REP26488 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

NQN m•f4~~ at5 HOMEBTAKE MINING COMPANY ~6POQr OF CALIFORNIA l3RANT8 QR'F16E 7 October 2005 Alan D. Cox Project Manager Mr. Gilbert Becenti, District Ranger RECEIVED Rio Grande National Forest Divide Ranger District OCT 1 ! 2fl05 13308 West Highway 160 Del Norte, CO 81132 Division of wimerais and Gatllogy Dear Mr. Becenti: Re: Bulldog Mine Reclamation Project, Mineral County, CO 2005 Windy Gulch Water Quality Monitoring Report This letter provides a summary of the water quality monitoring activities that have been conducted by Homestake Mining Company of California (HMCo) in Windy Gulch during 2005, which is the second year that water quality samples have been taken in Windy Gulch since completion of reclamation activities in late 2002. Windy Gulch did not flow below Bachelor Road during 2003 due to the regionally dry conditions so no representative water samples could be obtained in 2003. The first year of sampling was conducted in 2004, and the results were provided in our previous report dated August 9, 2004. The monitoring in Windy Gulch follows the plan described in our August 23, 2002 letter to the Forest Service. As per this monitoring plan, the goal for reclamation efforts is to meet agricultural water quality standards in Windy Gulch at the lower weir, which is near the confluence of Windy Gulch and Willow Creek. Monitoring activities have included the measurement of flow at the upper weir (at Bachelor Road) and the lower weir (at the mouth of Windy Gulch) located as shown m Figure 1. Water quality samples were also collected at each location for laboratory analysis. Flows measured during 2005 at the upper and lower weirs in Windy Gulch are shown on Figure 2. The 2004 measured flows are also shown for comparison. A data logger was installed at the lower weir on April 20, 2005, at which time the flow was about 1 cfs. The measured flow on April 20, 2005, at the upper weir was about 1.6 cfs. A data logger was not available for the upper weir during 2005; consequently, manual measurements of flow were taken periodically. The flow during the Spring of 2005 was slightly higher than observed in 2004, with most flow ranging from about 1 to 2 cfs. A peak flow of about 4 cfs was measured in mid-May 2005. Flow at the lower weir diminished quickly in early June 2005 and stopped by about mid June 2005. Consistent with previous years including 2004, flow at the upper weir was generally greater than at the lower weir.