A Guide to Surface Features Related to Underground Coal Mining

The purpose of this guide is to assist investigators conducting geologic hazard assessments with the understanding, detection, and characterization of surface features related to subsidence from underground coal mining. Subsidence related to underground coal mining can present serious problems to new and/or existing infrastructure, utilities, and facilities. For example, heavy equipment driving over the ground surface during construction processes may punch into voids created by sinkholes or cracks, resulting in injury to persons and property. Abandoned underground mines also may be full of water, and if punctured, can flood nearby areas. Furthermore, the integrity of rigid structures such as buildings, dams and bridges may be compromised if mining subsidence results in differential movement at the ground surface. Subsidence of the ground surface is a phenomenon associated with the removal of material at depth, and may occur coincident with mining, gradually over time, or sometimes suddenly, long after mining operations have ceased (Gray and Bruhn, 1984). The spatial limits of underground coal mines may extend for great distances beyond the surface operations of a mine, in some cases more than 10 miles for an individual mine. When conducting geologic hazard assessments, several remote investigation methods can be used to observe surface features related to underground mining subsidence. LiDAR-derived DEMs are generally the most useful method available for identifying these features because the bare earth surface can be viewed. However, due to limitations in the availability of LiDAR data, other methods often need to be considered when investigating surface features related to underground coal mining subsidence, such as Google Earth and aerial imagery. Mine maps, when available, can be viewed in tandem with these datasets, potentially improving the confidence of any possible mining subsidence-related features observed remotely. However, maps for both active and abandoned mines may be incomplete or unavailable. Therefore, it is important to be able to recognize possible surface features related to underground mining subsidence. This guide provides examples of surface subsidence features related to the two principal underground coal mining methods used in the United States: longwall mining and room and pillar mining. The depth and type of mining, geologic conditions, hydrologic conditions, and time are all factors that may influence the type of features that manifest at the surface. This guide provides investigators a basic understanding about the size, character and conditions of various surface features that occur as a result of underground mining subsidence.

Geomorphic Impacts of the 2013 Colorado Front Range Flood on Black Canyon Creek and North Fork Big Thompson River

In September 2013, the Colorado Front Range experienced a five-day storm that brought record-breaking precipitation to the region. As a consequence, many Front Range streams experienced flooding, leading to erosion, debris flows, bank failures and channel incision. I compare the effects that debris flows and flooding have on the channel bar frequency, frequency and location of wood accumulation, and on the shape and size of the channel along two flood impacted reaches located near Estes Park and Glen Haven, Colorado within Rocky Mountain National Park and Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest: Black Canyon Creek (BCC) and North Fork Big Thompson River (NFBT). The primary difference between the two study areas is that BCC was inundated by multiple debris flows, whereas NFBT only experienced flooding. Fieldwork consisted of recording location and size of large wood and channel bars and surveying reaches to produce cross-sections. Additional observations were made on bank failures in NFBT and the presence of boulders in channel bars in BCC to determine sediment source. The debris flow acted to scour and incise BCC causing long-term alteration. The post-flood channel cross-sectional area is as much as 7 to 23 times larger than the pre-flood channel, caused by the erosion of the channel bed to bedrock and the elimination of riparian vegetation. Large wood was forced out of the stream channel and deposited outside of the bankfull channel. Flooding in NFBT caused bank erosion and widening that contributed sediment to channel bars, but accomplished little stream-bed scour. As a result, there was relatively little damage to mid-channel and riparian vegetation, and most large wood remained within the wetted channel.