DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Silver Bow Creek Watershed Restoration Plan Does Not Change the Process Set Forth for Funding Decisions in the RPPC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Silver Bow Creek Watershed Restoration Plan Does Not Change the Process Set Forth for Funding Decisions in the RPPC Silver Bow Creek Watershed Restoration Plan (Final) December 2005 Prepared For: State of Montana Natural Resource Damage Program Prepared by: Montana Natural Resource Damage Program P.O. Box 201425 Helena, MT 59620 Confluence Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 1133 Bozeman, MT 59771-1133 DTM Consulting, Inc. 211 N. Grand Ave., Suite J Bozeman, MT 59715 i Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 1 1.0 Introduction......................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Basis for Developing the Watershed Restoration Plan..................................... 13 1.2 Goals of the Watershed Restoration Plan ......................................................... 15 1.3 Objectives of the Watershed Restoration Plan.................................................. 15 1.4 Document Organization.................................................................................... 15 1.5 Using this Document......................................................................................... 17 2.0 Background Information.................................................................................... 18 2.1 Environmental History of Silver Bow Creek Watershed.................................. 18 2.2 History of Silver Bow Creek Watershed Cleanup Efforts................................ 20 3.0 Watershed Planning and Restoration Concepts .............................................. 39 3.1 Characteristics and Benefits of a Healthy Watershed....................................... 39 3.2 Watershed Planning .......................................................................................... 40 3.3 Watershed Restoration Strategies ..................................................................... 41 3.4 Watershed Planning and Restoration Concepts for Silver Bow Creek............. 44 4.0 Methods................................................................................................................ 45 4.1 Public Involvement Plan................................................................................... 45 4.2 Data Compilation and Review.......................................................................... 47 4.3 Data Analysis.................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Determination of Restoration Priorities............................................................ 57 5.0 Vision for Silver Bow Creek............................................................................... 63 5.1 Visioning Process.............................................................................................. 63 5.2 Vision Statement............................................................................................... 64 6.0 Watershed Overview .......................................................................................... 66 6.1 General Characteristics..................................................................................... 66 6.2 Climate.............................................................................................................. 66 6.3 Hydrology ......................................................................................................... 69 6.4 Geology............................................................................................................. 75 6.5 Soils................................................................................................................... 77 6.6 Fisheries ............................................................................................................ 81 6.7 Vegetation......................................................................................................... 83 6.8 Wildlife ............................................................................................................. 91 6.9 Land Ownership................................................................................................ 93 6.10 Land Use........................................................................................................... 93 6.11 Water Quality.................................................................................................... 96 7.0 Sub-Watershed Conditions and Restoration Needs ...................................... 100 7.1 Silver Bow Creek Corridor ............................................................................. 100 7.2 Mill and Willow creeks Sub-watershed.......................................................... 118 7.3 German Gulch Sub-watershed........................................................................ 131 7.4 Sand Creek Sub-Watershed ............................................................................ 145 7.5 Basin and Blacktail creeks Sub-Watershed .................................................... 153 7.6 Butte Area Sub-Watershed ............................................................................. 167 7.7 Browns Gulch Sub-Watershed........................................................................ 178 7.8 Warm Springs Ponds Area Sub-Watershed .................................................... 187 i 8.0 Restoration Prioritization ................................................................................ 192 8.1 Review of Prioritization Process..................................................................... 192 8.2 Watershed Scale Prioritization Results by Restoration Category................... 193 8.3 Restoration Prioritization Results by Restoration Need ................................. 202 8.4 Prioritization Results by Planning Area.......................................................... 219 8.5 Limitations of the Prioritization Process......................................................... 219 9.0 Proposal Development...................................................................................... 221 9.1 NRDP Funding Opportunities......................................................................... 221 9.2 Other Funding Opportunities .......................................................................... 227 10.0 References Cited................................................................................................ 240 Appendix A Public Participation .......................................................................... 250 Focus Group Participants............................................................................................ 250 Ad Hoc Committee Participants ................................................................................. 251 Focus Group Results................................................................................................... 252 Butte Area Citizens Meeting, December 2003 ........................................................... 255 Appendix B GIS Data ............................................................................................ 264 Appendix C Water Quality Sampling................................................................... 266 Metals and Arsenic Sampling, Silver Bow Creek ...................................................... 266 Benthic Sediment Sampling on Silver Bow Creek..................................................... 271 Nutrient Sampling, Silver Bow Creek ........................................................................ 278 Water Quality Sampling, Warm Springs Ponds ......................................................... 283 Water Quality Sampling, German Gulch.................................................................... 286 Water Quality Sampling, Basin and Blacktail Creek.................................................. 293 Appendix D Aerial Photo Assessment .................................................................. 295 Appendix E Montana FWP Wildlife Aerial Sighting Data ................................ 304 List of Figures: Figure ES-1: Overview of the Silver Bow Creek watershed .............................................. 4 Figure ES-2: Diagram illustrating the watershed restoration plan development.................5 Figure 1-1: Location of the Silver Bow Creek watershed. ............................................... 14 Figure 2-1: Silver Bow Creek flowing through slag wall canyon in Butte. ..................... 19 Figure 2-2: Floodplain tailings contamination in Subarea 4............................................. 22 Figure 2-3: Overview of the Silver Bow Creek watershed............................................... 23 Figure 2-4: Berkeley Pit in Butte...................................................................................... 24 Figure 2-5:Sludge discharge pipeline, Horsehoe Bend Water Treatment Plant ............... 25 Figure 2-6: Colorado Tailings liming facility................................................................... 27 Figure 2-7: View of Anaconda uplands from Mount Haggin WMA................................ 29 Figure 2-8: Successful vegetation restoration, Silver Bow Creek floodplain, Subarea 1. 35 Figure 2-9: Tailings removal and reconstruction of Silver Bow Creek in Subarea 2....... 36 Figure 2-10: Silver Bow Creek in Durant Canyon. .......................................................... 37 Figure 6-1: 30 year average climate statistics, Butte airport weather station. .................. 67 Figure 6-2: 30 year average climate statistics, East Anaconda weather station. .............. 67 Figure 6-3: Average annual precipitation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Superfund Sites Yield New Drugs/Tourist Attractions
    Fact or Fiction? Jack W. Dini 1537 Desoto Way Livermore, CA 94550 E-mail: [email protected] Superfund Sites Yield New Drugs/Tourist Attractions In 1993, Travel and Leisure Magazine The 1.5-mile wide, 1,800-foot deep pit, fi ght migraines and cancer.4 ran an article on the Continental Divide. part of the nation’s largest Superfund site, In recent years, more than 40 small It was tough on Butte: “the ugliest spot in has been fi lling for the last 20 years with organisms have been discovered in the lake Montana - despite a spirited historic dis- a poisonous broth laced with heavy metals and these hold much potential for agricul- trict amid the rubble, the overall picture is and arsenic - a legacy of Butte’s copper ture and medicine. It’s even thought that desolate.” It called nearby Anaconda “a sad mining days. When mining offi cials aban- some of these organisms can be employed sack mining town dominated by a smelter doned the pit and stopped the pumps that to reclaim the lake and other similarly con- smokestack.”1 Today things are somewhat kept it dry, they opened the spigots to about taminated waters by neutralizing acidity different for these two sites. 3 million gallons of water per day. Today, and absorbing dissolved metals. the lake is about 850 feet deep and contains Andrea and Don Stierle and their col- Butte, Montana - Lake Berkeley more than 3 billion cubic feet of water.3 leagues have found a strain of the pitho- Edwin Dobb reports, “At one time Butte Lake Berkeley, also known as The myces fungi producing a compound that provided a third of the copper used in the Berkeley Pit, covers almost 700 acres of bonds to a receptor that causes migraines United States - all from a mining district the former open-pit copper mine.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana State Parks Guide Reservations for Camping and Other Accommodations: Toll Free: 1-855-922-6768 Stateparks.Mt.Gov
    For more information about Montana State Parks: 406-444-3750 TDD: 406-444-1200 website: stateparks.mt.gov P.O. Box 200701 • Helena, MT 59620-0701 Montana State Parks Guide Reservations for camping and other accommodations: Toll Free: 1-855-922-6768 stateparks.mt.gov For general travel information: 1-800-VISIT-MT (1-800-847-4868) www.visitmt.com Join us on Twitter, Facebook & Instagram If you need emergency assistance, call 911. To report vandalism or other park violations, call 1-800-TIP-MONT (1-800-847-6668). Your call can be anonymous. You may be eligible for a reward. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks strives to ensure its programs, sites and facilities are accessible to all people, including those with disabilities. To learn more, or to request accommodations, call 406-444-3750. Cover photo by Jason Savage Photography Lewis and Clark portrait reproductions courtesy of Independence National Historic Park Library, Philadelphia, PA. This document was produced by Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks and was printed at state expense. Information on the cost of this publication can be obtained by contacting Montana State Parks. Printed on Recycled Paper © 2018 Montana State Parks MSP Brochure Cover 15.indd 1 7/13/2018 9:40:43 AM 1 Whitefish Lake 6 15 24 33 First Peoples Buffalo Jump* 42 Tongue River Reservoir Logan BeTableaverta ilof Hill Contents Lewis & Clark Caverns Les Mason* 7 16 25 34 43 Thompson Falls Fort3-9 Owen*Historical Sites 28. VisitorMadison Centers, Buff Camping,alo Ju mp* Giant Springs* Medicine Rocks Whitefish Lake 8 Fish Creek 17 Granite11-15 *Nature Parks 26DisabledMissouri Access Headw ibility aters 35 Ackley Lake 44 Pirogue Island* WATERTON-GLACIER INTERNATIONAL 2 Lone Pine* PEACE PARK9 Council Grove* 18 Lost Creek 27 Elkhorn* 36 Greycliff Prairie Dog Town* 45 Makoshika Y a WHITEFISH < 16-23 Water-based Recreation 29.
    [Show full text]
  • High Country News Vol. 12.22, Nov. 14, 1980
    = = XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2-Hi h Count News - Nov. 14 1980 Anaconda ... (continued from page 1) . their mutual ignorance of the impend- ing shut-down. He has worked for what Montanans call "the Company" for 32 years? an association that predates ARCO's ;nvolvement by more than a quarter-century. Before that his father was a blue-collar employee at the smel- ter. "I was raised with the people that work up here," said Stokke. "I'm in- volved morally and socially." He thinks ARCO pulled the plug too quickly, "without looking into (alternatives) in depth ...It should have been researched a lot more." Barkley, Stokke and the rest of the town, are still in shock. The company had reassured them earlier in the year that it planned to keep the smelter open Ph.... and invest in improvements. "",-y "It hit US like somebody had suddenly of the died:' said Lutheran minister Kirby Anaeonda Nave. ;There was an initial reaction of Leoder disbelief and numbness." The surprise announcement set off a flurry of activity to find a quick fix. "A lot of people came in here just before the (Nov.4) election. promising money," said Alberta "Kraus, who works for the Anaconda Local Development Corpora- tion. "Then they left after the election. MEL STOKKE (upper left) runs the Anaconda omeltorworks. Despite the fact that it is not expected to operate again, strikers continue their vigil at the front gate. - Now we're having trouble finding any I . to people come in and invest:' I _Not surprisingly when over 70 per- vey now under way is expected to show back to the 18BOswhen Marcus Daly power to toy with Montanans'lives was cent of a community's payroll has been further decline.
    [Show full text]
  • COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL COPYRIGHTED I
    Avalanche Campground (MT), 66 Big Horn Equestrian Center (WY), Index Avenue of the Sculptures (Billings, 368 MT), 236 Bighorn Mountain Loop (WY), 345 Bighorn Mountains Trail System INDEX A (WY), 368–369 AARP, 421 B Bighorn National Forest (WY), 367 Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Backcountry camping, Glacier Big Red (Clearmont, WY), 370 (MT), 225–227 National Park (MT), 68 Big Red Gallery (Clearmont, WY), Academic trips, 44–45 Backcountry permits 370 Accommodations, 413–414 Glacier National Park (MT), Big Salmon Lake (MT), 113 best, 8–10 54–56 Big Sheep Creek Canyon (MT), 160 for families with children, 416 Grand Teton (WY), 325 Big Sky (MT), 8, 215–220 Active vacations, 43–52 Yellowstone National Park Big Sky Brewing Company AdventureBus, 45, 269 (MT—WY), 264 (Missoula, MT), 93 Adventure Sports (WY), 309, 334 Backcountry Reservations, 56 Big Sky Candy (Hamilton, MT), 96 Adventure trips, 45–46 Backcountry skiing, 48 Big Sky Golf Course (MT), 217 AdventureWomen, 201–202 Backroads, 45, 46 Big Sky Resort (MT), 216–217 Aerial Fire Depot and Baggs (WY), 390 Big Sky Waterpark (MT), 131 Smokejumper Center (Missoula, Ballooning, Teton Valley (WY), Big Spring (MT), 188 MT), 86–87 306 Big Spring Creek (MT), 187 Air tours Bannack (MT), 167, 171–172 Big Timber Canyon Trail (MT), 222 Glacier National Park (MT), 59 Bannack Days (MT), 172 Biking and mountain biking, 48 the Tetons (WY), 306 Barry’s Landing (WY), 243 Montana Air travel, 409, 410 Bay Books & Prints (Bigfork, MT), Big Sky, 216 Albright Visitor Center 105 Bozeman, 202 (Yellowstone), 263, 275
    [Show full text]
  • Health Consultation
    Health Consultation Evaluation of Residential Soil Arsenic Action Level ANACONDA CO. SMELTER NPL SITE ANACONDA, DEER LODGE COUNTY, MONTANA EPA FACILITY ID: MTD093291656 OCTOBER 19, 2007 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Division of Health Assessment and Consultation Atlanta, Georgia 30333 Health Consultation: A Note of Explanation An ATSDR health consultation is a verbal or written response from ATSDR to a specific request for information about health risks related to a specific site, a chemical release, or the presence of hazardous material. In order to prevent or mitigate exposures, a consultation may lead to specific actions, such as restricting use of or replacing water supplies; intensifying environmental sampling; restricting site access; or removing the contaminated material. In addition, consultations may recommend additional public health actions, such as conducting health surveillance activities to evaluate exposure or trends in adverse health outcomes; conducting biological indicators of exposure studies to assess exposure; and providing health education for health care providers and community members. This concludes the health consultation process for this site, unless additional information is obtained by ATSDR which, in the Agency’s opinion, indicates a need to revise or append the conclusions previously issued. You May Contact ATSDR TOLL FREE at 1-800-CDC-INFO or Visit our Home Page at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov HEALTH CONSULTATION Evaluation of Residential Soil Arsenic Action Level ANACONDA CO. SMELTER NPL SITE ANACONDA, DEER LODGE COUNTY, MONTANA EPA FACILITY ID: MTD093291656 Prepared By: US Department of Health and Human Services Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry Division of Health Assessment and Consultation Atlanta, Georgia 30333 Anaconda Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of 2008 Settlement of Clark Fork River Remediation and Natural Resource Damages Claims and Related Restoration Plans
    MONTANA DEPARTMENT Helping to Restore, Replace, and Preserve OF JUSTICE NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE PROGRAM 1301 LOCKEY AVE PO BOX 201425 the Natural Resources of Montana HELENA, MT 59620-1425 (406) 444-0205 Summary of 2008 Settlement of Clark Fork River Remediation and Natural Resource Damages Claims and Related Restoration Plans Introduction The State of Montana, the United States, and Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) have negotiated a new Consent Decree (CD) that will settle certain litigation, provide for the funding of the remedial action at the Clark Fork River (CFR) Operable Unit and provide for certain restoration actions at the three sites where the State has pending natural resource damages (NRD) claims, namely the Clark Fork River, Butte Area One, and the Smelter Hill Uplands. This CD was lodged with the federal court on February 7, 2008. There is also a second consent decree, involving only the State and ARCO, which was lodged at the same time. Public comment is being sought on this settlement. As part of this settlement, ARCO is paying the State approximately $168 million. ARCO is paying about $95 million for the remedial cleanup provided for in the EPA 2004 Record of Decision for the CFR site; this includes about $11.7 million in interest accruing since April of 2006. The remedial payment settles EPA and the State’s claims for response costs at the site, and will provide for DEQ implementation of the remedy with EPA oversight. The remediation payment will be made in two payments, one year apart; the first payment will most likely be in August or September 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Geochemistry and Stable Isotope Composition of the Berkeley Pit Lake and Surrounding Mine Waters, Butte, Montana
    Applied Geochemistry Applied Geochemistry 20 (2005) 2116–2137 www.elsevier.com/locate/apgeochem Geochemistry and stable isotope composition of the Berkeley pit lake and surrounding mine waters, Butte, Montana Damon A. Pellicori a,1, Christopher H. Gammons a,*, Simon R. Poulson b a Department of Geological Engineering, Montana Tech of The University of Montana, Butte, MT 59701, United States b Department of Geological Sciences and Engineering, University of Nevada-Reno, Reno, NV 89557-0138, United States Received 31 January 2005; accepted 28 July 2005 Editorial handling by R. Fuge Abstract Samples of mine water from Butte, Montana were collected for paired geochemical and stable isotopic analysis. The samples included two sets of depth profiles from the acidic Berkeley pit lake, deep groundwater from several mine shafts in the adjacent flooded underground mine workings, and the acidic Horseshoe Bend Spring. Beginning in July-2000, the spring was a major surface water input into the Berkeley pit lake. Vertical trends in major ions and heavy metals in the pit lake show major changes across a chemocline at 10–20 m depth. The chemocline most likely represents the boundary between pre-2000 and post-2000 lake water, with lower salinity, modified Horseshoe Bend Spring water on top of higher salinity lake water below. Based on stable isotope results, the deep pit lake has lost approximately 12% of its initial water to evaporation, while the shallow lake is up to 25% evaporated. The stable isotopic composition of SO4 in the pit lake is sim- ilar to that of Horseshoe Bend Spring, but differs markedly from SO4 in the surrounding flooded mine shafts.
    [Show full text]
  • Focus on Genetics Important Plant 2016 Plant Conservation Conference Areas for Montana by Peter Lesica, Clark Fork Chapter by Peter Lesica, Clark Fork Chapter
    Volume 29 No. 3 | Spring 2016 elseyaNewsletter of the Montana Native Plant Society Kelseya uniflora K ill. by Bonnie Heidel Approved: Two More Focus on Genetics Important Plant 2016 Plant Conservation Conference Areas for Montana By Peter Lesica, Clark Fork Chapter By Peter Lesica, Clark Fork Chapter he Montana Native Plant Society, along with the U.S. Forest Service, the MONTANA NOW HAS TWO NEW University of Montana Division of Biological Sciences, the Montana Natural IMPORTANT PLANT AREAS (IPAs), THeritage Program and the Natural Resources Conservation Service, hosted the approved during the February Plant Ninth Montana Plant Conservation Conference at the University of Montana in mid- Conservation Conference, bringing the February. More than 100 people attended, about half being MNPS members. total number of state IPAs to nine. Both The first day was dedicated to learning about population genetics and how new locales are in the southwest part of our molecular-based methods can help inform plant conservation. The three talks in the state — one is above treeline and the morning were conceptual in nature. Fred Allendorf from UM provided a refresher course other in a valley bottom. Descriptions on population genetics that helped provide a context for later talks. Loreen Allphin from of the new new IPAs, as well as of the Brigham Young University followed Fred, focusing on the importance of genetic variation previously approved sites, can be found to rare plant conservation and how using on the Montana Native Plant Society molecular markers can inform these efforts. new molecular-based website (http://www.mtnativeplants.org/ Matt Lavin from MSU ended the morning methods can help inform Important_Plant_Areas).
    [Show full text]
  • Long Term Changes in the Limnology and Geochemistry of the Berkeley Pit Lake, Butte, Montana Christopher H
    Mine Water and the Environment (2006) 25: 76–85 © IMWA Springer-Verlag 2006 Technical Article Long Term Changes in the Limnology and Geochemistry of the Berkeley Pit Lake, Butte, Montana Christopher H. Gammons1 and Terence E. Duaime2 1Dept of Geological Engineering, Montana Tech, Butte MT 59701, USA; 2Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, Butte MT 59701; corresponding author’s e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. The Berkeley pit lake in Butte, Montana is one of the largest accumulations of acid mine drainage in the world. The pit lake began filling in 1983, and continues to fill at a rate of roughly 10 million liters d-1. This paper details how changes in mining activities have led to changes in the rate of filling of the pit lake, as well as changes in its limnology and geochemistry. As of 2005, the Berkeley pit lake is meromictic, with lower conductivity water resting on top of higher conductivity water. This permanent stratification was set up by diversion of surface water - the so-called Horseshoe Bend Spring - into the pit during the period 2000 to 2003. However, the lake may have been holomictic prior to 2000, with seasonal top-to-bottom turnover events. The present mining company is pumping water from below the chemocline to a copper precipitation plant, after which time the Cu-depleted and Fe-enriched water is returned to the pit. Continued operation of this facility may eventually change the density gradient of the lake, with a return to holomictic conditions. A conceptual model illustrating some of the various physical, chemical, and microbial processes responsible for the unusually poor water quality of the Berkeley pit lake is presented.
    [Show full text]
  • Mine Name Date of Incident Last Name Year G N RR C W AABLE 11
    Mine Name Date of Incident Last Name Year G N RR C W AABLE 11/11/1909 AABLE 1909 MOUNTAIN CON FRANCIS ABBOTT 9/04/1924 ABBOTT 1924 LEONARD JOHN ABEGG 3/18/1907 ABEGG 1907 MINNIE HEALEY ISAAC ABRAHAM 2/26/1904 ABRAHAM 1904 BOSTON & MT JOHN ABRAMOVICH 10/07/1916 ABRAMOVICH 1916 BLACK ROCK WILLIAM ABT 4/22/1929 ABT 1929 BA&P RR GEORGE ACCOLA 8/30/1927 ACCOLA 1927 ANACONDA FIDENCIO ACEBEDO 8/15/1928 ACEBEDO 1928 NETTIE WILLIAM ACKLER 12/07/1923 ACKLER 1923 PITTSMONT SAM ADAMOVICH 1/31/1917 ADAMOVICH 1917 MOUNTAIN CON LASLIE ADAMS 2/14/1952 ADAMS 1952 TRAMWAY CHARLES ADAMS 4/05/1919 ADAMS 1919 TRAMWAY EDWARD ADAMS 7/16/1931 ADAMS 1931 ANACONDA JOHN ADVICH 7/26/1919 ADVICH 1919 PHILADELPHIA ALVIN AFFEN 12/16/1896 AFFEN 1896 PARROT WILLIAM AHERN 12/23/1906 AHERN 1906 BADGER TOIVO AHO 4/05/1925 AHO 1925 BELL DIAMOND DOMINICK AINARDI 3/15/1919 AINARDI 1919 PENNSYLVANIA JOHN ALEXANDER 3/26/1922 ALEXANDER 1922 ANSELMO JACOV ALEXSICH 11/25/1944 ALEXSICH 1944 GRANITE MTN FRANCIS ALLEN 6/08/1917 ALLEN 1917 HIBERNIA COLMAN ALLEN 6/25/1921 ALLEN 1921 MOUNTAIN CON PETER ALLEN 11/24/1924 ALLEN 1924 SEYMOUR MONTAGUE ALLEN 9/03/1924 ALLEN 1924 UNIDENTIFIED MINE JAMES ALLEN 9/27/1891 ALLEN 1891 RARUS FRANK ALOTATO 10/06/1905 ALOTATO 1905 PENNSYLVANIA GEORGE ALQIRE 4/30/1915 ALQIRE 1915 MOUNTAIN CON WALTER ALTONEN 11/17/1956 ALTONEN 1956 LEONARD FRANK AMBROSE 8/21/1927 AMBROSE 1927 BADGER JULES AMIET 8/10/1931 AMIET 1931 ANACONDA SMELTER KNUTE AMUNDSON 2/11/1916 AMUNDSON 1916 STEWARD MICK ANDERLY 6/19/1930 ANDERLY 1930 ANACONDA SMELTER JOHN ANDERSON 6/21/1916
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Macroinvertebrate Community Recovery in Post Restoration Silver Bow Creek, Montana
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2010 Assessing Macroinvertebrate Community Recovery in Post Restoration Silver Bow Creek, Montana Sean Patrick Sullivan The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Sullivan, Sean Patrick, "Assessing Macroinvertebrate Community Recovery in Post Restoration Silver Bow Creek, Montana" (2010). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 64. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/64 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ASSESSING MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY RECOVERY IN POST RESTORATION SILVER BOW CREEK, MONTANA By SEAN PATRICK SULLIVAN Bachelor of Arts, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana, 2003 Thesis Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Studies, Environmental Science The University of Montana Missoula, MT May 2010 Approved by: Perry Brown, Associate Provost for Graduate Education Graduate School Dr. Vicki Watson Committee Chair Environmental Studies Dr. Lisa Eby Wildlife Biology Dr. Solomon Harrar Mathematical Sciences Sullivan, Sean, Master of Science, Spring 2010 Environmental Studies ASSESSING MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY RECOVERY IN POST RESTORATION SILVER BOW CREEK, MONTANA Chairperson: Dr. Vicki Watson Since the turn of the twentieth century, mining activities have contaminated the floodplain and streambed of Silver Bow Creek, Montana, resulting in a streambed devoid of life and severely contaminated with heavy metals.
    [Show full text]
  • Promoting the Berkeley Pit and Industrial Heritage in Butte, Montana
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by UNL | Libraries University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History History, Department of 2012 Toxic Tourism: Promoting the Berkeley Pit and Industrial Heritage in Butte, Montana Bridget R. Barry University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/historydiss Part of the Nature and Society Relations Commons, and the United States History Commons Barry, Bridget R., "Toxic Tourism: Promoting the Berkeley Pit and Industrial Heritage in Butte, Montana" (2012). Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History. 50. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/historydiss/50 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the History, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. TOXIC TOURISM: PROMOTING THE BERKELEY PIT AND INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE IN BUTTE, MONTANA by Bridget R. Barry A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Master of Arts Major: History Under the Supervision of Professors Andrew R. Graybill and Margaret D. Jacobs Lincoln, Nebraska May, 2012 TOXIC TOURISM: PROMOTING THE BERKELEY PIT AND INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE IN BUTTE, MONTANA Bridget Rose Barry, M.A. University of Nebraska, 2010 Advisers: Andrew R. Graybill and Margaret D. Jacobs Butte, Montana’s Berkeley Pit and its deadly water are a part of the country’s largest Superfund site.
    [Show full text]