USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr20121078

Preliminary observations of voluminous ice-rich and water-rich lahars generated during the 2009 eruption of Redoubt, Alaska

Abstract

Redoubt Volcano in south-central Alaska began erupting on March 15, 2009, and by April 4, 2009, had produced at least 20 explosive events that generated plumes of ash and lahars. The 3,108-m high, snow- and -ice-clad stratovolcano has an ice-filled summit crater that is breached to the north. The volcano supports about 4 km 3 of ice and snow and about 1 km 3 of this makes up the Drift glacier on the northern side of the volcano. Explosive eruptions between March 22 and April 4, which included the destruction of at least two lava domes, triggered significant lahars in the Drift River valley on March 23 and April 4 and several smaller lahars between March 24 and March 31. High-flow marks, character of deposits, areas of inundation, and estimates of flow velocity revealed that the lahars on March 23 and April 4 were the largest of the eruption. In the 2-km-wide upper Drift River valley, average flow depths were about 3–5 m. Average peak-flow velocities were likely between 10 and 15 ms -1 , and peak discharges were on the order of 10 4 –10 5 m 3 s -1 . The area inundated by lahars on March 23 was at least 100 km 2 and on April 4 about 125 km 2 . The lahars emplaced on March 23 and April 4 had volumes on the order of 10 7 –10 8 m 3 and were similar in size to the largest lahar of the 1989–90 eruption. The March 23 lahars were primarily flowing slurries of snow and ice entrained from the Drift glacier and seasonal snow and tabular blocks of river ice from the Drift River valley. Only a single, undifferentiated deposit up to 5 m thick was found and contained about 80–95 percent of poorly sorted, massive to imbricate assemblages of snow and ice. The deposit was frozen soon after it was emplaced and later eroded and buried by the April 4 lahar. The lahar of April 4, in contrast, was primarily a hyperconcentrated flow, as interpreted from 1- to 6-m thick deposits of massive to horizontally stratified sand-to-fine-gravel. Rock material in the April 4 lahar deposit is predominantly juvenile andesite. We infer that the lahars generated on March 23 were initiated by a rapid succession of vent-clearing explosions that blasted through about 50–100 m of crater-filling glacier ice and snow, producing a voluminous release of meltwater from the Drift glacier. The resulting flood eroded and entrained snow, fragments of glacier and river ice, and liquid water along its flow path. Small-volume pyroclastic flows, possibly associated with destruction of a small dome or minor eruption-column collapses, may have contributed additional meltwater to the lahar. Meltwater generated by subglacial hydrothermal activity and stored beneath the Drift glacier may have been ejected or released rapidly as well. The April 4 lahar was initiated when hot dome-collapse pyroclastic flows entrained and swiftly melted snow and ice, and incorporated additional rock debris from the Drift glacier. The peak discharge of the April 4 lahar was in the range of 60,000–160,000 m 3 s -1 . For comparison, the largest lahar of the 1989–90 eruption had a peak discharge of about 80,000 m 3 s -1 . Lahars generated by the 2009 eruption led to significant channel aggradation in the lower Drift River valley and caused extensive inundation at an oil storage and transfer facility located there. The April 4, 2009, lahar was 6–30 times larger than the largest meteorological floods known or estimated in the Drift River drainage.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 60.53333333333333° to 60.71666666666667° latitude; -152.28333333333333° to -152.05° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Christopher F. Waythomas, Thomas C. Pierson, Jon J. Major, William E. Scott. 2012. Preliminary observations of voluminous ice-rich and water-rich lahars generated during the 2009 eruption of Redoubt, Alaska. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20121078

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona