REP41515 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

rising trend had been observed during the period of above normal precipitation while an overall smaller rise had been observed during the below normal precipitation prior to the fairly steady levels the last few yeazs. These responses are interpreted to be due to an increase in rechazge for a few years followed by a decrease in recharge. These water levels do not show much response to the higher precipitation in 2005. These responses indicate that the mining from the QR seams, which is nearest in the F pit mining that began in 1997, has not significantly affected water levels in GP-5 and GP-6. Figure A-13 presents the change in water-level elevation for alluvial well P-1, located in the Pyeatt drainage north of the PA, This data demonstrates classic seasonal responses, highs in winter/spring and lows in late summer/fall. Overall the water levels were slightly higher in 2005. Well P-3 is completed in the Lewis Shale outcrop, which is in contact with the Pyeatt alluvium. It demonstrates the same seasonal variations (Figure A-13) as the alluvial P-1 well. Water-level elevations for the Johnson Gulch alluvial well J-1 are also presented in Figure • A-13. The J-1 water levels remained steady in 2005. 2.2 GROUND WATER-LEVEL ELEVATION (PIEZOMETRIC MAP Si7MMARi~ Hydro-Engineering developed three piezometric maps to show the water level flow patterns for the QR, HI and 3rd White Sandstone aquifers at Trapper Mine. Water levels from the Fall of 2005 were used to develop these maps. Map No. 2-1 presents the water-level elevations for the QR aquifer. The water-level elevation is presented for the QR wells: GD-2, GE-1, GF-6, GP-5, and GP-6 and backfill wells GD-3 and GF-11. The ground-water flow in the QR aquifer is mainly to the north. Mining has only affected the QR aquifer close to the D, E, F, G and Z pits by causing drawdowns very near the pit Trapper Mining Company 2-8 • 2005 Annual Report