My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HYDRO20663
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Hydrology
>
HYDRO20663
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:41:55 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 1:40:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981033
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
2/17/1998
Doc Name
BEAR III MINE LANDSLIDE
From
DMG
To
DAVE BERRY MIKE BOULAY
Permit Index Doc Type
OTHER SURFACE WATER
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Memo to Boulay & Berry <br />Bear III Landslide <br />page 3 <br />(4) There are 3 possible sources of water to the slide: surface precipitation, groundwater flow <br />from the B- or C-seam workings, or groundwater flow independent of the coal seam / <br />mine workings. <br />I do not agree with W WE's hypothesis that the water source which triggered the landslide was <br />surface precipitation. WWE postulates the precipitation source based on several points: <br />(1) The was an "abnormally wet spring, summer, and eazly fall". <br />(2) There were cracks above the azea which could have allowed precipitation to infiltrate into <br />the colluvial materials. <br />(3) There was no observed evidence of "seeps, springs, or wet areas" on the slide mass or at <br />the toe, therefore they conclude that the water source could not be groundwater. <br />My discordance with WWE's hypothesis stems from the following: <br />(1) No data is presented within the report to demonstrate that precipitation at this site actually <br />was abnormal during 1997. Bruce Stover spent virtually all of October and half of <br />November conducting field work in Cedazedge, down valley from the Somerset azea. <br />Bruce reports that the fall weather was predominantly dry and clear. He can only recall <br />one snow storm /wet period during his field stay, and would not characterize the fall <br />weather in his field azea as unusually wet. <br />Late fall is extremely inconsistent with natural precipitation-induced mass wasting events <br />in semi-arid western Colorado. The vast majority of such landslide events occur during <br />the spring and early summer, following snow melt and spring precipitation. Landslides <br />aze uncommon in November, even in the North Fork valley. Fall / eazly winter is <br />normally the driest time of the yeaz, both in terms of precipitation and groundwater <br />levels. Streams run at baseflow levels. If the anomalous moisture levels postulated by <br />WWE occurred, it should be reflected by precipitation data within the permit azea and <br />stream gaging data for the immediate area. Such data would help support this portion of <br />W WE's theory. <br />(Z) I could discern no evidence of infiltration of precipitation through the slide mass. WWE <br />states that the slide mass was "unusually dry", yet calls upon abnormally high <br />precipitation as the source of waterfor induction of failure. <br />Examination of stereographic aerial photographic coverage from the years 1980 through <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.