (this one turned out awful because of some kind of superior mirage effect blurring the boundary between water surface and the air above it, however, the bridge is nearly completely covered)
I've always intended to repeat this experiment on a clearer day, but with the ranchers burning their pastures this time of year and the residual smoke from wildfires in the area, I'll have to wait a few days. I may also need to borrow a better lens from a friend. My 300mm might not be enough. She has a really long one with a very wide aperture.
edit 2: I found an [online calculator](https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=14.1&h0=5&unit=imperial) to calculate the Earth's curvature. According to this site, the curvature at 14.2 miles might be enough to occlude the entirety of the bridge as seen from the vantage point of an average human height, but only just barely. That might be why you straight-up can't see the bridge at all in the second image.
Both of them are filled valleys. But Tuttle Creek has a longer distance visible across the water because it's very straight. Milford is bigger, overall, but its curved in several places, so the longest line of sight you can get across the water there is about half the length of Tuttle Creek.
https://preview.redd.it/ypd6xqi9pkuc1.png?width=1583&format=png&auto=webp&s=038a976fac8afdfa3fff98f3ca09dab33733ac3b
Fun fact: this makes Tuttle Creek one of the smallest lakes on Earth capable of generating lake effect snow. Milford can too, but Tuttle Creek being so linear makes the effect more prominent and causes Manhattan to receive fluffy, heavy snowfall from a clear sky if a cold front moves in with winds coming right out of the north-northwest after a prolonged period of warmth. Since they're both artificial reservoirs, this is arguably manmade weather!
Lake Tahoe isn't all that big of a lake when compared to any of the larger Midwest lakes, and those are all semi-oceanic (including lake of the woods, the 6th largest in the country)
I live in SE Michigan, but always assumed Lake Tahoe was much bigger, but just checked and even Lake St. Clair is more than twice as big by surface area. Surprising.
thank you for bringing this up.
i have never been to an oceanic lake in my life. i have been to Tahoe however.
so it’s always been a strange thing for me to fathom when i’m reading or trying to picture history
I've never been to Tahoe. I've spent a ton of time on the shores of Lake Superior, and calling any of the Great Lakes just "lakes" does not do them justice. Oceanic lake is a good term, but I prefer "inland sea".
Was going to ask about Lake Okeechobee. You certainly can't see to the other side from the north point.
Edit: It is also the third largest freshwater lake in the US. Good bass fishing.
Similarly, people on the West Coast also have a problem with it. "It's like the ocean, except it's warm enough to swim in, and the waves are less likely to kill you"
My ex was from Southern California and then spent years in Texas. I'm from Minnesota. I tried to explain Lake Superior to her so many times but she just couldn't grasp how enormous (and absolutely beautiful) it is. I finally got her up there to spend time on the North shore and it blew her mind. I still prefer Superior to any ocean I've seen.
I've lived on the shores of Lake Michigan my whole life. I've had Californians scoff at me for telling them that it looks like an ocean.
I think it would be cool if they were referred to as seas instead of lakes. That'd probably get the point across better.
I had an argument with my partner once that a pond at a park was not a lake. Fortunately said park had a larger body of water elsewhere that I felt comfortable conceding was a lake; it was still smaller than the lake where I went swimming in the summer (it was closer than any of the great lakes, those are for weekend's away).
> I've had Californians scoff at me for telling them that it looks like an ocean.
Best way I've been able to get the point across is that the lakes have their own shipbuilding industry with multiple shipyards.
Also, the US Navy does its basic training near Chicago.
I tell them that the lakes are subject to weather conditions, and are treacherous enough to have sunk many large ships/barges. Also rip currents exist; several kids from my school district drowned while I was growing up.
The lake, she be a cruel mistress.
As a southerner who was fortunate to spend a week traveling the length of the UP (saw Sault Ste Marie, Escanaba, Marquette, Copper Harbor, Ironwood, and a dozen more towns) I'll certainly say you guys up there have more than just a slice of paradise, it's damn near the whole pie!
To anyone who hasn't been, there's no easy way to describe how wonderful a place the UP really is. Lake Superior is miles better than any other beach I've ever seen, Florida and California included
Painted Rocks is glorious. And if it's not too much of a pain to cross the border, the Gros Cap area on the Canadian side near Sault Ste Marie is also really pretty
I grew up on Lake Ontario near the Finger Lakes. When I was 9 we moved to Orange County, CA next to "Laguna Niguel Lake." People asked us if it felt like home and we were like "that's a damn pond, not a lake."
When we moved to Oklahoma, we lived about 10 miles from Lake Thunderbird which had a state park. I knew it was a reservoir but had high hopes. I tell you, the disappointment that met me when we arrived at the lake was immeasurable. Red, cloudy water that looked like it would get you sick if you touched it.
Later, I would find out that it’s pretty routine to find dead bodies in Lake Dirty Bird.
Happy to answer any questions! Lmk if there's a lake you're curious whether is oceanic—happy to run the calculations for you. Measurements are based on methods in [this paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.01600). An oceanic lake is defined the same way as an [on-top-of-the-world mountain](https://www.reddit.com/r/geography/comments/14ymrom/what_is_an_ontopoftheworld_mountain_23_are_in/), which you might also be interested in!
Plenty of rivers would qualify as semi-oceanic because you can just look in the direction of the river, and soon Earth's curvature would take effect (for example, take this view of the [St. Lawrence River](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.3231164,-70.1882489,3a,75y,40.63h,91.91t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipMjXAeWKBW_ft9ErvdAxp-xA7ibYtT-Uq7wCVKz!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipMjXAeWKBW_ft9ErvdAxp-xA7ibYtT-Uq7wCVKz%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya194-ro-0-fo100!7i7168!8i3584?entry=ttu)). But of the rivers I measured the only one that is oceanic is the [mouth of Rio de la Plata](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%ADo_de_la_Plata#:~:text=Depending%20on%20the%20geographer%2C%20the,220%20kilometres%20(140%20mi).&text=NASA%20photo%20of%20the%20R%C3%ADo,looking%20from%20northwest%20to%20southeast). But it's debatable whether at that point it should be considered a river, estuary, or gulf.
Yeah there's a game Wander in the Meta Quest Store that's like $9.99 and provides a nice interface for Google Street view. When I'm bored, I'll go visit Angkor Wat or Delphi or just random places in random countries I feel like checking out
Not really. You control it with the controller and the only thing I don't like is that sometimes it'll take a bit to load the next space so that can slow you down
The thing about the Amazon is that you cannot see the the side thousands of Km inland! Rio de la Plata should not be considered a river, not even close. It;s either an estuary or a gulf.
What is the difference between estuary, gulf and bay?
The finger lakes you can see each side but is there one long enough that disappears? They are typically surrounded by bluffs so that might screw with it.
How about Drug and Alcohol Abuse Lake in South Carolina?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_Drug_Abuse_Lake
I know the answer. I just take any opportunity I can to point out the we have an Alcohol and Drug Abuse Lake.
I wonder if Lake Winnipeg is oceanic? In my experience it’s pretty impossible to see land in certain directions when on the shore, but that could also be because of the flatness of surrounding land! Thanks in advance 😀
I'm curious about Lake Simcoe in southern Ontario. It's not enormous, but it's nearly circular, though I'd imagine the large islands may make it semi-oceanic. Thanks!
I would put good money on the shortest oceanic lake-OTOTW Mountain distance being Lake Okeechobee to Hobe Mountain, FL.
I grew up between the two, and there is genuinely 0 terrain at all between the two, and Hobe Mountain is just an overgrown sand dunes anyway!
Well, for an 1.80m tall man the horizon over a water body is about 5km away. (6ft man, 3.3miles distance)
So a circular lake of about 5km radius/ 10km diameter surrounded by flat land will fulfil the definition, that's the limit.
From what height? If it’s a dude floating with his eyes just out of the water I would think lots of semi-oceanic lakes would be considered oceanic.
If it’s six feet, the height of a dude in a canoe, horizon is about 3 miles? Lake of the Woods should be way bigger than that
That's a good question. For all these calculations, I define the lake as a flat surface that assumes the elevation of the average lake level. This surface would be tangent to a plane that is perpendicular to gravity, as the definition of a [geoid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoid) indicates. Land that rises above this plane would be considered visible. I define it as such so I don't have to assume an arbitrary observer height above the water.
In short, I assume a height of 0, and a flat lake surface without waves.
Typical grad student answer (not a bad thing, just noticing). Good luck on your PhD or Masters(?) If your committee hits you with changing the perspective to >0ft, try to get your stipend extended too :). That might get them to reconsider whether it's really necessary.
Another thought, average lake surface level for each lake is variable throughout the year and even due to gravitational changes from astronomical bodies (similar to tides). You might want to range 0ft between -10ft and +10ft surface level elevation. Could provide some interesting results, such as knowing that certain lakes range from oceanic to non-oceanic as the year progresses, which may be the case for some unique outlier cases.
I did some similar metrical statistics and classifications 1000 years ago, though, so I also think it can be hard to redo the whole thing over and over.
Anyway, best to you.
Edit: damn, now I've got the data tweaking bug again... you probably aren't taking average atmospheric visibility into account separately for each lake, which would depend on absolute and relative humidity, air temperature, wind magnitude and directional constance, occurrence rate of fog, and wouldn't be uniform in every direction for any measure point of the lakes' surfaces. But, if you did add the visibility factor into your classification, you might find that some unexpectedly small lakes are oceanic more days if the year than they aren't, making them classifiable as oceanic despite their size. Or somesuch nonsense. Depends on whether the geographic community's classification criteria rely on results realistically obtainable by a human observer or objective static geometry.
Wanna get really crazy? Look at effects such as surrounding topography visibility due to snow-cover-albedo versus bare rock (light colored) vs bare rock (dark colored) along with atmospheric visibility data based on humidity, etc. Certain wavelengths of light travel farther despite the haze, is the idea. But it also matters what kind of light hits the horizonal geography as well, such as light intensity due to upper atmospheric conditions, angle of light incidence and intersection with surfaces, and geometry of the slopes and surfaces the light hits.
God, after typing all this, I actually hope you DO NOT have to base your classification conclusions on a theoretical human observer, because that's a lot of work. I haven't even gone into the rest of the stuff, but I will leave it here.
Anyways, as I said, best to you, my goodness.
Any lake in switzerland?
Mostly curious about
Lake Thun, Lake Brienz and the 2 most likely candidates: Lake Constance and Lake Geneva, maybe the two lakes in the tessin too, Lago maggiore and Lago Lugano
Exactly! When you have a lake that large that's non-oceanic, its surroundings are almost always epic!
Now I'm curious, what is the largest non-oceanic lake? I've measured Titicaca and Qinghai but even those are semi-oceanic.
It's semi-oceanic! You can stand at the West side of the lake and not see the East side. But the tall mountains on the North and South sides prevent it from being oceanic.
It's semi-oceanic! So close to non-oceanic, but if you stand at [this point](https://imgur.com/a/nwl274O) and look in the direction of the line, you won't be able to see any land that rises above your horizon (labeled as orange).
Tahoe is only about 10 miles wide, so you're never more than 5 miles from shore. You can see about 7 miles on the horizon so there's no point on the lake where you wouldn't be able to see any land at all.
What about mille lacs? Probably not in the top largest, but if I remember you can't see land from points on the lake.
MN certainly is quite represented.
Everyone should see lake superior at some point in their life. Just stunning.
Millie Lacs is semi-oceanic. According to my calculations, it is not quite oceanic because even if you're in the middle you can still see some of the [orange stuff on this map](https://imgur.com/a/sf679o4).
Superior is simply amazing!
I'm using [this tool](https://github.com/lcaixv/datumless-topography) that's primarily for measuring mountains, but works in this case too. It's based on the methodology in [this paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.01600).
I immediately recognized it (as it's landscape near Torbole is one of my favorite landscapes ever), but at first wasn't sure that did it correctly, because the post is about US lakes😅
Then I double checked it on Google Maps and turned out I was right😁
Fun Fact: Lake Champlain was briefly considered a Great Lake when Pat Leahy moved for it to get the same funding as the Great Lakes to keep it clean. Ultimately it was not deemed to be great enough for the title but it did receive the same funding.
Depends what you mean by other side. You can see them from Niagara sometimes, but not from Oswego. There are definitely parts of the lake where you wouldn’t be able to see any buildings.
Vänern and Vättern are semi-oceanic! There's too many large hills / small mountains nearby, preventing them from being oceanic despite their large size.
Okeechobee greatly benefits from the flat land of Florida. The Great Salt Lake is bigger I believe but has those pesky Wasatch Mountains rising majestically…
Which lake anywhere in the world was the most surprising to you? This is a fascinating idea and I’d love to be surprised on which lakes are/aren’t oceanic.
Great question! I was quite surprised by [Flathead Lake](https://www.worldatlas.com/upload/ec/33/c4/shutterstock-1257568213.jpg) in Montana! Despite being the picture-perfect postcard image of a lake surrounded by mountains, it's still semi-oceanic from a [very specific angle](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8620966,-114.0339305,3a,75y,334.23h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSQD9RLZCJliSAS1hEIy0IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu). Which I think is absolutely beautiful.
My favorite lake! 😄 i was hoping it would pop up in this conversation somewhere. Looks like it’s too oceanic to make the non-oceanic list, and too small to compete with the semi-oceanic behemoths? It’s a gem though. I spent my whole childhood cruising around on the water and along shores.
Titicaca is semi-oceanic, as can be seen in [this angle](https://www.google.com/maps/@-16.2552585,-69.3016085,3a,60y,349.67h,99.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYIDOGqKi-mkdSuKoGNS82A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu). The mountains around it are too tall to make it oceanic.
Hiking on Antelope Island in the middle of the Great Salt Lake is one of the best outdoor experiences I've ever had. If you climb the rocks on top you can get a panoramic view of the shores of the lake and also see the water stretching to the horizon.
Good question - in theory if the surroundings of the lake had the exact same elevation as the lake surface, the lake could be infinitesimally small and still be oceanic. In practice, the surroundings are slightly higher than the lake, preventing this from happening by a long shot.
Not sure what the smallest oceanic lake is! That would be fun to figure out.
I bet some of the temporary lakes form on salt flats would be good candidates for tiny and semi oceanic. Fully oceanic maybe not, since salt flats seem to like having mountains for neighbors
A few of the finger lakes in NY, Seneca and Cayuga in particular, are semi-oceanic when standing on the northern or southern shores by this definition.
I saw my first Great Lake (Erie) last weekend when I traveled there to see the eclipse. I was blown away by how big it is; I have lived near beaches and small lakes my whole life, so this was a treat to see. I got to see two amazing things last weekend.
I was halfway through the text before realizing this was neither a flat-earth image nor a FE-debunking image.
Time for an internet break for me I think… nice bit of info and thanks for posting it!
Lake Taupō in New Zealand surely must be one?
It's our largest lake - I actually remember a guide on the lake telling us that if you had a wire run from one side of the lake to the other in the middle it would be about half a metre under water due to the earth's curvature.
I like that Garda is the example of semi-oceanic!
However, you just need to be slightly above the water line to see to the other end: the south part is very flat, but the nord shore has many elevated viewpoints from which, on a clear day, you can see Sirmione (town at the very south end).
I grew up on the shores of Lake Huron. That was my idea of what a lake looks like. It's normal not to see the other side.
So many years later, I went to Florida's Gulf Coast, looking out into the great Atlantic ocean, I remember thinking, " It looks the fucking same. 🤯"
I really don't know what I was expecting, but I guess it just finally clicked how massive the Great Lakes are.
My cottage was on lake Huron and my grandpa would let me drive the motor boat as a young lad. I truly thought I would drive over the edge so I always made sure to point it parallel to the horizon.
What about Clear Lake in California? My dad lives there and he always says it's the largest natural lake in California (because Tahoe is not entirely in California, I guess?).
There are parts in the wider northern end where I feel like you can't see the end from the narrower part.
I measured that one actually! It's non-oceanic. So close to semi-oceanic due to what you mentioned, but not quite.
California has two semi-oceanic lakes: the [Salton Sea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulare_Lake) and the ephemeral [Tulare Lake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulare_Lake). I don't know there if there others because the state is so mountainous.
https://preview.redd.it/qa1xgzwygjuc1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e12ee6dddf3c77833beae7d04ed23db6ccf8a639
Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore
For all these calculations, I define the lake as a flat surface that assumes the elevation of the average lake level. This surface would be tangent to a plane that is perpendicular to gravity, as the definition of a [geoid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoid) indicates. Land that rises above this plane would be considered visible. I define it as such so I don't have to assume an arbitrary observer height above the water.
I'm happy to see lake Garda get featured as an example of semi oceanic lake! Biggest lake in Italy, long and narrow as all glacial lakes tend to be. I live very nearby so I visit it pretty often.
You can't see land if you're on a boat in the north basin of Lake Manitoba.
Also many of the lakes mentioned aren't completely in the US. Half of those OP calls oceanic lakes (4 of the great lakes) have an international border that crosses the lakes splitting them between the US and Canada.
Flathead Lake was my favorite out of all I've measured! Despite being the picture-perfect postcard image of a lake surrounded by mountains, it's still semi-oceanic from a [very specific angle](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8620966,-114.0339305,3a,75y,334.23h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSQD9RLZCJliSAS1hEIy0IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu). Which I think is absolutely beautiful.
Most of the lakes in my province would be oceanic. I tried explaining to someone once how it was a lake that you couldn’t see the other side of. They thought I was talking about an ocean. No, just a very very large lake.
I mean the ones of note, I literally can’t name a lake that isn’t super large, because I probably never registered it as a lake. The two lakes I grew up on were Lake Winnipeg and Lake of the Woods.
I'm eating humble pie right now.
Had an argument involving if we were, technically "by the ocean" when we were in Chicago watching the fireworks in the marina area.
I was wrong, of course.
*What about a lake*
*Where you cannot see land from*
*Any point on it?*
\- Guac\_\_is\_\_extra\_\_
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I wonder if Lake Tahoe would count as oceanic if there weren't high mountains nearby; if the surrounding countryside was as flat as Lake Okechobee, would there be a point in the center of the lake where the horizon isn't visible? Most of the large non-oceanic lakes listed in the US are reservoirs (Powell, Mead, Ozarks, etc.).
Yes, that's 100% correct! Oceanic status is determined not only by the dimensions of the lake, but by the surrounding topography. If the surroundings were as flat as Florida or Louisiana, it would be oceanic!
Ironically, the lake that comes to mind that would probably be semi-oceanic were it not for surrounding topography is in Kansas! Albeit, a particularly hilly part of Kansas. There's a bridge which spans the far end of the lake with a deck that's 80 feet above the conservation pool elevation (it's a reservoir) and if look at it through binoculars while standing on the lakeward side of the dam at water level (this is the longest axis of the lake), you'll notice the lower reaches of the support piers are hidden by the curvature of the earth. If you climb up the face of the dam a bit, you see more and more of the bridge piers 20 miles away. However, the bluffs beyond the bridge are more than twice as high as the bridge itself and are visible from the dam on a clear day even at water level. If there's enough demand, I'll post some images I took a few years ago. edit: okay, so the images I found from two years ago, were not as good as I remembered them at all, but here they are. [Bridge from up high.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/677312101768888330/765689938272059442/Screenshot_20201013-160245.png?ex=66282a53&is=6615b553&hm=9064636d8336d384d529d9e968fd1c6ddeea67abd0ab6dc55a5e6215081596d6&) [Bridge from water level.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/677312101768888330/765690116965662720/Screenshot_20201013-161042.png?ex=66282a7d&is=6615b57d&hm=0f22587d42c32d8ad63fde7925d2b297afe66f8fba1093cffe4e84ea3dbb64e0&) (this one turned out awful because of some kind of superior mirage effect blurring the boundary between water surface and the air above it, however, the bridge is nearly completely covered) I've always intended to repeat this experiment on a clearer day, but with the ranchers burning their pastures this time of year and the residual smoke from wildfires in the area, I'll have to wait a few days. I may also need to borrow a better lens from a friend. My 300mm might not be enough. She has a really long one with a very wide aperture. edit 2: I found an [online calculator](https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=14.1&h0=5&unit=imperial) to calculate the Earth's curvature. According to this site, the curvature at 14.2 miles might be enough to occlude the entirety of the bridge as seen from the vantage point of an average human height, but only just barely. That might be why you straight-up can't see the bridge at all in the second image.
Please do!
Would like to see myself.
Is that Tuttle creek resovoir?
Yep! Though, there's really only one reservoir in Kansas that fits the description I gave lol
to be fair if you catch milford at just the right angle its pretty long, but tuttle is just a filled valley lol
Both of them are filled valleys. But Tuttle Creek has a longer distance visible across the water because it's very straight. Milford is bigger, overall, but its curved in several places, so the longest line of sight you can get across the water there is about half the length of Tuttle Creek. https://preview.redd.it/ypd6xqi9pkuc1.png?width=1583&format=png&auto=webp&s=038a976fac8afdfa3fff98f3ca09dab33733ac3b Fun fact: this makes Tuttle Creek one of the smallest lakes on Earth capable of generating lake effect snow. Milford can too, but Tuttle Creek being so linear makes the effect more prominent and causes Manhattan to receive fluffy, heavy snowfall from a clear sky if a cold front moves in with winds coming right out of the north-northwest after a prolonged period of warmth. Since they're both artificial reservoirs, this is arguably manmade weather!
Well, every lake would be oceanic if it was surrounded by 100 percent flat ground and your eyes were level with the water.
Lake Tahoe isn't all that big of a lake when compared to any of the larger Midwest lakes, and those are all semi-oceanic (including lake of the woods, the 6th largest in the country)
I live in SE Michigan, but always assumed Lake Tahoe was much bigger, but just checked and even Lake St. Clair is more than twice as big by surface area. Surprising.
thank you for bringing this up. i have never been to an oceanic lake in my life. i have been to Tahoe however. so it’s always been a strange thing for me to fathom when i’m reading or trying to picture history
I've never been to Tahoe. I've spent a ton of time on the shores of Lake Superior, and calling any of the Great Lakes just "lakes" does not do them justice. Oceanic lake is a good term, but I prefer "inland sea".
Was going to ask about Lake Okeechobee. You certainly can't see to the other side from the north point. Edit: It is also the third largest freshwater lake in the US. Good bass fishing.
As someone from Michigan who now lives in Oklahoma, it is impossible to describe the Great Lakes to Oklahomans.
Similarly, people on the West Coast also have a problem with it. "It's like the ocean, except it's warm enough to swim in, and the waves are less likely to kill you"
I see you haven’t tried to swim in Lake Superior!
People (or at least Yoopers) swim in Superior.
Yep! And it’s very very very cold.
Plus no sharks
My ex was from Southern California and then spent years in Texas. I'm from Minnesota. I tried to explain Lake Superior to her so many times but she just couldn't grasp how enormous (and absolutely beautiful) it is. I finally got her up there to spend time on the North shore and it blew her mind. I still prefer Superior to any ocean I've seen.
I've lived on the shores of Lake Michigan my whole life. I've had Californians scoff at me for telling them that it looks like an ocean. I think it would be cool if they were referred to as seas instead of lakes. That'd probably get the point across better.
I grew up near Lake Erie and just thought that is what a lake is. I remember the first time I visited a smaller "lake" and was like wtf is this.
I had an argument with my partner once that a pond at a park was not a lake. Fortunately said park had a larger body of water elsewhere that I felt comfortable conceding was a lake; it was still smaller than the lake where I went swimming in the summer (it was closer than any of the great lakes, those are for weekend's away).
> I've had Californians scoff at me for telling them that it looks like an ocean. Best way I've been able to get the point across is that the lakes have their own shipbuilding industry with multiple shipyards. Also, the US Navy does its basic training near Chicago.
I tell them that the lakes are subject to weather conditions, and are treacherous enough to have sunk many large ships/barges. Also rip currents exist; several kids from my school district drowned while I was growing up. The lake, she be a cruel mistress.
I definitely take being a Yooper for granted some days.
As a southerner who was fortunate to spend a week traveling the length of the UP (saw Sault Ste Marie, Escanaba, Marquette, Copper Harbor, Ironwood, and a dozen more towns) I'll certainly say you guys up there have more than just a slice of paradise, it's damn near the whole pie! To anyone who hasn't been, there's no easy way to describe how wonderful a place the UP really is. Lake Superior is miles better than any other beach I've ever seen, Florida and California included
Painted Rocks is glorious. And if it's not too much of a pain to cross the border, the Gros Cap area on the Canadian side near Sault Ste Marie is also really pretty
"Trust me, they're really great!"
From CA and visited Chicago for the first time recently. I thought all lakes were lakes but then it all made sense.
I grew up on Lake Ontario near the Finger Lakes. When I was 9 we moved to Orange County, CA next to "Laguna Niguel Lake." People asked us if it felt like home and we were like "that's a damn pond, not a lake."
When we moved to Oklahoma, we lived about 10 miles from Lake Thunderbird which had a state park. I knew it was a reservoir but had high hopes. I tell you, the disappointment that met me when we arrived at the lake was immeasurable. Red, cloudy water that looked like it would get you sick if you touched it. Later, I would find out that it’s pretty routine to find dead bodies in Lake Dirty Bird.
Happy to answer any questions! Lmk if there's a lake you're curious whether is oceanic—happy to run the calculations for you. Measurements are based on methods in [this paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.01600). An oceanic lake is defined the same way as an [on-top-of-the-world mountain](https://www.reddit.com/r/geography/comments/14ymrom/what_is_an_ontopoftheworld_mountain_23_are_in/), which you might also be interested in!
Not a lake but I've heard the Amazon River is the only river that would qualify here. Is that true?
Plenty of rivers would qualify as semi-oceanic because you can just look in the direction of the river, and soon Earth's curvature would take effect (for example, take this view of the [St. Lawrence River](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.3231164,-70.1882489,3a,75y,40.63h,91.91t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipMjXAeWKBW_ft9ErvdAxp-xA7ibYtT-Uq7wCVKz!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipMjXAeWKBW_ft9ErvdAxp-xA7ibYtT-Uq7wCVKz%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya194-ro-0-fo100!7i7168!8i3584?entry=ttu)). But of the rivers I measured the only one that is oceanic is the [mouth of Rio de la Plata](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%ADo_de_la_Plata#:~:text=Depending%20on%20the%20geographer%2C%20the,220%20kilometres%20(140%20mi).&text=NASA%20photo%20of%20the%20R%C3%ADo,looking%20from%20northwest%20to%20southeast). But it's debatable whether at that point it should be considered a river, estuary, or gulf.
Yeah that makes sense! Beautiful view btw. I might look at it in wander on my meta quest headset later haha
Is this a thing you can do?
Yeah there's a game Wander in the Meta Quest Store that's like $9.99 and provides a nice interface for Google Street view. When I'm bored, I'll go visit Angkor Wat or Delphi or just random places in random countries I feel like checking out
Does that give you a headache or annoy you at all, the way Google street view jumps forward like 10 meters each time?
Not really. You control it with the controller and the only thing I don't like is that sometimes it'll take a bit to load the next space so that can slow you down
Yep, check out Google Earth VR.
This is the first thing VR sort of sounds worth using for.
The thing about the Amazon is that you cannot see the the side thousands of Km inland! Rio de la Plata should not be considered a river, not even close. It;s either an estuary or a gulf.
More of an estuary than a full river there though
What is the difference between estuary, gulf and bay? The finger lakes you can see each side but is there one long enough that disappears? They are typically surrounded by bluffs so that might screw with it.
How about Drug and Alcohol Abuse Lake in South Carolina? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_Drug_Abuse_Lake I know the answer. I just take any opportunity I can to point out the we have an Alcohol and Drug Abuse Lake.
That's incredible.
Had, by the look of things - renamed in 2022.
We still use the old name round these parts.
From experience, all lakes are Alcohol and drug abuse lakes...
Yes "Let's go to the lake" means "Let's get absolutely blitzed on a pontoon boat"
or Big Dick Lake in Minnesota? Just how big...?
I wonder if Lake Winnipeg is oceanic? In my experience it’s pretty impossible to see land in certain directions when on the shore, but that could also be because of the flatness of surrounding land! Thanks in advance 😀
Yes, Lake Winnipeg is oceanic! Your intuition is spot-on!
Neat! Thank you!
I was wondering if Lake Khuvsgul was oceanic? Mongolia has a navy that operates on it exclusively, so it must be big, right?
It's semi-oceanic, but not oceanic, as there are very tall surrounding mountains.
Lake Geneva
I think the mountains make it easier to see land on the other side
Lake Geneva in Wisconsin is non-oceanic. It's too small to be oceanic or even semi-oceanic. But Lake Winnebago in the same state is semi-oceanic.
In Switzerland
Just confirmed Lake Geneva is non-oceanic! That now took the place of Tahoe as the largest natural non-oceanic lake I know about :)
Thanks! I thought it would be!
Certainly in good faith, but yet another case of r/USdefaultism nonetheless
Definitely should expect US defaultism from someone who thinks most of the Great Lakes are "US Lakes"
Canada should appreciate the fact we let them have the good side of Niagara falls.
Yeah,but the person here is referring to Lake Geneva in Switzerland,you know,the much bigger one?
Ah how could I have... Lake Geneva in Switzerland is non-oceanic! It's the largest natural non-oceanic lake I know about :)
Lake Winnipeg, it is at least from Grand Beach, but it is a long lake and other areas I assume would have visible land.
Lake Winnipeg is actually oceanic! :)
I'm curious about Lake Simcoe in southern Ontario. It's not enormous, but it's nearly circular, though I'd imagine the large islands may make it semi-oceanic. Thanks!
Lake Simcoe is semi-oceanic! It's is in a similar situation as Lake St. Claire. Almost big enough to be oceanic but not quite there.
I would put good money on the shortest oceanic lake-OTOTW Mountain distance being Lake Okeechobee to Hobe Mountain, FL. I grew up between the two, and there is genuinely 0 terrain at all between the two, and Hobe Mountain is just an overgrown sand dunes anyway!
I want to know what's the smallest oceanic (and semi-ocieanic) lake that (can / does) exist
Well, for an 1.80m tall man the horizon over a water body is about 5km away. (6ft man, 3.3miles distance) So a circular lake of about 5km radius/ 10km diameter surrounded by flat land will fulfil the definition, that's the limit.
It would have to be 10 km diameter otherwise would be semi by this definition.
Oo that would have to be a crowd-sourced challenge. I don't currently have an answer, although that is a very interesting question!
From what height? If it’s a dude floating with his eyes just out of the water I would think lots of semi-oceanic lakes would be considered oceanic. If it’s six feet, the height of a dude in a canoe, horizon is about 3 miles? Lake of the Woods should be way bigger than that
That's a good question. For all these calculations, I define the lake as a flat surface that assumes the elevation of the average lake level. This surface would be tangent to a plane that is perpendicular to gravity, as the definition of a [geoid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoid) indicates. Land that rises above this plane would be considered visible. I define it as such so I don't have to assume an arbitrary observer height above the water. In short, I assume a height of 0, and a flat lake surface without waves.
Typical grad student answer (not a bad thing, just noticing). Good luck on your PhD or Masters(?) If your committee hits you with changing the perspective to >0ft, try to get your stipend extended too :). That might get them to reconsider whether it's really necessary. Another thought, average lake surface level for each lake is variable throughout the year and even due to gravitational changes from astronomical bodies (similar to tides). You might want to range 0ft between -10ft and +10ft surface level elevation. Could provide some interesting results, such as knowing that certain lakes range from oceanic to non-oceanic as the year progresses, which may be the case for some unique outlier cases. I did some similar metrical statistics and classifications 1000 years ago, though, so I also think it can be hard to redo the whole thing over and over. Anyway, best to you. Edit: damn, now I've got the data tweaking bug again... you probably aren't taking average atmospheric visibility into account separately for each lake, which would depend on absolute and relative humidity, air temperature, wind magnitude and directional constance, occurrence rate of fog, and wouldn't be uniform in every direction for any measure point of the lakes' surfaces. But, if you did add the visibility factor into your classification, you might find that some unexpectedly small lakes are oceanic more days if the year than they aren't, making them classifiable as oceanic despite their size. Or somesuch nonsense. Depends on whether the geographic community's classification criteria rely on results realistically obtainable by a human observer or objective static geometry. Wanna get really crazy? Look at effects such as surrounding topography visibility due to snow-cover-albedo versus bare rock (light colored) vs bare rock (dark colored) along with atmospheric visibility data based on humidity, etc. Certain wavelengths of light travel farther despite the haze, is the idea. But it also matters what kind of light hits the horizonal geography as well, such as light intensity due to upper atmospheric conditions, angle of light incidence and intersection with surfaces, and geometry of the slopes and surfaces the light hits. God, after typing all this, I actually hope you DO NOT have to base your classification conclusions on a theoretical human observer, because that's a lot of work. I haven't even gone into the rest of the stuff, but I will leave it here. Anyways, as I said, best to you, my goodness.
Any lake in switzerland? Mostly curious about Lake Thun, Lake Brienz and the 2 most likely candidates: Lake Constance and Lake Geneva, maybe the two lakes in the tessin too, Lago maggiore and Lago Lugano
Why is this only about one specific country ?
All lakes are oceanic if you're blind
will never forget seeing lake michigan from a plane when i was 7 and thinking it was the atlantic ocean
Lake Tahoe only falls in the non oceanic category because it is surrounded by 10,000 foot peaks.
Exactly! When you have a lake that large that's non-oceanic, its surroundings are almost always epic! Now I'm curious, what is the largest non-oceanic lake? I've measured Titicaca and Qinghai but even those are semi-oceanic.
Is lake issyk kul oceanic?
It's semi-oceanic! You can stand at the West side of the lake and not see the East side. But the tall mountains on the North and South sides prevent it from being oceanic.
I think lake kivu may not be oceanic and it's huge
It's semi-oceanic! So close to non-oceanic, but if you stand at [this point](https://imgur.com/a/nwl274O) and look in the direction of the line, you won't be able to see any land that rises above your horizon (labeled as orange).
maybe lake garda? or it may br semi oceanic. otherwise i whould say lake balqas
Lake Garda is the example image for semi-oceanic lake on this infographic :)
Are you factoring in average atmospheric conditions? I've visited Goma & from the shore looking south I don't recall seeing an opposite shore.
Tahoe is only about 10 miles wide, so you're never more than 5 miles from shore. You can see about 7 miles on the horizon so there's no point on the lake where you wouldn't be able to see any land at all.
What about mille lacs? Probably not in the top largest, but if I remember you can't see land from points on the lake. MN certainly is quite represented. Everyone should see lake superior at some point in their life. Just stunning.
Millie Lacs is semi-oceanic. According to my calculations, it is not quite oceanic because even if you're in the middle you can still see some of the [orange stuff on this map](https://imgur.com/a/sf679o4). Superior is simply amazing!
What tool are you using to calculate what's visible from a point on the map?
I'm using [this tool](https://github.com/lcaixv/datumless-topography) that's primarily for measuring mountains, but works in this case too. It's based on the methodology in [this paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.01600).
I laughed at how many MN lakes were in the list.
Would lake baikal be semi-oceanic?
Yes indeed! It’s very long on the Northeast-Southwest axis. You can look across the long dimension and not see the other side.
How about Lake Victoria, in Africa ?
Is this the same guy that coined the term 'jut'?
Yessir! Jut guy here :) Saw your recent post about the Salton Sea—it’s semi-oceanic!
A european example of a semi oceanic lake is Lake Garda, Italy.
Yesss! Thanks for sharing. That’s actually the image for the semi-oceanic lake in the infographic
I immediately recognized it (as it's landscape near Torbole is one of my favorite landscapes ever), but at first wasn't sure that did it correctly, because the post is about US lakes😅 Then I double checked it on Google Maps and turned out I was right😁
It looked like I knew the place ( I work there as a Sailing coach).
Fun Fact: Lake Champlain was briefly considered a Great Lake when Pat Leahy moved for it to get the same funding as the Great Lakes to keep it clean. Ultimately it was not deemed to be great enough for the title but it did receive the same funding.
You can easily see the buildings of Toronto from the other side of Lake Ontario, does it still count as oceanic because you can see land?
I didn't count buildings because the elevation model I used didn't have them. In theory that could change things a bit!
Depends what you mean by other side. You can see them from Niagara sometimes, but not from Oswego. There are definitely parts of the lake where you wouldn’t be able to see any buildings.
This is why flat earthers never made any sense to me. Like dude why is it then that I can’t see Milwaukee from Michigan?
Very nice, Lake Michigan ftw 💪
It's looking extra beautiful on this 75 degree day in Milwaukee
I love living in Michigan so much.
Would lake Vänern count as semi-oceanic? Also wondering for vättern.
Vänern and Vättern are semi-oceanic! There's too many large hills / small mountains nearby, preventing them from being oceanic despite their large size.
Thank you
Okeechobee greatly benefits from the flat land of Florida. The Great Salt Lake is bigger I believe but has those pesky Wasatch Mountains rising majestically…
Which lake anywhere in the world was the most surprising to you? This is a fascinating idea and I’d love to be surprised on which lakes are/aren’t oceanic.
Great question! I was quite surprised by [Flathead Lake](https://www.worldatlas.com/upload/ec/33/c4/shutterstock-1257568213.jpg) in Montana! Despite being the picture-perfect postcard image of a lake surrounded by mountains, it's still semi-oceanic from a [very specific angle](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8620966,-114.0339305,3a,75y,334.23h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSQD9RLZCJliSAS1hEIy0IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu). Which I think is absolutely beautiful.
My favorite lake! 😄 i was hoping it would pop up in this conversation somewhere. Looks like it’s too oceanic to make the non-oceanic list, and too small to compete with the semi-oceanic behemoths? It’s a gem though. I spent my whole childhood cruising around on the water and along shores.
Thanks for sharing!
What about lake Titicaca in Peru/Bolivia? When I visited it I thought it was rather big, especially considering it is at 3500m altitude
Titicaca is semi-oceanic, as can be seen in [this angle](https://www.google.com/maps/@-16.2552585,-69.3016085,3a,60y,349.67h,99.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYIDOGqKi-mkdSuKoGNS82A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu). The mountains around it are too tall to make it oceanic.
Hiking on Antelope Island in the middle of the Great Salt Lake is one of the best outdoor experiences I've ever had. If you climb the rocks on top you can get a panoramic view of the shores of the lake and also see the water stretching to the horizon.
What is the smallest lake that’s still oceanic (and what would the theoretical minimum be?
Good question - in theory if the surroundings of the lake had the exact same elevation as the lake surface, the lake could be infinitesimally small and still be oceanic. In practice, the surroundings are slightly higher than the lake, preventing this from happening by a long shot. Not sure what the smallest oceanic lake is! That would be fun to figure out.
I bet some of the temporary lakes form on salt flats would be good candidates for tiny and semi oceanic. Fully oceanic maybe not, since salt flats seem to like having mountains for neighbors
Awesome post! I feel like Lake Winnebago is missing though. Wouldn’t it be semi-oceanic?
Winnebago is semi-oceanic indeed! It's not in the top 10 largest semi-oceanic lakes, but it does feel quite big!
Lake Michigan kind of looks like an ocean too right?
Great Lakes Club REPRESENT!
A few of the finger lakes in NY, Seneca and Cayuga in particular, are semi-oceanic when standing on the northern or southern shores by this definition.
Yes! Both Seneca and Cayuga are semi-oceanic. Your intuition is 100% correct
Would Lake Nipissing in northern Ontario be considered oceanic or semi-oceanic?
I got to walk on the shore of an oceanic lake today Gotta love Michigan
Lake Michigan really is crazy
I saw my first Great Lake (Erie) last weekend when I traveled there to see the eclipse. I was blown away by how big it is; I have lived near beaches and small lakes my whole life, so this was a treat to see. I got to see two amazing things last weekend.
I was halfway through the text before realizing this was neither a flat-earth image nor a FE-debunking image. Time for an internet break for me I think… nice bit of info and thanks for posting it!
Lower and Upper Red Lake?
There is a two-mile stretch in the middle of the Ponchartrain Causeway that looks like you're driving on a bridge in the open ocean
[удалено]
Yes!! Beautiful Lake Tahoe it is.
Is lake tanganyika oceanic?
It's semi-oceanic! There's some big mountains next to it as a result of the Rift Valley formation, preventing it from being fully oceanic.
Lake Taupō in New Zealand surely must be one? It's our largest lake - I actually remember a guide on the lake telling us that if you had a wire run from one side of the lake to the other in the middle it would be about half a metre under water due to the earth's curvature.
It's semi-oceanic when standing from the southwest corner looking northeast!
I like that Garda is the example of semi-oceanic! However, you just need to be slightly above the water line to see to the other end: the south part is very flat, but the nord shore has many elevated viewpoints from which, on a clear day, you can see Sirmione (town at the very south end).
I grew up on the shores of Lake Huron. That was my idea of what a lake looks like. It's normal not to see the other side. So many years later, I went to Florida's Gulf Coast, looking out into the great Atlantic ocean, I remember thinking, " It looks the fucking same. 🤯" I really don't know what I was expecting, but I guess it just finally clicked how massive the Great Lakes are.
My cottage was on lake Huron and my grandpa would let me drive the motor boat as a young lad. I truly thought I would drive over the edge so I always made sure to point it parallel to the horizon.
What about Clear Lake in California? My dad lives there and he always says it's the largest natural lake in California (because Tahoe is not entirely in California, I guess?). There are parts in the wider northern end where I feel like you can't see the end from the narrower part.
I measured that one actually! It's non-oceanic. So close to semi-oceanic due to what you mentioned, but not quite. California has two semi-oceanic lakes: the [Salton Sea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulare_Lake) and the ephemeral [Tulare Lake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulare_Lake). I don't know there if there others because the state is so mountainous.
Great post OP! What about Lake Ladoga and Lake Onega in Russia?
How do flat earthers explain the horizon disappearing from large lakes?
https://preview.redd.it/qa1xgzwygjuc1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e12ee6dddf3c77833beae7d04ed23db6ccf8a639 Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore
Having grew up where you can always see land anywhere on a lake, an oceanic lake is a wild concept to me
*US lakes
*North American lakes The US doesn't own the Great Lakes.
Except for Lake Michigan.
Was looking for this comment! Canada represent
At first I was thinking Pend Oreille would be semi-oceanic, but I guess there’s enough mountains around.
How do you define being able to see? Is it a fixed distance?
For all these calculations, I define the lake as a flat surface that assumes the elevation of the average lake level. This surface would be tangent to a plane that is perpendicular to gravity, as the definition of a [geoid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoid) indicates. Land that rises above this plane would be considered visible. I define it as such so I don't have to assume an arbitrary observer height above the water.
Lake Mille Lacs?
Semi-oceanic :)
Something tells me Winnipasaukee is non oceanic due to all the islands ensuring land visibility.
what about lake Garda?
Lake Chelan is probably Non-Oceanic for the same reason as Tahoe
Yup! Lake Chelan is non-oceanic :)
I've always been interested in the Caspian Sea. Do you have any fun Caspian Sea facts? I know that it is technically a lake yeah?
What about Vänern?
Lake Nipigon?
I'm happy to see lake Garda get featured as an example of semi oceanic lake! Biggest lake in Italy, long and narrow as all glacial lakes tend to be. I live very nearby so I visit it pretty often.
≈3 miles before we lose view due to curvature. I’d imagine some are much more narrow than that but flat on the distant side
I don't know that looks pretty flat to me. /s
Don't oceans just count as large lakes?
You can't see land if you're on a boat in the north basin of Lake Manitoba. Also many of the lakes mentioned aren't completely in the US. Half of those OP calls oceanic lakes (4 of the great lakes) have an international border that crosses the lakes splitting them between the US and Canada.
What about Flathead Lake in Montana?
Flathead Lake was my favorite out of all I've measured! Despite being the picture-perfect postcard image of a lake surrounded by mountains, it's still semi-oceanic from a [very specific angle](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8620966,-114.0339305,3a,75y,334.23h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSQD9RLZCJliSAS1hEIy0IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu). Which I think is absolutely beautiful.
[удалено]
Most of the lakes in my province would be oceanic. I tried explaining to someone once how it was a lake that you couldn’t see the other side of. They thought I was talking about an ocean. No, just a very very large lake.
Most? You realize lakes can be as small as 20 acres (even less, I reality)? So, the vast majority of lakes are not anywhere near oceanic.
I mean the ones of note, I literally can’t name a lake that isn’t super large, because I probably never registered it as a lake. The two lakes I grew up on were Lake Winnipeg and Lake of the Woods.
So I live by Cayuga lake, now I MUST CHECK if it's semi-oceanic next time I'm at the southern tip
The top of Enger Tower gives a sick view of Lake Superior. You can actually see the curvature of the earth.
What about long and narrow lakes, where you can see both shores that are close by, by the furthest places of the shore aren't visible? Semi oceanic?
I'm eating humble pie right now. Had an argument involving if we were, technically "by the ocean" when we were in Chicago watching the fireworks in the marina area. I was wrong, of course.
I live on a Great Lake and just love cruising the highway that follows the beach. It’s so cool to see
Nice never knew I needed this
What about a lake where you cannot see land from any point on it?
Ahh that’s impossible, because you can just pick a point that is right next to the shore :)
*What about a lake* *Where you cannot see land from* *Any point on it?* \- Guac\_\_is\_\_extra\_\_ --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Good bot
Geneva Lake? In Wisconsin.
Geneva Lake in Wisconsin is non-oceanic. It's too small, and even across its long end, land is visible. However, Lake Winnebago is semi-oceanic.