Laserfiche WebLink
CDS subjected the 2015 up dated analytical data set to trend analysis using <br />formulas for linear trend analysis, within Excel®. Data sets were not analyzed for best fit <br />using polynomial and exponential methods because of the high degree of variability of <br />data sets. Because many of the reported parameters vary considerably from quarter to <br />quarter, trend analysis will provide a mathematical trend which may or may not be statically <br />significant. For example, as was seen in the 2014 report, even though the King II Up -gradient <br />monitoring well exhibits a high degree of variability for Manganese, there is a significant ten <br />year upward trend in Manganese concentration from about 0.005 mg/L to about 0.035 mg/L. <br />Again as seen in the 2014 report, other parameters also demonstrate linear trends, <br />but because of high variability the trend may not be statically significant. That being said, in <br />some cases it is our professional opinion, as in the 2014 report, a particular trend may be <br />real over longer periods of time, such as 10+ years. <br />Excerpt from 2014 report: <br />Precipitation history and tree ring analysis indicates the area around both King I and King II mines is <br />plagued by cycles of wet and dry that run for a few years up to decades. Even with the cycles much of the <br />precipitation comes in the form of short lived downpours which can deposit'/4 or more of the annual average <br />rainfall in a single event. This makes the interpretation of quarterly water analysis difficult at best. <br />Since all sampling wells derive their water from the Hay Gulch alluvial floor they may share a similar wet - <br />dry cycle. In addition, the Hay Gulch Ditch, which derives its water from the La Plata River, will reflect its flow and <br />chemistry variations. The Hay Gulch valley floor receives water from all slopes draining into its alluvium. Its <br />chemistry will reflect the surface leaching of the exposed shale, mudstone, and sandstone outcroppings along the <br />valley walls. Each of these two sources of water are different. The La Plata River drainage comes from alpine <br />zones where minerals are slowly derived from hard rock formations, while the runoff into the valley floor comes <br />from contained shale, mudstone and sandstone formations which tend to leach minerals quickly. So it is safe to <br />assume the King I & II monitoring sites derives there water from more than a single source. This "mixing" of water <br />sources can and does produce a complex family of water types, which are seen in these monitoring sites. <br />Section Summary: Environmental conditions surrounding both King I and King sampling <br />sites are such that great variations in water chemistry can be expected. Trend analysis of <br />reported quarterly sampling yields linear trend plots which in some cases are significant. <br />Summary of analytical data: <br />CDS will summarize below the analytical data from each sampling site and provide <br />limited interpretation of the data provided by GCC monitoring. A summary and conclusions <br />are seen at the end of this section. This data includes monitoring data for all of 2015. <br />King I Mine — Haugen Well — NO CHANGE FROM 2014 -- Only sampled between <br />8/1/2000 and 12/1/2006. There is significant trend upward in water temperature. <br />Data on water depth is not available to correlate with ground temperature. A <br />downward trend in TDS and field EC suggests an influx of low TDS warmer water into <br />this well. <br />King I — Wiltze Well — Sampled since 2/1/1982. This well still demonstrates a <br />significant variation, with some moderation in 2015. suggesting an increase in annual <br />rainfall in the Hay Gulch drainage. This is mirrored by a decrease in Field EC, TDS <br />and total Sulfate. Manganese levels are erratic. These observations still suggest a <br />