Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr0037

Abrupt physical and chemical changes during 1992-1999, Anderson Springs, SE Geyser Geothermal Field, California

Abstract

The Anderson Springs area is located about 90 miles (145 kilometers) north of San Francisco, California, in the southwestern part of Lake County. The area was first developed in the late 1800s as a health resort, which was active until the 1930s. Patrons drank a variety of cool to hot mineral waters from improved springs, swam in various baths and pools, and hiked in the rugged hills flanking Anderson Creek and its tributaries. In the bluffs to the south of the resort were four small mercury mines of the eastern Mayacmas quicksilver district. About 1,260 flasks of mercury were produced from these mines between 1909 and 1943. By the early 1970s, the higher ridges south and west of Anderson Springs became part of the southeast sector of the greater Geysers geothermal field. Today, several electric power plants are built on these ridges, producing energy from a vapor-dominated 240 °C reservoir. Only the main hot spring at Anderson Springs has maintained a recognizable identity since the 1930s. The hot spring is actually a cluster of seeps and springs that issue from a small fault in a ravine southwest of Anderson Creek. Published and unpublished records show that the maximum temperature (Tm) of this cluster fell gradually from 63°C in 1889 to 48°C in 1992. However, Tm of the cluster climbed to 77°C in 1995 and neared boiling (98°C) in 1998. A new cluster of boiling vents and small fumaroles (Tm = 99.3°C) formed in 1998 about 30 m north of the old spring cluster. Several evergreen trees on steep slopes immediately above these vents apparently were killed by the new activity. Thermal waters at Anderson Hot Springs are mostly composed of near-surface ground waters with some added gases and condensed steam from The Geysers geothermal system. Compared to gas samples from Southeast Geysers wells, the hot spring gases are higher in CO 2 and lower in H 2 S and NH 3 . As the springs increased in temperature, however, the gas composition became more like the mean composition of steam discharges from the Southeast Geysers. The hot spring waters are low in ions of Cl, B, and Li, but relatively high in HCO 3 , SO 4 and NH 4 . The stable-isotope compositions (deuterium and oxygen-18) of these waters plot near the global meteoric water line. Geochemical data through time reveal apparent maxima in the concentrations of SO 4 , Fe, and Mn in 1991 to 1992, before the cluster became hotter. The black-to-gray deposits from the new spring cluster are rich in pyrite and contain anomalous metals. About one-half mile to the east of the hot springs, mineralized water discharges intermittently from an old adit of the Schwartz (Anderson) mine, and enters a tributary of Anderson Creek. This drainage increased substantially in July 1998, and a slurry of mine water and precipitates were transported down the tributary and into Anderson Creek. In December 1998, the adit water was 22°C, and had a chemical composition that was similar to spring waters that once discharged in the ravines surrounding the old Anderson Springs resort. The cause for the abrupt changes that have occurred in thermal features at Anderson Springs is still not resolved. One possibility is that these changes are a response to withdrawal of steam from The Geysers geothermal field over more than 20 years of production. Pressure declines in the geothermal reservoir may have caused a "drying out" of the overlying condensation zone. Induced boiling in this zone and upflow of deep steam to shallower depths would cause heating and vaporization of shallow ground waters. In addition, earthquakes occurring in the vicinity of Anderson Springs have increased significantly after nearby geothermal power plants began operation. These earthquakes may have enhanced surface discharge of thermal fluids along fractures and faults.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 38.699118° to 38.999502° latitude; -122.9004° to -122.556788° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Cathy J. Janik, Fraser Goff, Stephen R. Walter, Michael L. Sorey, Dale Counce, Elizabeth M. Colvard. 2000. Abrupt physical and chemical changes during 1992-1999, Anderson Springs, SE Geyser Geothermal Field, California. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr0037

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