Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr20091111

Analytical Results for Agricultural Soils Samples from a Monitoring Program Near Deer Trail, Colorado (USA)

Abstract

Since late 1993, Metro Wastewater Reclamation District of Denver (Metro District, MWRD), a large wastewater treatment plant in Denver, Colorado, has applied Grade I, Class B biosolids to about 52,000 acres of nonirrigated farmland and rangeland near Deer Trail, Colorado, USA. In cooperation with the Metro District in 1993, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) began monitoring groundwater at part of this site. In 1999, the USGS began a more comprehensive monitoring study of the entire site to address stakeholder concerns about the potential chemical effects of biosolids applications to water, soil, and vegetation. This more comprehensive monitoring program has recently been extended through 2010. Monitoring components of the more comprehensive study include biosolids collected at the wastewater treatment plant, soil, crops, dust, alluvial and bedrock groundwater, and stream bed sediment. Soils for this study were defined as the plow zone of the dry land agricultural fields - the top twelve inches of the soil column. This report presents analytical results for the soil samples collected at the Metro District farm land near Deer Trail, Colorado, during three separate sampling events during 1999, 2000, and 2002. Soil samples taken in 1999 were to be a representation of the original baseline of the agricultural soils prior to any biosolids application. The soil samples taken in 2000 represent the soils after one application of biosolids to the middle field at each site and those taken in 2002 represent the soils after two applications. There have been no biosolids applied to any of the four control fields. The next soil sampling is scheduled for the spring of 2010. Priority parameters for biosolids identified by the stakeholders and also regulated by Colorado when used as an agricultural soil amendment include the total concentrations of nine trace elements (arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, and zinc), plutonium isotopes, and gross alpha and beta activity (Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division, 1997; Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment,1998; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993). Since these were the identified priority parameters for the biosolids, the soils have the same set of priority parameters. Although the composite soils' priority analytes have been reported earlier to Metro District, the remaining elemental datasets for both the composite soils samples and selected fields' individual subsamples' data are presented here for the first time. More information about the other monitoring components is presented elsewhere in the literature (http://co.water.usgs.gov/projects/CO406/CO406.html). In general, the objective of each component of the study was to determine whether concentrations of priority parameters (1) were higher than regulatory limits, (2) were increasing with time, and(or) (3) were significantly higher in biosolids-applied areas than in a similar farmed area where biosolids were not applied. The method chosen for sampling the soils proved to be an efficient and reliable representation of the average composition of each field. This was shown by analyzing individual subsamples, averaging the resulting values, and then comparing the values to the composited samples' values. The soil chemistry shows distinct differences between the two sites, most likely due to the different underlying parent material. Biosolids data were used to compile an inorganic-chemical biosolids signature that can be contrasted with the geochemical signature of the agricultural soils for this site. The biosolids signature and an understanding of the geology and hydrology of the site can be used to separate biosolids effects from natural geochemical effects. Elements of particular interest for a biosolids signature after application in the soils include bismuth, copper, silver, mercury, and phosphorus. This signat

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 39.416666666666664° to 39.73444444444444° latitude; -104° to -103.7° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J.G. Crock, D. B. Smith, T. J. B. Yager. 2009. Analytical Results for Agricultural Soils Samples from a Monitoring Program Near Deer Trail, Colorado (USA). https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20091111

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