DOCSLIB.ORG

Hydrogeologic Investigation of the Boulder Valley, Jefferson County, Montana Groundwater Modeling Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hydrogeologic Investigation of the Boulder Valley, Jefferson County, Montana Groundwater Modeling Report March 2017 Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 688 HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION OF THE BOULDER VALLEY, JEFFERSON COUNTY, MONTANA GROUNDWATER MODELING REPORT Julie A. Butler1 and Andrew L. Bobst Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Ground Water Investigations Program 1Currently employed by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Boston, MA Cover photo by Andrew L. Bobst, 2011 HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION OF THE BOULDER VALLEY, JEFFERSON COUNTY, MONTANA GROUNDWATER MODELING REPORT March 2017 Julie A. Butler1 and Andrew L. Bobst Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Ground Water Investigations Program 1Currently employed by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Boston, MA Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 688 Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 688 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface ....................................................................................................................................................1 Abstract ..................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................3 Background ......................................................................................................................................3 Purpose and Scope ...........................................................................................................................3 Model Objectives .............................................................................................................................3 Previous Investigations ....................................................................................................................3 Physiography....................................................................................................................................6 Climate .............................................................................................................................................6 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................................6 Water-Development Infrastructure...................................................................................................6 Conceptual Model ..................................................................................................................................8 Geologic Framework .......................................................................................................................8 Hydrogeologic Setting ...................................................................................................................11 Groundwater Flow System ............................................................................................................13 Hydrologic Boundaries ..................................................................................................................13 Aquifer Properties ..........................................................................................................................13 Sources and Sinks ..........................................................................................................................13 Groundwater Budget ......................................................................................................................13 Irrigation Recharge (Ir) ............................................................................................................17 Upland Recharge (Ur) ..............................................................................................................18 Canal Leakage (Cl) ..................................................................................................................20 Groundwater Inflow/Outflow (Agi and Agd) ...........................................................................20 Pumping-Well Withdrawals (Pw) ............................................................................................22 Evapotranspiration by Riparian Vegetation (Etr) .....................................................................23 Changes in Storage (Ds) ..........................................................................................................23 Net River Gain (Riv) ................................................................................................................23 Budget Summary .....................................................................................................................24 Groundwater Flow Model Construction ..............................................................................................24 Computer Code ..............................................................................................................................24 Spatial Discretization .....................................................................................................................24 Temporal Discretization .................................................................................................................27 Hydraulic Parameters .....................................................................................................................27 Boundary Conditions .....................................................................................................................27 Active Grid Border ..................................................................................................................27 Internal Sources and Sinks .......................................................................................................28 v Butler and Bobst, 2017 Streams .....................................................................................................................................28 Calibration ............................................................................................................................................33 Selection of Calibration Targets .....................................................................................................33 Observation Grouping and Weighting .....................................................................................35 Steady-State Calibration ................................................................................................................35 Methods ...................................................................................................................................35 Results ......................................................................................................................................37 Transient Calibration ......................................................................................................................42 Methods....................................................................................................................................42 Aquifer Storage Properties .......................................................................................................43 Transient Calibration Targets ...................................................................................................43 Results ......................................................................................................................................43 Sensitivity Analysis ..............................................................................................................................49 Methods..........................................................................................................................................49 Results ............................................................................................................................................51 Predictive Simulations .........................................................................................................................54 Scenario 1 .......................................................................................................................................59 Scenario 2 .......................................................................................................................................59 Scenario 3 .......................................................................................................................................59 Scenario 4 .......................................................................................................................................64 Scenarios Summary ......................................................................................................................64 Summary and Conclusions ..................................................................................................................65 Assumptions and Limitations ........................................................................................................65 Model Predictions ..........................................................................................................................65 Recommendations ..........................................................................................................................65 Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................70
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Part 629 – Glossary of Landform and Geologic Terms
    Title 430 – National Soil Survey Handbook Part 629 – Glossary of Landform and Geologic Terms Subpart A – General Information 629.0 Definition and Purpose This glossary provides the NCSS soil survey program, soil scientists, and natural resource specialists with landform, geologic, and related terms and their definitions to— (1) Improve soil landscape description with a standard, single source landform and geologic glossary. (2) Enhance geomorphic content and clarity of soil map unit descriptions by use of accurate, defined terms. (3) Establish consistent geomorphic term usage in soil science and the National Cooperative Soil Survey (NCSS). (4) Provide standard geomorphic definitions for databases and soil survey technical publications. (5) Train soil scientists and related professionals in soils as landscape and geomorphic entities. 629.1 Responsibilities This glossary serves as the official NCSS reference for landform, geologic, and related terms. The staff of the National Soil Survey Center, located in Lincoln, NE, is responsible for maintaining and updating this glossary. Soil Science Division staff and NCSS participants are encouraged to propose additions and changes to the glossary for use in pedon descriptions, soil map unit descriptions, and soil survey publications. The Glossary of Geology (GG, 2005) serves as a major source for many glossary terms. The American Geologic Institute (AGI) granted the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) permission (in letters dated September 11, 1985, and September 22, 1993) to use existing definitions. Sources of, and modifications to, original definitions are explained immediately below. 629.2 Definitions A. Reference Codes Sources from which definitions were taken, whole or in part, are identified by a code (e.g., GG) following each definition.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Groun D Water Features of the Butte Valley Region Siskiyou County California
    Geology and Groun d Water Features of the Butte Valley Region Siskiyou County California By P. R. WOOD GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1491 Prepared in cooperation with the California Department offf^ater Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1960 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRED A. SEATON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library catalog card for this publication appears after page 151. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C. CONTENTS Page Abstract___.__-_-____________-____________-_____----_----------- 1 Introduction.___---____-______________________--_----------------- 3 Purpose and scope of the work._..._____________________----.._-- 3 Location of area.-_-___-_____________-______--_------_--------- 4 Culture and accessibility. ________-___.___-______-----_--------- 4 Previous investigations.________-_____-______-_-_---_----------- 4 Acknowledgments _________________-___-____-__------_--------- 6 Well-numbering system____-______________-______------_------- 6 Method of investigation._____-______________-__-----_---------- 7 Physical features of the area..___________________._____-___-.---_--- 10 Topography and drainage. __________________-____----_-----_--- 10 Cascade Range.--___________-__________-_-_---_-_--------- 10 Butte Valley_-___----._-_----_---_--_---_----------------- 11 Red Rock Valley area________-_--__---_-------------------- H Oklahoma district. _____________________-___---------------
    [Show full text]
  • The Western Environmental Technology Office (WETO) Butte, Montana ^Jj&Gs^ «*Sim«
    DOE/EM-0217 Office of Environmental Management Office of Technology Development The Western Environmental Technology Office (WETO) Butte, Montana ^jj&gS^ «*sim« •4 4 1 Technology Summary October 1994 i DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENrT I S UNLIMITED DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. THE WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY OFFICE (WETO) BUTTE, MONTANA TECHNOLOGY SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword iii Introduction iv 1.0 Office of Technology Development-Sponsored Projects 1 Heavy Metals Contaminated Soil Project 1.1 Heavy-Metals-Contaminated Soil Project 3 1.2 Heavy
    [Show full text]
  • Hogback Is Ridge Formed by Near- Vertical, Resistant Sedimentary Rock
    Chapter 16 Landscape Evolution: Geomorphology Topography is a Balance Between Erosion and Tectonic Uplift 1 Topography is a Balance Between Erosion and Tectonic Uplift 2 Relief • The relief in an area is the maximum difference between the highest and lowest elevation. – We have about 7000 feet of relief between Boulder and the Continental divide. Relief 3 Mountains and Valleys • A mountain is a large mass of rock that projects above surrounding terrain. • A mountain range is a continuous area of high elevation and high relief. • A valley is an area of low relief typically formed by and drained by a single stream. • A basin is a large low-lying area of low relief. In arid areas basins commonly have closed topography (no river outlet to the sea). Mountains • Typically occur in ranges. • Glaciated forms –Horn –Arête • Desert Mountains – Vertical Cliffs – Alluvial Fans 4 Mountain Landforms: Horn Deserts: Vertical Cliffs and Alluvial Fans 5 Valleys and Basins • River Valleys – U-shape (Glacial) – V-shape (Active Water erosion) – Flat-floored (depositional flood plain) • Tectonic (Fault) Valleys (Basins) – Tectonic origin – San Luis Valley – Jackson Hole – Great Basin U-shaped Valley: Glacial Erosion 6 V-shaped Valley: Active water erosion Flat-floored Valley: Depositional Flood Plain 7 Desert and Semi-arid Landforms • A plateau is a broad area of uplift with relatively little internal relief. • A mesa is a small (<10 km2)plateau bounded by cliffs, commonly in an area of flat-lying sedimentary rocks. • A butte is a small (<1000m2) hill bounded by cliffs Plateau, Mesa, Butte 8 Colorado National Monument Canyonlands 9 Desert and Semi-arid Landforms • A cuesta is an asymmetric ridge in dipping sedimentary rocks as the Flatirons.
    [Show full text]
  • Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Strategic Plan April 2018 1.0
    Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Strategic Plan April 2018 1.0 Introduction The Sutter-Butte Basin (Basin) covers 300 square miles bordered by the Cherokee Canal to the north, the Sutter Buttes to the west, the Sutter Bypass to the southwest and the 44-mile long Feather River to the east—see Figure 1. The Basin is home to 95,000 residents and encompasses $7 billion of damageable assets (as estimated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or USACE). The region has sustained numerous floods, including the 1955 levee failure on the Feather River, which resulted in the deaths of at least 38 people. The personal safety and economic stability of large segments of the population are reliant on flood management systems that, until recent efforts, did not begin to meet modern engineering standards. Numerous projects and programs have been implemented in the Basin over the years to reduce flood risk, including the Feather River West Levee Project, which is nearing completion. The Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA) leads the planning and implementation efforts in the Basin to reduce the risk of catastrophic, riverine flooding. In this role, SBFCA collaborates with local, regional, state, tribal and federal agencies and organizations. On January 13, 2016 the SBFCA Board of Directors adopted the Strategic Plan to guide these efforts. This version is the first update to the Strategic Plan. 2.0 Purpose of the Strategic Plan The purpose of the Strategic Plan is to help formulate and articulate a vision for flood management within the Basin and to describe an approach to achieve this vision.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Slope Stability of Crestone, CO Snodgrass Mountain Ski Area March 2008 Crested Butte, CO CHAPTER 2-- GEOLOGY
    GEO-HAZ Consulting, Inc. Geology and Slope Stability of Crestone, CO Snodgrass Mountain Ski Area March 2008 Crested Butte, CO CHAPTER 2-- GEOLOGY This chapter describes the bedrock and Quaternary geology of Snodgrass Mountain, with special emphasis of landslides. Because the area had been mapped several times before, our first task was to compare the various maps. 2.1 Methods 2.1.1 Digitizing previous landslide mapping During the winter of 2006-2007 we digitized the landslide mapping from all seven previous landslide studies (Table 2-1). These maps were georeferenced by International Alpine Design, Vail, CO, for use in our GIS, so we could visually compare the various maps. Table 2-1. Previous studies in which landslides were mapped on Snodgrass Mountain. Author Date Title Map Remarks and Digitizing Scale Gaskill et al. 1967 Geologic map of the 1:24,000 Published USGS color map; being Oh-Be-Joyful digitized by IAD quadrangle… Soule 1976 Geologic Hazards in Ca. Polygons identical to those in the Crested Butte- 1:43,000 Gaskill. Gunnison Area (9 quads) Gaskill et al. 1991 Geologic map of the 1:24,000 Published USGS color map; see Gothic quadrangle… DIGITAL APPENDIX D2.1 on DVD- ROM only Resource 1995 Geologic Hazard 1:6,000 Includes several large landslide Consultants Assessment and deposits, and many small scarps; and Mitigation Planning for digitized by Pioneer Environmental Engineers Crested Butte Mountain in 1995 (RCE) Resort Irish 1996 Geologic Hazard Study 1:12,000 Concludes that Chicken Bone, Zones 3-A and 3-B Slump Block, and toe
    [Show full text]
  • A Geomorphic Classification System
    A Geomorphic Classification System U.S.D.A. Forest Service Geomorphology Working Group Haskins, Donald M.1, Correll, Cynthia S.2, Foster, Richard A.3, Chatoian, John M.4, Fincher, James M.5, Strenger, Steven 6, Keys, James E. Jr.7, Maxwell, James R.8 and King, Thomas 9 February 1998 Version 1.4 1 Forest Geologist, Shasta-Trinity National Forests, Pacific Southwest Region, Redding, CA; 2 Soil Scientist, Range Staff, Washington Office, Prineville, OR; 3 Area Soil Scientist, Chatham Area, Tongass National Forest, Alaska Region, Sitka, AK; 4 Regional Geologist, Pacific Southwest Region, San Francisco, CA; 5 Integrated Resource Inventory Program Manager, Alaska Region, Juneau, AK; 6 Supervisory Soil Scientist, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM; 7 Interagency Liaison for Washington Office ECOMAP Group, Southern Region, Atlanta, GA; 8 Water Program Leader, Rocky Mountain Region, Golden, CO; and 9 Geology Program Manager, Washington Office, Washington, DC. A Geomorphic Classification System 1 Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 5 I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 6 History of Classification Efforts in the Forest Service ............................................................... 6 History of Development .............................................................................................................. 7 Goals
    [Show full text]
  • Marysville Levee Commission Background
    Marysville Levee Commission Background 2012 Central Valley Flood Protection Plan Regional Flood Management Plans Basin‐wide Feasibility Studies 2017 Central Valley Flood Protection Plan Feather River Regional Boundary Memorandum of Understanding Partner Agencies: Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA) Marysville Levee Commission (MLC) Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority (TRLIA) Yuba County Water Agency (YCWA) Marysville Levee Commission Feather River Regional Flood Management Plan Purpose: Build upon the CVFPP by obtaining more region‐specific information and local input for long term implementation of a sustainable and integrated flood risk reduction program in the Central Valley Duration: 18 months Budget: $1.1M Funding: DWR Grant Feather River Regional Stakeholders • 4 Counties – Sutter, Yuba, Butte, and Placer • 6 Cities –Yuba City, Live Oak, Biggs, Gridley, Marysville, and Wheatland • 4 Flood Control Agencies – Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA), Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority (TRLIA), and the Yuba County Water Agency (YCWA), Marysville Levee Commission (MLC) • 9 LMAs –RD’s 10, 784, 817, 2103, 1001, LD 1, LD 9, Marysville Levee District and the Sutter Yard (MA 5, 7, 13, & 16) • 2 Small Communities –Rio Oso and Nicolaus • 21 Currently identified Stakeholder Groups – Including Farm Bureau, Growers, Enterprise Rancheria, Environmental groups/NGOs, Water groups, Chambers of Commerce, Schools, Building and Realty groups, and Citizen and Neighborhood associations Coordinating Committee Steve Lambert primary;
    [Show full text]
  • Controlled Groundwater Areas Fact Sheet
    FACT SHEET CONTROLLED GROUNDWATER AREAS Butte-Silver Bow Background Information: The Butte area and Upper Clark Fork Basin has been adversely affected by 120 years of hard rock mining, smelting, milling, and other processing activities. Contaminants associated with the site include arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, and zinc. Mining and ore-processing wastes represent the primary source materials. These wastes come in several different forms. They include, mill tailings, waste rock, slag, smelter fallout, and mixed combinations of each. Arsenic and metals contained in, or released from these wastes to soils, surface water, and groundwater pose significant threats to human and ecological receptors. In 1983, the EPA designated Silver Bow Creek as a Superfund site due to the impact of mining activities on the environment. In 1987, EPA expanded the Silver Bow Creek Site to include the Butte Area. The expanded site includes the city of Butte and the town of Walkerville. Several Operable Units were established to address impacted soils, surface water, groundwater, and stormwater issues. In the Butte area, these Operable Units include: Butte Mine Flooding Operable Unit; Streamside Tailings Operable Unit; Butte Priority Soils Operable Unit; West Side Soils Operable Unit; and the Active Mining and Milling Operable Unit. What is a Controlled Groundwater Area? Montana has authority to designate a controlled ground water area to prevent new appropriations or limit certain types of water appropriations due to water availability or water quality problems for the protection of existing water rights. (MCA 85-2-501). The State of Montana’s Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (Water Rights Bureau) is responsible for approving Controlled Groundwater Areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Mitchell Butte Quadrangle
    Physiography The mopped oreo lies just within the Columbia River Plateau Province. The more prominent topographic forms in the region ore largely the result of the westward tilt of the resistant lava flows which form cuestalike escarpments. GEOLOGICAL MAP SERIES GEOLOGY OF THE MITCHELL BU TT E QUADRANGLE, OREGON The softer sedimentary deposits that ore associated with the lavas show a more subdued topography because of their nonresistant character. by R. E. Corcoran, R. A . Doak, P. W. Porter, F. I. Pri tchett, and N . C. Privrosky The maximum relief for the quodrongle is 2,778 feet; the lowest elevation, 2,182 feet, is in the northeast cor­ ner of the area in the Snoke River fl oodplain, and the maximum elevation, 4,960 feet, is at the crest-of Owyhee Ridge in the south- central portion of the mop. Mi tchell Butte, o prominent topographic feature at 3,495 feet I N TRODUCT I ON elevation, lies near the center of the quadrangle. .,•. 0 "' ' Topographicall y the quadrangle fol ls into two units. The northern half is on oreo of low relief with the drain­ f-- : ,/. .:r. 0 History of the study IJl ·..• ·._- -- .,, ,. _: lz age controll ed by the Malheur River, which flows eastward across the northern por t of the quadrangle . The nOfth­ flow ing Snoke River drains a str ip along the eastern border of the mop and is the major controlling stream in the ···;,e it..~--· The Mitchell Butte 30- minu te quadrangle is situated in eastern Oregon along the Idaho boundary. It lies on region.
    [Show full text]
  • Field-Trip Guide to the Vents, Dikes, Stratigraphy, and Structure of the Columbia River Basalt Group, Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington
    Field-Trip Guide to the Vents, Dikes, Stratigraphy, and Structure of the Columbia River Basalt Group, Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5022–N U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Palouse Falls, Washington. The Palouse River originates in Idaho and flows westward before it enters the Snake River near Lyons Ferry, Washington. About 10 kilometers north of this confluence, the river has eroded through the Wanapum Basalt and upper portion of the Grande Ronde Basalt to produce Palouse Falls, where the river drops 60 meters (198 feet) into the plunge pool below. The river’s course was created during the cataclysmic Missoula floods of the Pleistocene as ice dams along the Clark Fork River in Idaho periodically broke and reformed. These events released water from Glacial Lake Missoula, with the resulting floods into Washington creating the Channeled Scablands and Glacial Lake Lewis. Palouse Falls was created by headward erosion of these floodwaters as they spilled over the basalt into the Snake River. After the last of the floodwaters receded, the Palouse River began to follow the scabland channel it resides in today. Photograph by Stephen P. Reidel. Field-Trip Guide to the Vents, Dikes, Stratigraphy, and Structure of the Columbia River Basalt Group, Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington By Victor E. Camp, Stephen P. Reidel, Martin E. Ross, Richard J. Brown, and Stephen Self Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5022–N U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Maps of the Grand View-Bruneau Area, Owyhee County, Idaho
    Geologic Map of the Grand View-Bruneau Area, Owyhee County, Idaho Margaret D. Jenks Bill Bonnichsen Martha M. Godchaux Idaho Geological Survey Technical Report 98- 1 University of Idaho December 1998 Moscow, Idaho 83844-3014 Contents Introduction ............................................................... 1 Location ................................................................ 2 General Geologic Setting ........................................................ 2 Structure ................................................................ 5 Hotsprings ............................................................... 6 Acknowledgments ........................................................... 7 References ............................................................... 7 DescriptionofUnits .......................................................... 9 SedimentqUnits .......................................................... 9 Younger Unconsolidated Sediments ............................................... 9 Qal Alluvium (Holocene) .................................................. 9 Qil Intermittent lake sediments (Holocene) ......................................... 9 Qfs Fresh, unvegetated dune sand (Holocene) ....................................... 9 Qaf Alluvial fan deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) ........................ :.............. 9 Qds Vegetated dune sand (Holocene and Pleistocene) ................................... 9 Qls Landslide deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) .................................... 9 Qbf Bonneville
    [Show full text]