My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE138580
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
300000
>
PERMFILE138580
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:39:15 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 7:53:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/10/1988
Doc Name
DRAINAGEWAY RECONSTRUCTION
Section_Exhibit Name
Appendix W 1987 Report Section 3.0
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.
/
5
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
3 <br />Section 3.0 <br />Section 3.1 (continued) <br />Temporary drainage reconstruction was accomplished on a 1300 foot segment <br />immediately above the brush crimped area in Johnson Gulch. <br />Additional erosion control work in Johnson Gulch included seeding of rills and <br />small gullies on the reclaim areas of Enfield and Ashmore pits. Livestock ponds <br />were constructed on reclaim areas in Enfield and Ashmore pits and will assist in <br />reducing flows to the major drainage. <br />Major drainageway reconstruction concluded in September of 1987 with incidental <br />activities occurring in Oct - Nov 1987. <br />Section 3.2: Flow <br />Discharge readings in Coyote drainage were recorded from a 10 year-24 hour <br />parshall flume located at the north end of the treated drainage. The peak flow <br />for Coyote drainage in 1987 was 9,982 gpm (22.24 cfs) and occurred on June 7, <br />1987 (.74" ppt event). <br />Actual flow information for other treated drainage segments is not available. <br />However, peak flow data were collected at some downstream NPDES locations <br />during discharges from the sediment control structures. <br />Section 3. 3: Results <br />No results are available evaluating the success of Trapper's erosion control plan <br />for permanenC postmine drainageways in 1987. Surveyed profiles (Fig 3-1., <br />Drainage Profile Points) of reconstructed channels were performed to assist <br />Trapper and CMLRD in monitoring the future success of these erosion control <br />treatments. In the event the drainage fails or any portion fails and is <br />reshaped, those reshaped sections will be resurveyed and submitted to the <br />Division. <br />Section 3.4: Conclusion <br />The initial success or failure of this project has yet to be demonstrated. <br />Excessive gully erosion will recur if structures were improperly placed, or if <br />unforeseen high intensity thunderstorms or snow melt drastically influence the <br />watersheds. The success of woody vegetation establishment will be key in the <br />long term channel stabilization. Without a combined effort to ensure vegetation <br />establishment and proper physical barriers to eliminate the gully network, it is <br />possible for downstream cutting to move upstream and erode the drainageways. <br />Regardless of Trappers efforts to stabilize postmine drainageways the long term <br />stability of treated drainages and of undisturbed pre-mine drainages is subject <br />to the affect of catastrophic weather patterns. <br />WA/ rb <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.