<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:creator>J. Thomas Nash</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>1999</dc:date>
  <dc:description>Field observations, sampling of mine dumps and mine drainage waters, and&#13;
laboratory studies of dump materials have been made at mining areas deemed to be on&#13;
public lands administered by the U. S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in the Upper&#13;
Animas River watershed. Results of chemical analyses of dump materials, leachates of&#13;
those materials, and surface waters draining mines or dumps provide indications of where&#13;
acid is generated or consumed, and metal concentrations below mines or dumps.&#13;
Information on sites previously identified as needing reclamation is reviewed and&#13;
available geochemical information is used to rank 26 sites into four classes of priority for&#13;
reclamation.&#13;
Although there are more than a thousand mining sites (productive mines and&#13;
prospects) on BLM lands in the Upper Animas River watershed study area, the majority&#13;
are very small (less than about 70 cubic yards of dump material), are more than 2 miles&#13;
from a major stream, or so inaccessible as to prohibit reclamation. In the summers of&#13;
1997 and 1998 approximately 200 sites were observed and more than 100 of these that&#13;
appeared to have the potential to geochemically impact the watershed were examined&#13;
more carefully and sampled. Building upon the prior work of the BLM and associated&#13;
agencies, this work attempted to identify the most significant sources of mine-related&#13;
contamination and to rank those sites as to priority for reclamation. These most&#13;
significant mining areas have been examined within a geologic framework and were&#13;
evaluated by multiple criteria, including tendency to generate acid and release toxic&#13;
metals, observed damage to vegetation, potential to release metals based on leach tests,&#13;
and likelihood of transport into streams of the watershed. No single measurable&#13;
parameter, such as metal concentration, can be used to rank the sites. Rather, subjective&#13;
estimates are required to evaluate combinations or interactions among several parameters.&#13;
The most subjective estimate, while ranking feasibility of reclamation, is the relative&#13;
amounts of naturally occurring metals and acidity and mine-related contamination at each&#13;
mining area. Mitigation of natural contributions at mines or unmined areas is beyond the&#13;
scope of my studies, but should be considered when planning reclamation. Available&#13;
information for the 26 priority sites is adequate for ranking, but at some sites additional&#13;
information on groundwater conditions is needed for a more complete site evaluation.</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.3133/ofr99323</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey,</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Geochemical investigations and interim recommendations for priority abandoned mine sites, BLM lands, upper Animas River watershed, San Juan County, Colorado</dc:title>
  <dc:type>reports</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>