DOCSLIB.ORG

Mainstem Channel and Bridge Crossings Ravalli County, Montana

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mainstem Channel and Bridge Crossings Ravalli County, Montana Bitterroot River Geomorphic FINAL Summary: Mainstem Channel and Bridge Crossings Ravalli County, Montana Karin Boyd Applied Geomorphology, Inc. 211 N Grand Ave, Suite C Bozeman, MT 59715 406-587-6352 Prepared for: Montana Department of Transportation Tony Thatcher DTM Consulting, Inc. 2701 Prospect Avenue 211 N Grand Ave, Suite J PO Box 201001 Bozeman, MT 59715 Helena, MT 59620-1001 406-585-5322 May 1, 2008 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary................................................................................................ 1 2.0 Introduction............................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Project Objectives............................................................................................... 3 2.2 Defining Channel Stability.................................................................................. 4 2.3 Primary Findings................................................................................................. 6 2.4 Document Organization...................................................................................... 7 2.5 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................. 8 2.6 Disclaimer........................................................................................................... 8 3.0 Physical and Biological Setting .............................................................................. 9 3.1 Geology............................................................................................................. 10 3.2 Hydrology ......................................................................................................... 10 3.3 Geomorphology ................................................................................................ 11 3.4 Riparian Vegetation.......................................................................................... 15 3.5 Fisheries............................................................................................................ 15 3.6 Water Quality.................................................................................................... 16 4.0 Geomorphic Assessment Methodology ................................................................ 19 4.1 Base Maps......................................................................................................... 19 4.2 Pre-Field Assessment and Project Reach Characterization .............................. 19 4.3 Project Reach Inventory.................................................................................... 19 4.3.1 Bank Erosion Severity .............................................................................. 20 4.3.2 Bank Protection –Inferred Purpose........................................................... 20 4.4 Bridge Assessment............................................................................................ 20 4.4.1 Historic Photo Analysis ............................................................................ 21 4.4.2 Channel Stability Assessment................................................................... 21 4.4.3 Historic Cross-sections ............................................................................. 25 4.4.4 Channel Geometry.................................................................................... 25 4.5 Channel Profile ................................................................................................. 25 4.6 Geographic Information System (GIS) Applications........................................ 25 5.0 Geomorphology of the Mainstem Bitterroot River............................................... 27 5.1 Slope and Sinuosity........................................................................................... 29 5.2 Floodplain Width and Belt Width..................................................................... 30 5.3 Level I Channel Type........................................................................................ 32 5.4 Diversions ......................................................................................................... 33 5.5 Large Woody Debris......................................................................................... 34 5.6 Bank Erosion..................................................................................................... 35 5.7 Bank Armor....................................................................................................... 37 6.0 Geomorphic Conditions at Assessed Bridges....................................................... 41 6.1 Channel Profile and Pattern.............................................................................. 41 6.2 Floodplain Encroachment ................................................................................. 45 6.3 Active Channel Encroachment.......................................................................... 48 6.4 Channel Stability............................................................................................... 50 6.5 Cross Section .................................................................................................... 53 6.5.1 Silver Bridge ............................................................................................. 53 6.5.2 Woodside Bridge....................................................................................... 54 6.5.3 Victor Bridge............................................................................................. 54 AGI and DTM Bitterroot River Geomorphic Summary i 6.5.4 Bell Crossing............................................................................................. 55 6.5.5 Stevensville Bridge ................................................................................... 56 6.5.6 Florence Bridge......................................................................................... 57 6.5.7 Cross Section Summary............................................................................ 57 6.6 Bank Erosion..................................................................................................... 58 6.7 Bank Armor....................................................................................................... 60 6.8 Site-Specific Bridge Summaries....................................................................... 60 6.8.1 Silver Bridge (RM 55.9) ........................................................................... 62 6.8.2 Woodside (RM 52.9)................................................................................. 66 6.8.3 Victor (RM 44.3)....................................................................................... 68 6.8.4 Bell Crossing (RM 41.4)........................................................................... 72 6.8.5 Stevensville (RM 34.4) ............................................................................. 75 6.8.6 Florence (RM 23.8)................................................................................... 78 7.0 Conceptual Strategies to Minimize Geomorphic Impacts at Bridges ................... 81 7.1 Minimizing Encroachment................................................................................ 81 7.1.1 Active Channel Encroachment.................................................................. 81 7.1.2 Floodplain Isolation .................................................................................. 82 7.1.3 Secondary Channel Continuity ................................................................. 82 7.2 Maintaining alignment at bridges ..................................................................... 83 7.2.1 Tapering the Braid Belt to Improve Long-Term Angle of Approach....... 84 7.3 Minimizing Habitat Loss on Armored Banks ................................................... 87 7.4 Large Woody Debris Passage ........................................................................... 88 7.5 Maintaining Fish Passage.................................................................................. 89 7.6 Removal of Derelict Features ........................................................................... 89 8.0 References............................................................................................................. 91 Appendix A. Glossary of Terms .......................................................................... 95 Appendix B. Project Reach Maps (Plates)........................................................... 99 Appendix C. Historic Aerial Photo Sheets at Bridges ....................................... 101 List of Figures Figure 3-1. Project location map........................................................................................ 9 Figure 3-2. Mean annual hydrograph, Bitterroot River at Darby USGS Gage 12344000. ................................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 3-3. Annual peak discharges, Bitterroot River at Darby 1940-2006; USGS Gage 12344000................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 5-1. Map of project reach showing Bitterroot River morphological zones (Gaueman, 1977)....................................................................................................... 28 Figure 5-2. Longitudinal channel profile of the main stem Bitterroot River, Ravalli County MT...............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • December 18, 2020 Fish Consumption Guidance Updated for Portions Of
    Media contact: Trevor Selch, FWP Fisheries Pollution Biologist, 406-444-5686 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 18, 2020 Fish consumption guidance updated for portions of Clark Fork, Bitterroot and Blackfoot Rivers in western Montana MISSOULA – The State of Montana Fish Guidance Board, which includes Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) and the Departments of Environmental Quality (DEQ), and Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS), has updated the fish consumption guidance for all species of fish on a 148-mile stretch of the Clark Fork River and tributaries in western Montana in response to new research results. Guidance now recommends avoiding consumption of all species of fish from the Clark Fork River’s confluence with the Bitterroot River, just west of Missoula, to the confluence with the Flathead River, near Paradise. Slightly revised guidance is also in place for rainbow trout and northern pike on an upstream section of the Clark Fork and for the Blackfoot and Bitterroot Rivers. New data was collected to assess chemical contaminants including dioxins, furans, and PCBs in fish tissue in a study area on the Clark Fork that extended from approximately 30 miles upstream of Missoula to 100 miles downstream. Testing in the area is underway as part of water quality monitoring around the former Smurfit-Stone Container mill site. Upon review of the study results, new guidance was issued based on high levels of contaminants in the fish tissue. The source of all the contaminants found in the fish has not been attributed. The study only looked at contaminant concentrations found in the muscle tissues of northern pike and rainbow trout, but the same “Avoid” guidance extends to all species present in the Clark Fork River near Missoula (such as brown trout, whitefish, small- and large-mouth bass, northern pikeminnow, and sucker species) because similar food habits, habitat use, and life- span suggest they could also contain chemical concentrations at potentially dangerous levels.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Annual Spring Meeting Macey Center New Mexico Tech Socorro, NM
    New Mexico Geological Society Proceedings Volume 2015 Annual Spring Meeting Macey Center New Mexico Tech Socorro, NM NEW MEXICO GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY 2015 SPRING MEETING Friday, April 24, 2015 Macey Center NM Tech Campus Socorro, New Mexico 87801 NMGS EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE President: Mary Dowse Vice President: David Ennis Treasurer: Matthew Heizler Secretary: Susan Lucas Kamat Past President: Virginia McLemore 2015 SPRING MEETING COMMITTEE General Chair: Matthew Heizler Technical Program Chair: Peter Fawcett Registration Chair: Connie Apache ON-SITE REGISTRATION Connie Apache WEB SUPPORT Adam Read ORAL SESSION CHAIRS Peter Fawcett, Matt Zimmerer, Lewis Land, Spencer Lucas, Matt Heizler Session 1: Theme Session - Session 2: Volcanology and Paleoclimate: Is the Past the Key to Proterozoic Tectonics: the Future? Auditorium: 8:45 AM - 10:45 AM Galena Room: 8:45 AM - 10:45 AM Chair: Peter Fawcett Chair: Matthew Zimmerer GLOBAL ICE AGES, REGIONAL TECTONISM U-PB GEOCHRONOLOGY OF ASH FALL TUFFS AND LATE PALEOZOIC SEDIMENTATION IN IN THE MCRAE FORMATION (UPPER NEW MEXICO CRETACEOUS), SOUTH-CENTRAL NEW MEXICO — Spencer G. Lucas and Karl Krainer — Greg Mack, Jeffrey M. Amato, and Garland 8:45 AM - 9:00 AM R. Upchurch 8:45 AM - 9:00 AM URANIUM ISOTOPE EVIDENCE FOR PERVASIVE TIMING, GEOCHEMISTRY, AND DISTRIBUTION MARINE ANOXIA DURING THE LATE OF MAGMATISM IN THE RIO GRANDE RIFT ORDOVICIAN MASS EXTINCTION. — Rediet Abera, Brad Sion, Jolante van Wijk, — Rickey W Bartlett, Maya Elrick, Yemane Gary Axen, Dan Koning, Richard Chamberlin, Asmerom, Viorel Atudorei, and Victor Polyak Evan Gragg, Kyle Murray, and Jeff Dobbins 9:00 AM - 9:15 AM 9:00 AM - 9:15 AM FAUNAL AND FLORAL DYNAMICS DURING THE N-S EXTENSION AND BIMODAL MAGMATISM EARLY PALEOCENE: THE RECORD FROM THE DURING EARLY RIO GRANDE RIFTING: SAN JUAN BASIN, NEW MEXICO INSIGHTS FROM E-W STRIKING DIKES AT — Thomas E.
    [Show full text]
  • Derek Decker, Senior Offensive
    Derek Decker, senior offensive gua Other area attractions include “A Carousel for Missoula” (one of the first fully hand-carved carousels to be built in America since the Great Depression), Garnet Ghost Town, the National Bison Range, the Ninemile Remount Depot and Ranger Station, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation Wildlife Visitor Center, and the Smokejumper Visitor Center. Missoula Parks and Recreation and the YMCA provide a variety of recreational opportunities in basketball, soccer, softball, tennis, volleyball, and ice skating. Missoula also serves as a center for education, health care, retail, and the arts. The University of Montana provides educa­ tional opportunities for more than 13,000 college students. Com­ munity Medical Center and St. Patrick Hospital, along with many clinics, make Missoula one of the state’s premier health care com­ munities. The Missoula community supports the arts in all its forms: the­ Summertime in Missoula, the Downtown Association’s Out to Lunch ater productions, dance, art, and music. The Missoula Children’s weekly series. Theater, founded in 1970, moved into a renovated building near Birthplace and hometown of author Norman McLean, who wrote campus and produces plays and musicals by national and local A River Runs Through It, Missoula is also known as the “Garden playwrights for both adults and children. The theater also has an City” for its dense trees and lush green landscape. Missoula is International Tour Project, taking theatrical productions to audi­ nestled in the heart of the Northern Rockies in western Montana. ences outside the Missoula area. The Garden City Ballet and A community of approximately 66,000 residents, Missoula lies in a Missoula Symphony, which is in its 50th season, bring performances mountain forest setting where five valleys converge.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Clark Fork River Biomonitoring Macroinvertebrate Community
    Report Clark Fork River Biomonitoring: Macroinvertebrate Community Assessments for 2019 Prepared by: David Stagliano Montana Biological Survey/Stag Benthics Prepared for: Boise, Idaho Submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 June 2020 Executive Summary The upper Clark Fork River (CFR) Basin in western at Kohrs Bend (Station 10) to 85 percent at SBC Montana contains four contiguous Superfund below Warm Springs (Station 4.5) and the operable units that have been undergoing various Blackfoot River site (Station 14) (Figure ES-1). remediation activities for decades. Since 1986, Both SBC sites (stations 2.5 and 4.5) were rated as annual benthic macroinvertebrate-based (BMI) slightly impaired. Slight biological impairment monitoring has been performed at 13 CFR stream from nutrients was evident at two CFR stations reaches with ongoing or future remedial actions near Deer Lodge (8.5 and 9.0) and near Missoula (McGuire Consulting 1986-2017; Montana (Station 15.5), but the former sites have improved Biological Survey/Stag Benthics 2017-Present). markedly since 2017. The lower Blackfoot River Monitoring extended from Silver Bow Creek (SBC) (Station 14) was ranked slightly impaired again in sites upstream of the Warm Springs Ponds, 2019, likely due to metal related stressors. downstream through the upper CFR, bracketing During 2019, environmental conditions in SBC at the former Milltown Dam site to below the Opportunity (Station 2.5) improved after CFR-Bitterroot River confluence. In addition to experiencing declines in integrity scores in 2018. providing current assessments of ecological Likewise, SBC below the Warm Springs Ponds conditions, these sampling events extend the (Station 4.5) remained slightly impaired but BMI long-term data set for evaluating water quality integrity improved over 2017 scores.
    [Show full text]
  • Birding in the Missoula and Bitterroot Valleys
    Birding in the Missoula and Bitterroot Valleys Five Valleys and Bitterroot Audubon Society Chapters are grassroots volunteer organizations of Montana Audubon and the National Audubon Society. We promote understanding, respect, and enjoyment of birds and the natural world through education, habitat protection, and environmental advocacy. Five Valleys Bitterroot Audubon Society Audubon Society P.O. Box 8425 P.O. Box 326 Missoula, MT 59807 Hamilton, MT 59840 www.fvaudubon.org/ www.bitterrootaudubonorg/ Montana Audubon P.O. Box 595 Helena, MT 59624 406-443-3949 www.mtaudubon.org Status W Sp Su F Bird Species of West-central Montana (most vagrants excluded) _ Harlequin Duck B r r r Relative abundance in suitable habitat by season are: _ Long-tailed Duck t r r c - common to abundant, usually found on every visit in _ Surf Scoter t r r r moderate to large numbers _ White-winged Scoter t r r r u - uncommon, usually present in low numbers but may be _ Common Goldeneye B c c c c _ missed Barrow’s Goldeneye B u c c c _ o - occasional, seen only a few times during the season, not Bufflehead B o c u c _ Hooded Merganser B o c c c present in all suitable habitat _ Common Merganser B c c c c r - rare, one to low numbers occur but not every year _ Red-breasted Merganser t o o _ Status: Ruddy Duck B c c c _ Osprey B c c c B - Direct evidence of breeding _ Bald Eagle B c c c c b - Indirect evidence of breeding _ Northern Harrier B u c c c t - No evidence of breeding _ Sharp-shinned Hawk B u u u u _ Cooper’s Hawk B u u u u Season of occurrence: _ Northern Goshawk B u u u u W - Winter, mid-November to mid-February _ Swainson’s Hawk B u u u Sp - Spring, mid-February to mid-May _ Red-tailed Hawk B c c c c Su - Summer, mid-May to mid-August _ Ferruginous Hawk t r r r F - Fall, mid-August to mid-November _ Rough-legged Hawk t c c c _ Golden Eagle B u u u u This list follows the seventh edition of the AOU check-list.
    [Show full text]
  • A Groundwater Sapping in Stream Piracy
    Darryll T. Pederson, Department of energy to the system as increased logic settings, such as in a delta, stream Geosciences, University of Nebraska, recharge causes groundwater levels to piracy is a cyclic event. The final act of Lincoln, NE 68588-0340, USA rise, accelerating stream piracy. stream piracy is likely a rapid event that should be reflected as such in the geo- INTRODUCTION logic record. Understanding the mecha- The term stream piracy brings to mind nisms for stream piracy can lead to bet- ABSTRACT an action of forcible taking, leaving the ter understanding of the geologic record. Stream piracy describes a water-diver- helpless and plundered river poorer for Recognition that stream piracy has sion event during which water from one the experience—a takeoff on stories of occurred in the past is commonly based stream is captured by another stream the pirates of old. In an ironic sense, on observations such as barbed tribu- with a lower base level. Its past occur- two schools of thought are claiming vil- taries, dry valleys, beheaded streams, rence is recognized by unusual patterns lain status. Lane (1899) thought the term and elbows of capture. A marked of drainage, changes in accumulating too violent and sudden, and he used change of composition of accumulating sediment, and cyclic patterns of sediment “stream capture” to describe a ground- sediment in deltas, sedimentary basins, deposition. Stream piracy has been re- water-sapping–driven event, which he terraces, and/or biotic distributions also ported on all time and size scales, but its envisioned to be less dramatic and to be may signify upstream piracy (Bishop, mechanisms are controversial.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Fishing Regulations
    MONTANA FISHING REGULATIONS 20March 1, 2018 — F1ebruary 828, 2019 Fly fishing the Missouri River. Photo by Jason Savage For details on how to use these regulations, see page 2 fwp.mt.gov/fishing With your help, we can reduce poaching. MAKE THE CALL: 1-800-TIP-MONT FISH IDENTIFICATION KEY If you don’t know, let it go! CUTTHROAT TROUT are frequently mistaken for Rainbow Trout (see pictures below): 1. Turn the fish over and look under the jaw. Does it have a red or orange stripe? If yes—the fish is a Cutthroat Trout. Carefully release all Cutthroat Trout that cannot be legally harvested (see page 10, releasing fish). BULL TROUT are frequently mistaken for Brook Trout, Lake Trout or Brown Trout (see below): 1. Look for white edges on the front of the lower fins. If yes—it may be a Bull Trout. 2. Check the shape of the tail. Bull Trout have only a slightly forked tail compared to the lake trout’s deeply forked tail. 3. Is the dorsal (top) fin a clear olive color with no black spots or dark wavy lines? If yes—the fish is a Bull Trout. Carefully release Bull Trout (see page 10, releasing fish). MONTANA LAW REQUIRES: n All Bull Trout must be released immediately in Montana unless authorized. See Western District regulations. n Cutthroat Trout must be released immediately in many Montana waters. Check the district standard regulations and exceptions to know where you can harvest Cutthroat Trout. NATIVE FISH Westslope Cutthroat Trout Species of Concern small irregularly shaped black spots, sparse on belly Average Size: 6”–12” cutthroat slash— spots
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Setback Handout 12-10-07.Pmd
    Streamside Setbacks Protecting People, Property, and Montana’s Streams and Rivers with Specific Information on Ravalli County, Montana Montana’s future depends on clean water. One of the significant threats to our water quality is the increasing number of developments—including homes, parking lots, lawns, roads, and other developments—located next to our streams and rivers. Stream setbacks offer an intelligent solution that protects clean water, a homeowner’s privacy, and the natural landscapes that harbor the fish and wildlife that everyone in the state of Montana enjoys. Setbacks also reduce the risk of losing investments to flooding and erosion— and they increase property values. Much of the information contained in this handout is based on A Planning Guide for Protecting Montana’s Wetlands and Riparian Areas (Ellis and Richard, 2003). SETBACKS AND PUBLIC HEALTH The main way that stream setbacks address public health, is by filtering out pollutants from our water. Polluted runoff—which occurs when rainfall or snowmelt washes pollutants such as sediment, nutrients, heavy metals, pesticides, and salt into streams, lakes, and ground water—is the number one source of pollution to the waters of our state (DEQ, 2007a). What Setbacks Do for Clean Water: All Montanans depend upon clean water that comes from ground water or surface "Development along rivers and water. Wetlands and riparian areas act like a filter to reduce streams that destroys protective the amount of pollutants that enter streams, ground water, riparian areas is possibly the and—ultimately—drinking water, in runoff originating from single most urgent ecosystem sources such as city streets, lawns, construction sites, and threat facing Montana around buildings.
    [Show full text]
  • Nɫʔay \ PLACE of SMALL BULL TROUT the Missoula Area and The
    Nɫʔay | PLACE OF SMALL BULL TROUT The Missoula Area and the Séliš & Ql̓ispé People Ep Stm̓tú HAS CURRANTS Mill Creek Q͏ʷʔéɫ Snɫp̓ú Nšiy̓tétk͏ʷs REFERRING TO WATER COMING-OUT-INTO-THE-OPEN’S CREEK or millennia, the Missoula Valley has been a place of great importance Frenchtown area O’Keefe Creek to our people, the Séliš (SEH-leesh, also known as ‘Salish’ or ‘Flathead’) Ql̓ispé F and (Kah-lee-SPEH, also known as ‘Kalispel’ or ‘Pend d’Oreille’). Snɫp̓ú(pƛ̓m̓) PLACE WHERE YOU COME OUT This is a vital part of our aboriginal territories, a landscape filled with Base of Evaro Hill cultural meaning, reflected in the selected place-names on this sign. Some names come from our creation stories. Others refer to our traditional way N̓eslétk͏ʷ of life and the resources, such as bull trout, that were particularly abundant TWO WATERS Lavalle & Butler Creeks here. The confluence of Rattlesnake Creek and the Clark Fork River is known N̓ml̓šé Bigcrane family at annual bitterroot dig, 2009. Courtesy SQCC. ʔamtqné PLACE OF COTTONWOODS as Nɫʔaycčstm, meaning Place of Small Bull Trout. The shortened form of SOMETHING SITTING ON TOP GRASS VALLEY Site above Cyr Gulch this name, Nɫʔay, is used by Salish speakers to refer to the city of Missoula. Ništétk͏ʷ Nɫɫq̓esuʔl̓m LITTLE WIDE CREEK YOU The west side of the valley, including the prairies around Fort Missoula, WATER IN A DEEP VALLEY Člmé Deep Creek CAN CROSS was the greatest bitterroot digging ground in TREE-LIMB-STRIPPED-OFF Grant Creek Council Grove all of our vast aboriginal territories. Until the Nɫʔay Sewɫk͏ʷ͏s Sx͏ʷtpqéyn SMALL BULL TROUT’S WATERS Ep Sč̓iɫt 1960s, when development made it impossible to Rattlesnake Creek HAS WHITE CLAY PLACE WHERE Marshall Creek Nmesulétk͏ʷ SOMETHING IS CUT OFF continue, our people gathered here every spring AND COMES TO A POINT Ṇaaycčstm Sewɫk͏ʷ͏s SHIMMERING COLD WATERS Missoula Valley Nmq̓͏ʷe BULL TROUT’S WATERS to offer prayers of thanks for this staple food and Middle Clark Fork River Clark Fork-Blackfoot Rivers HUMPED MOUNTAIN dig for several weeks.
    [Show full text]
  • FLUSHING FLOWS D.W. Reiser, M.P. Ramey and T.A. Wesche Book
    FLUSHING FLOWS D.W. Reiser, M.P. Ramey and T.A. Wesche 1990 Book Chapter WWRC - 90 - 15 Chapter 4 in Alternatives in Regulated River Management J.A. Gore and G.E. Petts, Editors CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, Florida 91 Chapter 4 FLUSHING FLOWS Dudley W . Reiser. Michael P. Ramey. and Thomas A . Wesche TABLE OF CONTENTS I . Introduction and Background .................................................... 92 II . Channel Response to Flow Regulation ........................................... 93 A . Deposition of Sediments in Regulated Streams ...........................93 B . Channel Changes in Regulated Sbeams .................................. 98 1. Climate ........................................................... 99 2. Geology and Soils ................................................99 3. Land Use ........................................................ 100 4 . Streamflow and How Regulation ................................ 100 5 . Case Studies ..................................................... 101 m . Existing Flushing Flow Methodologies ......................................... 102 A. Hydrologic Event Methods .............................................. 102 B . Channel Morphology Methods .......................................... 107 C . Sediment Transport Mechanics Methods ................................ 107 1 . Threshold of Movement ......................................... 108 2. Sediment Transport Functions ................................... 111 a . Meyer-PeterIMuller Formula ............................. 111 b . Einstein’s
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeology and Aquifer Sensitivity of the Bitterroot Valley, Ravalli County, Montana
    science for a changing world ofc In cooperation with the RAVALLI COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS and the BITTERROOT CONSERVATION DISTRICT Hydrogeology and Aquifer Sensitivity of the Bitterroot Valley, Ravalli County, Montana Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4219 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Hydrogeology and Aquifer Sensitivity of the Bitterroot Valley, Ravalli County, Montana By David W. Briar and DeAnn M. Dutton Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4219 In cooperation with the RAVALLI COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS and the BITTERROOT CONSERVATION DISTRICT U.S. Department of the Interior BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm name in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government Helena, Montana February 2000 For additional information write to: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey 3162 Bozeman Avenue Helena, MT 59601-6456 Copies of this report may be purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Box 25286 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Page Abstract.................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction......................................................................................^^ 2 Purpose and scope.....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B-Bitterroot River Watershed Description
    Bitterroot Temperature & Tributary Sediment TMDLs – Appendix B APPENDIX B - BITTERROOT RIVER WATERSHED DESCRIPTION 2011 Prepared for and by: Montana Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Planning Bureau 1520 E. Sixth Avenue P.O. Box 200901 Helena, MT 59620-0901 8/17/11 FINAL B-1 Bitterroot Temperature & Tributary Sediment TMDLs – Appendix B 8/17/11 FINAL B-2 Bitterroot Temperature & Tributary Sediment TMDLs – Appendix B TABLE OF CONTENTS B1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... B-5 B2.0 Physical Characteristics ...................................................................................................................... B-7 B2.1 Location.......................................................................................................................................... B-7 B2.2 Ecoregions ...................................................................................................................................... B-7 B2.3 Topography .................................................................................................................................... B-7 B2.4 Geology .......................................................................................................................................... B-7 B2.5 Soils ................................................................................................................................................ B-8 B2.6 Surface Water
    [Show full text]