Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Extract from WMCI trip report documenting observations made June 15, 1998 <br />I Received <br />I AUG o ~ ~Q~" <br />Seeps Durango Field Office <br />Division of t,7inora~s ~ Geology <br />The two seeps reference by Steve Shuey in the May 29`" letter are located in Windy <br />Gulch below the dump toe. Both seeps have been flagged and staked. <br />The largest seep is designated DT-1 and is located below the toe of the dump <br />approximately 20 feet downstream of the culvert exit. It was flowing at an <br />estimated 15 to 25 gpm. The water temperature was measured at 7.5° C, <br />conductivity at 1 145 umhos/cm and pH at 6.46. This seep was sampled previously <br />by Bob Boppe and Vern Kelso so I did not take another sample. <br />The second seep is designated DT-2 and is located below the toe of the dump <br />upstream of the culvert outlet. As initially observed by me, this seep consisted of <br />wet areas beneath rock and wood debris with no defined channel or area of <br />ponding. I cleaned out the debris to form a small catch basin to pond water and <br />allow for sampling. The flow was estimated to be less than 1 gpm. The <br />temperature was measured at 13.0° C, conductivity at 750 umhos/cm and pH at <br />5.8. This seep was not sampled previously by Bob Boppe and Vern Kelso because <br />a sample could not be taken prior to cleaning out the debris. I took a water sample <br />at his location and submitted it to the laboratory for analysis. <br />Discussion of seeps <br />There is abundant wetland type vegetation below seep DT-1 indicating that it is not <br />a new occurrence. Discussions with Bob Boppe also indicate that this seep has <br />occurred in this spot on a regular basis over the years the mine operated. Bob <br />stated that the original channel of Windy Gulch was further to the west than the <br />current channel and was altered by the mining activities, including placement of the <br />culvert and rip rap channel. Thus, he feels that the seep represents subsurface flow <br />down the original Windy Gulch channel and not a seep from Iccal groundwater. <br />Bob said that old topographic maps of the site located in Reno show the original <br />channel location. <br />Based on my observations this appears to be a likely scenario. The water exiting <br />the culvert just above the seep is a significantly lower flow than the water flowing <br />into Windy Gulch from above the mine site (i.e., above the talus slopel. Flow out of <br />the culvert was probably 20 to 30 gpm whereas the flow in upper Windy Gulch was <br />probably 70 to 100 gpm. Thus, the culvert water plus the seepage from DT-1 may <br />amount to 35 to 55 gpm in total. The measured flow in the Windy Gulch flume <br />was 88 gpm. Assuming that this is approximately the same flow as observed in <br />upper Windy Gulch at the Bachelor road (i.e., estimated to be 70 to 100 gpml, then <br />there is still a significant component of subsurface flow in the Windy Gulch alluvium <br />and rock debris near the area of these seeps. This information strongly supports <br />