You are here

Is The Human Footprint Strangling Old Faithful In Yellowstone National Park?

Share
Alternate Text
Is development in the Upper Geyser Basin of Yellowstone having an impact on Old Faithful?/Kurt Repanshek

We all go through growing pains as we get older, and that seems to be the case with the Old Faithful Geyser in Yellowstone National Park, as the geyser isn't as faithful as it once was and could eventually go dormant.

In just the past five decades, the geyser whose reliable gushers earned it its name, has slowed down. While Old Faithful in the 1960s erupted on an average of every 66 minutes, in 2013 the average was more than 90 minutes.

However, whether that decrease in reliability is natural, or has been caused by human development in Yellowstone's Upper Geyser Basin, is hard, if not impossible, to say. But construction projects in the past have directly impacted some thermal features in the basin, in some cases "catastrophically," according to a report on the basin's geothermal plumbing and human infrastructure.

Seeing an Old Faithful eruption is one of the main attractions of a Yellowstone vacation, and so word that those eruptions are becoming less timely can be disconcerting. Exactly why the eruption intervals have gotten longer in recent years is difficult to say, according to members of the Old Faithful Science Review Panel that was organized to look at geothermal issues and infrastructure in the Old Faithful area.

"Decreased groundwater pressure implies a longer recharge time for a geyser eruption. In the absence of actual groundwater monitoring wells, the only indicator of groundwater elevation or pressure is the flow of the Firehole and Madison rivers," the panel wrote in its report. "There is a correlation between Old Faithful's average annual eruption interval and varitions in the flow of the Madison River, suggesting that variations in the water table may be responsible. Similar correlations were found with the eruption intervals of Daisy Aurum, and Depressions geysers in the Upper Geyser Basin. Long-term precipitation and impacts on the local water table are almost certainly factors in the behavior of Old Faithful and other geysers."

While the scientists surmise that the total mass of water spouted every time Old Faithful erupts could be diminishing over the years, there have been no measurements of that output, "and it is difficult to evaluate long-term changes of Old Faithful without a complete understanding of the total water and heat budget of the eruptions."

Nevertheless, they say, the bottom line is that Old Faithful will not erupt indefinitely.

"Future projections of the average eruption intervals are not reliable. Because of the complexity of the natural system, it can be concluded that further changes and even cessation of Old Faithful eruptions are possible. Logs and stumps found buried in sinter on the geyser mound suggest that Old Faithful was completely inactive a few hundred years ago."

Of course, a new factor has been inserted into the landscape around Old Faithful in the past two centuries: humans. And their collective footprint on the park's Upper Geyser Basin could be having an effect on Old Faithful, the scientists say.

"For example, diversion of river water for consumptive use, paving for roads and parking lots, and the footprint of new buildings can decrease the amount of recharge into the groundwater system," they point out. "Trenches for sewage, electricity, gas, and other infrastructure can change the pathways for movement of heat and groundwater."

These impacts are not theoretical, the scientists note.

"There are places in Yellowstone National Park where park infrastructure has impacted hydrothermal features, in some cases catastrophically," they stress. "For example, in the 1960s, the excavation of the footing for the main support of the Old Faithful overpass intercepted very hot water that flowed at a rate of about 40-50 gallons per minute. Nearby hot springs simultaneously dried up. Stopping this discharge of thermal water and gas with a cement plug was considered and rejected because the plug might cause H2S-rich gas to accumulate under the plug, and then leak around its sides."

The gas then might react with water to create sulphuric acid, the story went on, which would eat away at both the bridge support and cement plug, until it failed.

While it's difficult at best to gauge what effects human infrastructure in the Upper Geyser Basin is having on the geothermal plumbing system, thermal imaging done in recent years "clearly shows that trenching has altered the natural surface temperature pattern in the Old Faithful developed area," the report notes.  

Still, "at this time, scientific data do not exist that allow us to say with any degree of confidence that existing and past roads, parking lots, buildings, and subsurface infrastructure have, or have not, affected Old Faithful and other features in the Upper Geyser Basin.

Just the same, "Infrastructure and thermal ground don't easily coexist. Hot ground isn't good for buildings, roads and pipelines; conversely, parking lots and sewer lines disrupt the natural hydrology,' says USGS Geologist and Science Review Panel Co-Chair Jacob Lowenstern. 'œThe popularity of Yellowstone is only increasing with time, so the park needs to consider means to minimize the human impact on both its cultural and natural resources."

To that point, Yellowstone Superintendent Dan Wenk says the report "serves as a starting point for management of the most intensively visited location within Yellowstone National Park."

"There may be no place on Earth that presents the challenges where such iconic natural and cultural features are within such a short distance of each other," the superintendent adds.

You can find the report here.

Featured Article

Comments

Famous last words, "We didn't think...."
100 years ago, people regularly threw things - coins, rocks, clothes, even soap - into geysers. They didn't think it would cause any problems. It did. 50 years ago, for the most part, throwing things into geysers was stopped; it took awhile, but human impact was noticed and corrected. As long as 50 years ago, it was noticed that road building and other construction had an impact on geysers and hot springs. At the time the roads were built, no one thought about their impacts. As they learned more, over time, they realized their mistakes.

The great thing about humans is that they (most of them) are capable of learning. There are many things - events, actions - that took place in the past that are now looked at in disbelief: "What were they thinking?"

For an interesting read, check out "Human Impacts on Geyser Basins"
http://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/upload/ys17%281%29p1.pdf

We might not have absolute, irrefutable proof that humans impact the environment in any way. But, we can move forward trying to minimize the potential impact we may have on the environment in the hopes that corrective action will not be necessary 50-100 years from now.


Thanks dahkota -

Well said ... and a good example of a comment that  adds value to the discussion.


OMG - let's not leave our houses, we may have some impact on the environment. For that matter, lets not build houses. Lets go back to living in caves and hunting with spears for we wouldn't want to have any impact on the environment.

There have been so many Chicken Little predictions of environmental disaster that have been nowhere near accurate. If we can show a real risk, then by all means work to fix it but I don't believe we should run from every potential risk imagined.

Things were thrown in geysers not out of ignorance of the potential impact but out of indifference. Fortunately we have taken appropriate steps to limit that activity.


For Rick,

In addition to the futility of trying to prove a negative, I don't offer "proof" because I never made a claim to prove. I merely offered an alternative conjecture.

And no, I don't have shame or guilt. I leave that to those that cast aspersions rather than debate the issues.


Agree with Jim. Thanks for the link, comment, (and attempt to recover a meaningful conversation), dahkota.


Sara,

Your piece on Solitary Spring raises some very interesting questions.

If the water was returned to Solitary but it didn't go back to being a hot spring, might something else have caused it to turn to a geyser in the first place?

Is a geyser preferred over a hot spring or vice versa?

If man turns a hot spring into a geyser and simultaneously a geyser into a hot spring is he break even or negative two?

If it is preferable to have a geyser is it bad for man to try to make one?

If natural causes are making a geyser go away, would it be bad for man to try to stop those natural causes?

Is not man part of nature and thus anything he does "natural"?


Yes, indifference. That same indifference to the needs of the natural world is also what created the problems in the Everglades. Or perhaps ignorance. But, neither is an excuse for poor stewardship.

I hear of many people complaining of what we are leaving for the children, though they usually only refer to the monetary situation. I would ask those same people to consider the condition of the world in general, the natural world particularly, because that is also the legacy we impart to future generations.

One can immediately jump to the extreme position, as some often do, "What, do you want us to go back to living in caves?" but that doesn't serve any purpose except to try to silence those who think that even basic care and attention can prevent problems (a stitch in time...). One doesn't have to "live in a cave" to reduce their environmental impact. That extremism also provides an excuse for those unwilling to compromise. The positions don't have to be extreme; there is value in moderation from both sides.

We can, 50 years down the road, decide that, "yeah, we probably shouldn't have done that," but, correcting the problems now, when we know the potential impacts on future generations, would probably save a lot of work. As we come to learn the greater effects of what previous generations have ignorantly or indifferently done, we have the opportunity to not make the same mistakes.


correcting the problems now, when we know the potential impacts on future generations, would probably save a lot of work.

Yes "when we know"


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.