Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · sir20085032

Quality of water and sediment in streams affected by historical mining, and quality of Mine Tailings, in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo Basin, Big Bend Area of the United States and Mexico, August 2002

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the International Boundary and Water Commission - U.S. and Mexican Sections, the National Park Service, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales in Mexico, the Area de Proteccion de Flora y Fauna Canon de Santa Elena in Mexico, and the Area de Proteccion de Flora y Fauna Maderas del Carmen in Mexico, collected samples of stream water, streambed sediment, and mine tailings during August 2002 for a study to determine whether trace elements from abandoned mines in the area in and around Big Bend National Park have affected the water and sediment quality in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo Basin of the United States and Mexico. Samples were collected from eight sites on the main stem of the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo, four Rio Grande/Rio Bravo tributary sites downstream from abandoned mines or mine-tailing sites, and 11 mine-tailing sites. Mines in the area were operated to produce fluorite, germanium, iron, lead, mercury, silver, and zinc during the late 1800s through at least the late 1970s. Moderate (relatively neutral) pHs in stream-water samples collected at the 12 Rio Grande/Rio Bravo main-stem and tributary sites indicate that water is well mixed, diluted, and buffered with respect to the solubility of trace elements. The highest sulfate concentrations were in water samples from tributaries draining the Terlingua mining district. Only the sample from the Rough Run Draw site exceeded the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards general-use protection criterion for sulfate. All chloride and dissolved solids concentrations in water samples were less than the general-use protection criteria. Aluminum, copper, mercury, nickel, selenium, and zinc were detected in all water samples for which each element was analyzed. Cadmium, chromium, and lead were detected in samples less frequently, and silver was not detected in any of the samples. None of the sample concentrations of aluminum, cadmium, chromium, nickel, selenium, and zinc exceeded the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards criteria for aquatic life-use protection or human health. The only trace elements detected in the water samples at concentrations exceeding the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards criterion for human health (fish consumption use) was lead at one site and mercury at 10 of 12 sites. Relatively high mercury concentrations distributed throughout the area might indicate sources of mercury in addition to abandoned mining areas. Streambed-sediment samples were collected from 12 sites and analyzed for 44 major and trace elements. In general, the trace elements detected in streambed-sediment samples were low in concentration, interpreted as consistent with background concentrations. Concentrations at two sites, however, were elevated compared to Texas Commission on Environmental Quality criteria. Concentrations of antimony, arsenic, cadmium, lead, silver, and zinc in the sample from San Carlos Creek downstream from La Esperanza (San Carlos) Mine exceeded the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality screening levels for sediment. The sample from Rough Run Draw, downstream from the Study Butte Mine, also showed elevated concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, and lead, but these concentrations were much lower than those in the San Carlos Creek sample and did not exceed screening levels. Elevated concentrations of multiple trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from San Carlos Creek and Rough Run Draw indicate that San Carlos Creek, and probably Rough Run Draw, have been adversely affected by mining activities. Fourteen mine-tailing samples from 11 mines were analyzed for 25 major and trace elements. All trace elements except selenium and thallium were detected in one or more samples. The highest lead concentrations were detected in tailings samples from the Boquillas, Puerto Rico, La Esperanza (San Carlos), and Tres Marias Mines, as might be expected because the tailings ar

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 28.25° to 30.5° latitude; -104° to -101.08333333333333° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Rebecca B. Lambert, Christine M. Kolbe, Wayne Belzer. 2008. Quality of water and sediment in streams affected by historical mining, and quality of Mine Tailings, in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo Basin, Big Bend Area of the United States and Mexico, August 2002. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20085032

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗