USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · pp1717H

The question of recharge to the deep thermal reservoir underlying the geysers and hot springs of Yellowstone National Park: Chapter H in Integrated geoscience studies in Integrated geoscience studies in the Greater Yellowstone Area—Volcanic, tectonic, and hydrothermal processes in the Yellowstone geoecosystem

Abstract

The extraordinary number, size, and unspoiled beauty of the geysers and hot springs of Yellowstone National Park (the Park) make them a national treasure. The hydrology of these special features and their relation to cold waters of the Yellowstone area are poorly known. In the absence of deep drill holes, such information is available only indirectly from isotope studies. The δD-δ18O values of precipitation and cold surface-water and ground-water samples are close to the global meteoric water line (Craig, 1961). δD values of monthly samples of rain and snow collected from 1978 to 1981 at two stations in the Park show strong seasonal variations, with average values for winter months close to those for cold waters near the collection sites. δD values of more than 300 samples from cold springs, cold streams, and rivers collected during the fall from 1967 to 1992 show consistent north-south and east-west patterns throughout and outside of the Park, although values at a given site vary by as much as 8 ‰ from year to year. These data, along with hot-spring data (Truesdell and others, 1977; Pearson and Truesdell, 1978), show that ascending Yellowstone thermal waters are modified isotopically and chemically by a variety of boiling and mixing processes in shallow reservoirs. Near geyser basins, shallow recharge waters from nearby rhyolite plateaus dilute the ascending deep thermal waters, particularly at basin margins, and mix and boil in reservoirs that commonly are interconnected. Deep recharge appears to derive from a major deep thermal-reservoir fluid that supplies steam and hot water to all geyser basins on the west side of the Park and perhaps in the entire Yellowstone caldera. This water (T ≥350°C; δD = –149±1 ‰) is isotopically lighter than all but the farthest north, highest altitude cold springs and streams and a sinter-producing warm spring (δD = –153 ‰) north of the Park. Derivation of this deep fluid solely from present-day recharge is problematical. The designation of source areas depends on assumptions about the age of the deep water, which in turn depend on assumptions about the nature of the deep thermal system. Modeling, based on published chloride-flux studies of thermal waters, suggests that for a 0.5- to 4-km-deep reservoir the residence time of most of the thermal water could be less than 1,900 years, for a piston-flow model, to more than 10,000 years, for a well-mixed model. For the piston-flow model, the deep system quickly reaches the isotopic composition of the recharge in response to climate change. For this model, stable-isotope data and geologic considerations suggest that the most likely area of recharge for the deep thermal water is in the northwestern part of the Park, in the Gallatin Range, where major north-south faults connect with the caldera. This possible recharge area for the deep thermal water is at least 20 km, and possibly as much as 70 km, from outflow in the thermal areas, indicating the presence of a hydrothermal system as large as those postulated to have operated around large, ancient igneous intrusions. For this model, the volume of isotopically light water infiltrating in the Gallatin Range during our sampling period is too small to balance the present outflow of deep water. This shortfall suggests that some recharge possibly occurred during a cooler time characterized by greater winter precipitation, such as during the Little Ice Age in the 15th century. However, this scenario requires exceptionally fast flow rates of recharge into the deep system. For the well-mixed model, the composition of the deep reservoir changes slowly in response to climate change, and a significant component of the deep thermal water could have recharged during Pleistocene glaciation. The latter interpretation is consistent with the recent discovery of warm waters in wells and springs in southern Idaho that have δD values 10–20 ‰ lower than the winter snow for their present-day high-level recharge. These waters have been interpreted to be Pleistocene in age (Smith and others, 2002). The well-mixed model permits a significant component of recharge water for the deep system to have δD values less negative than –150 ‰ and consequently for the deep system recharge to be closer to the caldera at a number of possible localities in the Park.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 43.35713822211053° to 45.521743896993634° latitude; -111.6485595703125° to -108.7811279296875° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert O. Rye, Alfred Hemingway Truesdell. 2007. The question of recharge to the deep thermal reservoir underlying the geysers and hot springs of Yellowstone National Park: Chapter H in Integrated geoscience studies in Integrated geoscience studies in the Greater Yellowstone Area—Volcanic, tectonic, and hydrothermal processes in the Yellowstone geoecosystem. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1717h

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Resurvey of the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon dam sites in Grand Canyon National Park—Changes in sediment storage and evidence supporting the occurrence of bedrock incision through the mid-20th century

The Bureau of Reclamation developed an extensive plan for a network of dams, water tunnels, and hydropower plants in and around Grand Canyon, Arizona, in the 1940s through 1960s. The two largest of these planned dams were the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon Dams on the Colorado River. Though these dams were ultimately never built, Reclamation conducted extensive topographic, bathymetric, and subsurface exploration work at the sites proposed for these dams in the 1940s and 1950s. Resurveys of these dam sites were conducted between 1998 and 2021 to determine the changes in sediment storage at these dam sites caused by the upstream construction and operation of Glen Canyon Dam and by the recession of Lake Mead, the reservoir impounded by Hoover Dam. The resurveys of the Marble Canyon dam sites indicate that the post-1950s changes in sediment storage at these dam sites are broadly consistent with flux-based estimates of voluminous sand erosion from Marble Canyon since the 1963 closure of Glen Canyon Dam. These resurveys also suggest that the pre-dam longitudinal variation in sediment thickness over bedrock played a key role in determining the locations of the sand erosion induced by Glen Canyon Dam; more sand eroded from locations where more sand was present in the 1950s. The resurvey of the Bridge Canyon dam sites indicates that the Colorado River’s incision of the Lake Mead delta is regulated both by bed-sediment grain size and downstream hydraulic controls. Finally, analyses of bed-sediment thickness and sedimentological data at the dam sites, and observations of bed scour and gravel transport, suggest that sufficient bedrock was exposed to allow bedrock incision during commonly recurring pre-dam snowmelt floods that entrained small boulders into transport.

Arizona

The eruptive behavior of distributed volcanism forming low shield edifices—A case study of Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field, U.S.A.

Distributed volcanic fields are present in various tectonic settings worldwide, and their characteristics reflect differing influences from magmatic and tectonic processes. In the southwestern United States alone, there are 37 Quaternary distributed volcanic fields. After the primary period of extensional tectonics in the southern Basin and Range 15–5 million years ago, the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field developed in southwestern Arizona between 4 and 1 million years ago. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists primarily of low relief shield volcanoes, a type of distributed volcanism with poorly understood temporal evolution. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field is less than 200 kilometers (km) from the Colorado Plateau, Gulf of California, and southern San Andreas Fault system. This work identifies and examines controls on the emplacement of the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field by documenting shallow and surficial structures as well as eruption characteristics and style through time. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists of 21 volcanoes with a total of 33 vents over an area of about 770 square kilometers (km 2 ). The prominence of low relief shield volcanoes may be explained by ascent of basaltic magmas through thin Basin and Range crust, without much crustal contamination, and low viscosities common to mafic compositions. Typical eruption characteristics involve the construction of low relief shield volcanoes followed by Strombolian fissure eruptions at the summits or near-summit medial areas that produce scoria lapilli, which may weld to form agglomerate. The total lifetime erupted volume of about 4.3 cubic kilometers (km 3 ) represents an average eruptive flux of approximately 2x10 -3 km 3 per thousand years (k.y.). This erupted volume is low relative to Neogene basaltic intraplate distributed volcanic fields worldwide, which typically range from 10 -3 to 1 km 3 k.y. -1 . Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field eruptions were likely triggered by intermittent rejuvenation of transient magmatic zones that exist in thinned crust. Instantaneous flux from point sources feeding the lava flows is estimated to be on the order of 10 -1 to 10 cubic meters per second.

Arizona

Capitalization of positional (Lower/Middle/Upper) and temporal (Early/Middle/Late) adjectives in the names of formal chronostratigraphic and geochronologic units of the Phanerozoic

Many authors are understandably confused about the capitalization of the words “lower,” “middle,” “upper,” “early,” and “late.” Where these words are used simply as descriptive adjectives, they should be in lowercase; where they form the first word of a formal chronostratigraphic or geochronologic unit name, they should be in uppercase.

Professional Paper