Grand Canyon Threatened – Still
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Hydrochemical Zoning and Chemical Evolution of the Deep Upper Jurassic Thermal Groundwater Reservoir Using Water Chemical and Environmental Isotope Data
water Article Hydrochemical Zoning and Chemical Evolution of the Deep Upper Jurassic Thermal Groundwater Reservoir Using Water Chemical and Environmental Isotope Data Florian Heine * , Kai Zosseder and Florian Einsiedl * Chair of Hydrogeology, Department of Civil, Geo and Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Arcisstr. 21, 80333 Munich, Germany; [email protected] * Correspondence: fl[email protected] (F.H.); [email protected] (F.E.); Tel.: +49-(89)-289-25833 (F.E.) Abstract: A comprehensive hydrogeological understanding of the deep Upper Jurassic carbonate aquifer, which represents an important geothermal reservoir in the South German Molasse Basin (SGMB), is crucial for improved and sustainable groundwater resource management. Water chemical data and environmental isotope analyses of δD, δ18O and 87Sr/86Sr were obtained from groundwater of 24 deep Upper Jurassic geothermal wells and coupled with a few analyses of noble gases (3He/4He, 40Ar/36Ar) and noble gas infiltration temperatures. Hierarchical cluster analysis revealed three major water types and allowed a hydrochemical zoning of the SGMB, while exploratory factor analyses identified the hydrogeological processes affecting the water chemical composition of the thermal water. Water types 1 and 2 are of Na-[Ca]-HCO3-Cl type, lowly mineralised and have been recharged 87 86 under meteoric cold climate conditions. Both water types show Sr/ Sr signatures, stable water isotopes values and calculated apparent mean residence times, which suggest minor water-rock Citation: Heine, F.; Zosseder, K.; interaction within a hydraulically active flow system of the Northeastern and Southeastern Central Einsiedl, F. Hydrochemical Zoning Molasse Basin. This thermal groundwater have been most likely subglacially recharged in the south and Chemical Evolution of the Deep of the SGMB in close proximity to the Bavarian Alps with a delineated northwards flow direction. -
List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017
Washington Natural Heritage Program List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017 The following list of animals known from Washington is complete for resident and transient vertebrates and several groups of invertebrates, including odonates, branchipods, tiger beetles, butterflies, gastropods, freshwater bivalves and bumble bees. Some species from other groups are included, especially where there are conservation concerns. Among these are the Palouse giant earthworm, a few moths and some of our mayflies and grasshoppers. Currently 857 vertebrate and 1,100 invertebrate taxa are included. Conservation status, in the form of range-wide, national and state ranks are assigned to each taxon. Information on species range and distribution, number of individuals, population trends and threats is collected into a ranking form, analyzed, and used to assign ranks. Ranks are updated periodically, as new information is collected. We welcome new information for any species on our list. Common Name Scientific Name Class Global Rank State Rank State Status Federal Status Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile Amphibia G5 S5 Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Amphibia G5 S5 Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Amphibia G5 S3 Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Amphibia G5 S5 Dunn's Salamander Plethodon dunni Amphibia G4 S3 C Larch Mountain Salamander Plethodon larselli Amphibia G3 S3 S Van Dyke's Salamander Plethodon vandykei Amphibia G3 S3 C Western Red-backed Salamander Plethodon vehiculum Amphibia G5 S5 Rough-skinned Newt Taricha granulosa -
Heritage of the Birdsville and Strzelecki Tracks
Department for Environment and Heritage Heritage of the Birdsville and Strzelecki Tracks Part of the Far North & Far West Region (Region 13) Historical Research Pty Ltd Adelaide in association with Austral Archaeology Pty Ltd Lyn Leader-Elliott Iris Iwanicki December 2002 Frontispiece Woolshed, Cordillo Downs Station (SHP:009) The Birdsville & Strzelecki Tracks Heritage Survey was financed by the South Australian Government (through the State Heritage Fund) and the Commonwealth of Australia (through the Australian Heritage Commission). It was carried out by heritage consultants Historical Research Pty Ltd, in association with Austral Archaeology Pty Ltd, Lyn Leader-Elliott and Iris Iwanicki between April 2001 and December 2002. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the South Australian Government or the Commonwealth of Australia and they do not accept responsibility for any advice or information in relation to this material. All recommendations are the opinions of the heritage consultants Historical Research Pty Ltd (or their subconsultants) and may not necessarily be acted upon by the State Heritage Authority or the Australian Heritage Commission. Information presented in this document may be copied for non-commercial purposes including for personal or educational uses. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires written permission from the South Australian Government or the Commonwealth of Australia. Requests and enquiries should be addressed to either the Manager, Heritage Branch, Department for Environment and Heritage, GPO Box 1047, Adelaide, SA, 5001, or email [email protected], or the Manager, Copyright Services, Info Access, GPO Box 1920, Canberra, ACT, 2601, or email [email protected]. -
Groundwater Storage Dynamics in the World's
Interactive comment on “Groundwater storage dynamics in the world’s large aquifer systems from GRACE: uncertainty and role of extreme precipitation” by Mohammad Shamsudduha and Richard G. Taylor Marc Bierkens (Referee #1) [email protected] Received and published: 2 January 2020 Reviewer’s comments are italicised, and our responses (R) and revisions (REVISION) are provided in normal fonts. General comments The authors use the results of three different GRACE-based TWS methods and 4 Land surface models to generate an ensemble of groundwater storage anomalies. These are subsequently analyzed by a non-parametric statistical method to separate seasonal signals from non-linear trends and residuals. The main message of the paper is that trends in GWS anomalies (ΔGWS), if existing, are non-linear in the vast majority of main aquifer systems and that rainfall anomalies play an important role in explaining these non-linear trends. I enjoyed reading the paper. I find that it is a well-written with an important message that deserves publication. However, I have a few comments. Moderate comments: 1. I find the lack of reference to estimates based on global hydrological models (GHMS) remarkable. The first spatially distributed global assessment of depletion rates where based on such models and, albeit indirect, should be used in the discussion. They are the basis for the “narratives on global groundwater depletion” that are mentioned in the discussion and the abstract (See https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748- 9326/ab1a5f/meta for an overview of these studies). This is the more remarkable, given that the authors do use Land Surface Models (LSMs) to estimate ΔGWS from GRACE ΔTWS. -
Groundwater and Global Change: Trends, Opportunities and Challenges
SIDE PUBLICATIONS SERIES :01 Groundwater and Global Change: Trends, Opportunities and Challenges Jac van der Gun UNITED NATIONS WORLD WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME Published in 2012 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 7, Place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France © UNESCO 2012 All rights reserved ISBN 978-92-3-001049-2 The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization. Photographs: Cover: © africa924 / Shutterstock © Rolffimages / Dreamstime © Frontpage / Shutterstock.com p.i: © holgs / iStockphoto p.ii: © Andrew Zarivny p.2: © Aivolie / Shutterstock p.4: © Jorg Hackemann / Shutterstock p.17: © Jac van der Gun p.31: © Aivolie / Shutterstock p.33: © Hilde Vanstraelen Original concept (cover and layout design) of series: MH Design / Maro Haas Layout: Pica Publishing LTD, London–Paris / Roberto Rossi Printed by: UNESCO Printed in France Groundwater and global change: Trends, opportunities and challenges Author: Jac van der Gun Contributors: Luiz Amore (National Water Agency, Brazil), Greg Christelis (Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, Nambia), Todd Jarvis (Oregon State University, USA), Neno Kukuric (UNESCO-IGRAC) Júlio Thadeu Kettelhut (Ministry of the Environment, Brazil), Alexandros Makarigakis (UNESCO, Ethiopia), Abdullah Abdulkader Noaman (Sana’a University, Yemen), Cheryl van Kempen (UNESCO-IGRAC), Frank van Weert (UNESCO-IGRAC). -
Environment Management Manual
Procedure Document No. 2617 Document Title Environment Management Manual Area HSE Issue Date 23 August 2017 Major Process Environment Sub Process Management Review Authoriser Jacqui McGill – Asset President Version Number 16 Olympic Dam 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Glossary and defined terms ................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Purpose and scope .............................................................................................................. 3 1.3 How to use the EPMP .......................................................................................................... 4 2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ..................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Key legal requirements ........................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Compliance with routine reporting obligations ..................................................................... 6 2.3 Amendments to the EPMP ................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Environmental outcomes and criteria .................................................................................. 7 2.5 Enforcement process (Indenture and Mining Code) ............................................................ 7 2.6 ALARA and best practicable -
Supplement of Earth Syst
Supplement of Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 755–774, 2020 https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-755-2020-supplement © Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Supplement of Groundwater storage dynamics in the world’s large aquifer systems from GRACE: uncertainty and role of extreme precipitation Mohammad Shamsudduha and Richard G. Taylor Correspondence to: Mohammad Shamsudduha ([email protected]) The copyright of individual parts of the supplement might differ from the CC BY 4.0 License. Supplementary Table S1. Characteristics of the world’s 37 large aquifer systems according to the WHYMAP database including aquifer area, total number of population, proportion of groundwater (GW)-fed irrigation, mean aridity index, mean annual rainfall, variability in rainfall and total terrestrial water mass (ΔTWS), and correlation coefficients between monthly ΔTWS and precipitation with reported lags. ) 2 2) Correlation between between Correlation precipitation TWS and (lag in month) GW irrigation (%) (%) GW irrigation on based zones Climate Aridity indices Mean (2002-16) annual precipitation (mm) Rainfall variability (%) (cm TWS variance WHYMAP aquifer number name Aquifer Continent (million)Population area (km Aquifer Nubian Sandstone Hyper- 1 Africa 86.01 2,176,068 1.6 30 12.1 1.5 0.16 (13) Aquifer System arid Northwestern 2 Sahara Aquifer Africa 5.93 1,007,536 4.4 Arid 69 17.3 1.9 0.19 (8) System Murzuk-Djado Hyper- 3 Africa 0.35 483,817 2.3 8 36.6 1.3 0.20 (-8) Basin arid Taoudeni- Hyper- 4 Africa 0.35 -
United States Department of the Interior U.S
United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Office 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 FAX: (602) 242-2513 In Reply Refer To: AESO/SE 22410-2011-F-0100 22410-2011-F-0112 December 23, 2011 Memorandum To: Regional Director, Bureau of Reclamation, Salt Lake City, Utah From: Field Supervisor Subject: Final Biological Opinion on the Operation of Glen Canyon Dam including High Flow Experiments and Non-Native Fish Control Thank you for your request for formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), as amended (ESA). Your January 2011 request was supplemented with Biological Assessment (BA) dated July 13, 2011, and received by us on July 15, with supplements provided as described in the Consultation History section of this document. At issue are impacts that may result from the proposed 10-year continued operation of Glen Canyon Dam under the Modified Low Fluctuating Flows (MLFF) alternative along with High Flow Experimental (HFE) Releases and Non-Native Fish (NNFC) Control downstream from Glen Canyon Dam (GCD), Coconino County, Arizona. The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) concluded that the proposed action “may affect, and is likely to adversely affect” the humpback chub (Gila cypha) and its critical habitat, the razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) and its critical habitat, and the Kanab ambersnail (Oxyloma kanabensis haydenii). You also concluded that the proposed action “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” the southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). -
Walking on Water- Global Aquifers
16 March 2011 Walking on Water Mendel Khoo Researcher FDI Global Food and Water Crises Research Programme Gary Kleyn Manager FDI Global Food and Water Crises Research Programme Summary Aquifers play a key role in the provision of water for farming and for consumption by animals and humans. Almost all parts of the global landmass hide a subterranean water body. Aquifers are underground beds or layers of permeable rock, sediment or soil where water is lodged and can be accessed to yield water. This paper explores some of the major aquifers around the world and determines how countries are coping with increased water usage. Analysis Studying aquifers presents a number of problems, in part because scientists are yet to develop a complete picture of the globe’s aquifer systems; the sub-surface geology still holds mysteries. Further discoveries of aquifers and information on their connectivity with surface water can be expected in the future. The process should be similar to the way in which new discoveries of energy sources beneath the earth’s surface are still being made. An additional impediment lies in the different terms used to describe aquifers, some of them arising simply because of language differences. Aquifers do not fit into one neat category, as there are many variations to their form. The terminology for aquifers can include: underground water basins; groundwater mounds; lakes and parts of rivers; as well as artesian basins, which are confined aquifers contained under positive pressure. Hence, aquifers are not only located underground but some, or all, parts may also be found on the surface. -
Detecting Inter-Aquifer Leakage in Areas with Limited Data Using Hydraulics and Multiple Environmental Tracers, Including 4He, 36Cl/Cl, 14Cand87sr/86Sr
Hydrogeol J DOI 10.1007/s10040-017-1609-x REPORT Detecting inter-aquifer leakage in areas with limited data using hydraulics and multiple environmental tracers, including 4He, 36Cl/Cl, 14Cand87Sr/86Sr Stacey C. Priestley 1 & Daniel L. Wohling2 & Mark N. Keppel2 & Vincent E. A. Post 1 & Andrew J. Love1 & Paul Shand 1,3 & Lina Tyroller4 & Rolf Kipfer4,5 Received: 6 December 2016 /Accepted: 19 May 2017 # The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication Abstract The investigation of regionally extensive ground- controlled by diffuse inter-aquifer leakage, but the coarse spa- water systems in remote areas is hindered by a shortage of data tial resolution means that the presence of additional enhanced due to a sparse observation network, which limits our under- inter-aquifer leakage sites cannot be excluded. This study standing of the hydrogeological processes in arid regions. The makes the case that a multi-tracer approach along with study used a multidisciplinary approach to determine hydrau- groundwater hydraulics and geology provides a tool-set to lic connectivity between the Great Artesian Basin (GAB) and investigate enhanced inter-aquifer leakage even in a ground- the underlying Arckaringa Basin in the desert region of water basin with a paucity of data. A particular problem en- Central Australia. In order to manage the impacts of ground- countered in this study was the ambiguous interpretation of water abstraction from the Arckaringa Basin, it is vital to different age tracers, which is attributed to diffusive transport understand its connectivity with the GAB (upper aquifer), as across flow paths caused by low recharge rates. -
Advances in Genetic Research Reveal Kanab Ambersnail Not a Distinct Subspecies Subspecies Removed from Endangered Species Act List
News Release U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Missouri and Upper Colorado Basin Region 134 Union Boulevard Lakewood, Colorado 80228 For Immediate Release June 17, 2021 Contact: Joe Szuszwalak, [email protected], 303-236-4336 Advances in Genetic Research Reveal Kanab Ambersnail Not a Distinct Subspecies Subspecies removed from Endangered Species Act list Western Oxyloma sp. from Vasey's Paradise, Grand Canyon, AZ Photo credit: Jeff Sorenson, AZ Game and Fish DENVER — The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is announcing today the publication of a final rule to remove the Kanab ambersnail (Oxyloma haydeni kanabensis) from the Endangered Species Act list of threatened and endangered species. This determination follows a review of the best available science, which has indicated the Kanab ambersnail is not a distinct subspecies and therefore cannot be listed as an entity under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This action follows the publication of the proposed rule on January 6, 2020. The Kanab ambersnail was initially listed as endangered in 1991. It is a small snail in the Succineidae family, typically inhabiting marshes and other wetlands watered by springs and seeps at the base of sandstone or limestone cliffs. Three populations have been known to the Service, one in Three Lakes, UT, and in Vasey’s Paradise and Upper Elves Canyon, AZ. In 2013 the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published a comprehensive, peer-reviewed, comparative genetic and morphological study of 11 populations of ambersnails (Oxyloma) in Utah and Arizona, including the Kanab ambersnail. USGS analyzed genetics, shell morphology, and reproductive soft tissue anatomy and found that the subspecies known as Kanab ambersnail is not a distinct subspecies. -
A Public Interest Map for Queensland Government Bodies
Brokering Balance: A Public Interest Map for Queensland Government Bodies An Independent Review of Queensland Government Boards, Committees and Statutory Authorities Part B Report by the Independent Reviewers: Ms Simone Webbe and Professor Patrick Weller AO March 2009 i Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................ 4 2. Executive Summary .................................................................................... 9 3. A Public Interest Map for Queensland Government Bodies ..................... 11 3.1 Reducing bureaucracy and red tape ............................................. 13 3.1.1 Meanings ............................................................................... 13 3.1.2 Causes ................................................................................... 14 3.1.3 A Public Interest Map in response ............................................ 16 3.2 The Threshold Test ........................................................................ 21 3.2.1 Threshold Questions ............................................................... 21 3.2.2 Public Interest Case ................................................................ 23 3.2.3 Sunset or Review .................................................................... 24 3.3 The Organisational Form Guide .................................................... 30 3.3.1 Committees and Councils ........................................................ 32 3.3.2 Statutory Authorities and Statutory