Wild Bear Adventures

Wild Bear Adventures Wild Bear Adventures offers personalized tours of Yellowstone National Park's unique wildlife and geology. Join us for your own adventure soon!
(2)

Custom private wildlife and geology tours of Yellowstone National park.

02/02/2023

Here we go I am back working on this piece. It’s pretty massive 48x60 ! Sanded it down and I am here! Completely present! Making this wonderful creatures come to life with my paint brush! Very inspired!!!!✨✨✨✨✨.

12/02/2022

Whitebark Pines Trees are icons of North America's mountain landscape.  They provide a host of ecosystem services and are considered both a foundational and ...

https://youtu.be/ZX9N2DgwNlY
11/30/2022

https://youtu.be/ZX9N2DgwNlY

Whitebark Pines Trees are icons of North America's mountain landscape.  They provide a host of ecosystem services and are considered both a foundational and ...

Fascinating!
08/01/2022

Fascinating!

The Hebgen Lake earthquake is the largest to have struck the Intermountain West region of the United States. This week's describes how high-resolution topographic data from lidar are shedding new “light” on this complex event, as well as on prehistoric earthquakes that occurred within the same fault system.

https://www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/using-modern-tools-look-past-earthquakes-how-lidar-data-help-better

Major earthquakes that rupture up to the ground surface and form fault scarps are rare occurrences in the Intermountain West during historical times. For an earthquake to generate surface rupture it typically needs to have a magnitude of 6.5 or greater. Only three historical earthquakes have produced surface ruptures in the Intermountain West; the magnitude 6.6 Hansel Valley earthquake in 1934 near the Great Salt Lake, the magnitude 7.3 Hebgen Lake, Montana, earthquake in 1959, and the magnitude 6.9 Borah Peak, Idaho, earthquake in 1983. So, a surface-rupturing earthquake presents a rare opportunity to study a modern analog of the hundreds of prehistoric earthquakes that formed fault scarps that crisscross the Intermountain West. Recent technological developments are providing new insights into the details of earthquake geology and fault scarp formation, even decades after they formed.

In 2014, airborne lidar data were collected along the Hebgen Red Canyon faults, which are the primary faults that ruptured in the 1959 Hebgen Lake earthquake. Geoscientists used these data to augment previous studies of these spectacular fault scarps. By construction of over 440 detailed topographic profiles across the fault scarps, they measured the shapes of the scarps and calculated the amount of slip along the faults. These fault-slip measurements (known as fault throw) were compared with field measurements collected by USGS geologists shortly after the 1959 earthquake. Along some sections of the faults, the lidar-based and field-measured throws agreed well. Along other fault sections, however, the lidar-derived fault throws were up to three times larger than those measured in 1959. This discrepancy indicates that the lidar data are also detecting fault throws from one or two prehistoric earthquakes in addition to the 1959 earthquake. Other sections of the faults, specifically the ridge section of the Red Canyon fault, showed only 1959 movement. Researchers argue that prehistoric scarps that likely existed were not preserved on the steep slopes in the talus and debris that characterize this fault section.

While mapping the fault scarps soon after the 1959 earthquake, USGS geologists noted several gaps where scarps did not form for short distances along the surface trace of the Red Canyon and Hebgen faults. These gaps are also observed in the lidar data and appear to reflect structural complexities in the near-surface fault geometry. Several other gaps in scarp formation were observed in the lidar data where USGS geologist documented post-earthquake surface offsets. Apparently at some locations, scarps have been obliterated by 55 years of erosion and/or human disturbance of the land surface.

The lidar-derived fault throw along the entire surface rupture zone of the 1959 earthquake was used to estimate a moment magnitude—the magnitude of the earthquake based on the amount of fault slip multiplied by the area over which slip occurred—of 7.1 ± 0.2. Although not as accurate as a seismologically determined magnitude, this independent determination based on surface displacement agrees well with the reported magnitude of the 1959 earthquake and provides an excellent tool for estimating magnitudes of prehistoric earthquakes, for which no seismic data are available.

The new lidar data, acquired 55 years after the earthquake, reveal new details about the 1959 earthquake scarp complexity and extent. These new data also show that, despite the lack of technology at the time, geologists made remarkably good observations and interpretations of the 1959 earthquake right after It occurred. Without the benefits of GPS, computers with mapping software, and other technologies we now take for granted, and using only air photos and 1:62,500 (15-minute) scale topographic maps, the geologists created excellent maps of the 1959 earthquake fault scarps. Post-event studies of future surface-rupturing earthquakes in the Intermountain West will benefit from the suite of modern technology-based tools and improve our understanding of major earthquakes in ways not dreamt possible by geologists a half-century ago.

For more information, see the scientific paper describing the lidar survey of the Hebgen Lake faulting event: Johnson, K.L., Nissen, E., and Lajoie, L. (2018) Surface rupture morphology and vertical slip distribution of the 1959 Mw 7.2 Hebgen Lake Montana earthquake from airborne lidar topography; Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 123,8229-8248. https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JB015039.

(Map: Lidar coverage of the Hebgen and Red Canyon faults collected in 2014. Magenta lines show fault scarps mapped by USGS geologists shortly after the 1959 earthquake. Yellow lines show fault scarps interpreted from lidar data 55 years after the earthquake.)

-----------------------

Yellowstone Caldera Chronicles is a weekly column written by scientists and collaborators of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory. This week's contribution is from Mike Stickney, Director of the Earthquake Studies Office at the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology.

06/17/2022
05/23/2022

Are you ready for the ride of a lifetime? The Beartooth Scenic Highway in Montana’s Yellowstone Country is it! This 68-mile byway connects the charming communities of Red Lodge and Cooke City and serves as a western corridor to Yellowstone National Park. Along the Beartooth Highway, you will enjoy...

https://www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/spectacular-columns-sheepeater-cliffsA great place to relax and picnic watch...
05/14/2022

https://www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/spectacular-columns-sheepeater-cliffs

A great place to relax and picnic watching marmots and ground squirrels frolic in the juble of broken columns at the base. A short hike down river (the Gardner) you will find even more basalt columns.

A small side road on the highway between Mammoth Hot Springs and Norris Junction leads to Sheepeater Cliffs, a spectacular example of columnar jointing in a lava flow.

I can't wait to drive the road from Tower to Canyon after 2 years of closure. May 27th! Here's some great geology about ...
05/12/2022

I can't wait to drive the road from Tower to Canyon after 2 years of closure. May 27th! Here's some great geology about that stretch to make it a meaningful ride!

https://www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/geological-excursion-between-tower-and-canyon-junctions-yellowstone-national

For the first time in two years, Yellowstone National Park visitors will be able to drive from Tower to Canyon Junctions across Dunraven Pass, now that road construction is complete. The fascinating geology of this part of the park spans from well before Yellowstone’s recent volcanism to the lates...

Bears are out - be cautious and prepared!
03/26/2022

Bears are out - be cautious and prepared!

Park County law enforcement officials said a Livingston man who went missing Wednesday in the Six Mile Creek area of Paradise Valley appears to have died after an encounter with a grizzly bear.Park County Sheriff Brad Bichler posted on the department’s page Friday afternoon that searchers...

02/25/2022

News Release: There will be three major road improvement projects in Yellowstone National Park beginning in 2022. All three projects will cause major delays (Lewis River Bridge, Old Faithful to West Thumb, and Yellowstone River Bridge) and two projects (Old Faithful to West Thumb and Lewis River Bridge) will have overnight closures.

The National Park Service (NPS) decided to begin the Old Faithful to West Thumb and Lewis River Bridge project simultaneously to complete both in the same two-year time window. Otherwise, impacts to visitors would have occurred over four to five years.

"It's important the visiting public understand the major delays that will occur in 2022 and 2023 and impacts to the South Entrance Road,” said Superintendent Cam Sholly. "While we always strive to execute projects in the least impacting way, the Old Faithful to West Thumb and Lewis River Bridge projects will seriously disrupt travel entering and exiting the park’s south entrance and visitors should plan accordingly. We very much appreciate the funding received through the Great American Outdoors Act to complete these critical projects."

Addressing the deferred maintenance backlog is part of the NPS core mission to preserve national parks and provide a world-class visitor experience. In 2018, Yellowstone reported a conservative backlog estimate exceeding $586 million, more than half of which is related to park roads. With the completion of these three projects, the park will reduce its deferred maintenance backlog by about $103 million.

Learn more about these road improvement projects and how they will impact travel in the park at: go.nps.gov/22010

Photo: Current condition of Yellowstone River Bridge.

Yellowstone's 2021 Winter season begins on December 15th and runs through March 5th. Are you longing for a cozy getaway?...
12/02/2021

Yellowstone's 2021 Winter season begins on December 15th and runs through March 5th. Are you longing for a cozy getaway? A little skiing, snowshoeing, wildlife watching or sitting by the fire with hot chocolate or a glass of wine?
This is a perfect home base for such activites, one that I'm very "attached" to. Check it out and come enjoy the solace of winter in the wild. I'll throw in a nice French Bordeaux.

https://www.mountain-home.com/montana-vacation-rentals/rive-gauche

x

12/02/2021

Are you planning a trip to Yellowstone this winter?

Restricted vehicle access and limited services make winter visits far different than a summer experience. So, by following our Top 10 Tips for a winter visit: go.nps.gov/YELLtop10winter.

We will share tips over the next few days as the countdown to the winter season continues: T-minus 15 days! ❄️

12/02/2021

Volcano Observatory monthly update
Wednesday, December 1, 2021, 11:25 AM MST

https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/yellowstone/volcano-updates

SUMMARY

- Normal background activity
- 137 located earthquakes (max=M2.5)
- caldera subsidence continues; no deformation of Norris
- 2 eruptions of Steamboat Geyser (19 total in 2021)

RECENT WORK AND NEWS

During the usual seasonal closure of Yellowstone National Park (as part of the transition from summer to winter operations), Yellowstone Volcano Observatory scientists and collaborators conducted multidisciplinary research experiments in the Upper Geyser Basin, deploying numerous instruments in the region near Old Faithful. The work is part of an ongoing effort to better understand geyser plumbing systems, chemistries, and eruptive patterns.

Steamboat Geyser continues to be active, with two eruptions in the past month: on November 12 and 24. This brings the total number of eruptions for the year to 19.

SEISMICITY

During November 2021, the University of Utah Seismograph Stations, responsible for the operation and analysis of the Yellowstone Seismic Network, located 137 earthquakes in the Yellowstone National Park region. The largest event of the month was a minor earthquake of magnitude 2.5 located ~3.5 miles south of the South Entrance of Yellowstone National Park on November 10 at 5:56 AM MST.

November seismicity in Yellowstone was marked by 2 earthquake swarms:

1) A cluster of 60 earthquakes occurred during November 26–27 located ~14 miles north-northeast of Old Faithful. These earthquakes continued from a sequence that began on September 16. The largest November event (magnitude 1.8) occurred on November 26 at 8:00 AM MST.

2) A small swarm of 14 earthquakes occurred November 14–27 located ~15 miles east-northeast of West Yellowstone, MT. The largest event (magnitude 1.3) occurred on November 14 at 1:56 AM MST.

Earthquake sequences like these are common and account for roughly 50% of the total seismicity in the Yellowstone region.

Yellowstone earthquake activity remains at background levels.

GROUND DEFORMATION

Subsidence of Yellowstone Caldera has been ongoing since 2015, but that deformation typically pauses or turns to slight uplift during the summer months due to seasonal groundwater recharge. The summer pause in 2021 has now ended, and subsidence has resumed across the caldera. This subsidence occurs at a rate of about 1–2 inches per year. A GPS station near Norris Geyser Basin was showing slight uplift during summer 2021, and the source of this deformation was initially unclear. In November, however, this deformation reversed, and the area is now experiencing a small amount of subsidence. The timing of the minor summer uplift at Norris corresponds to the summer pause in subsidence of the caldera, suggesting that Norris was also impacted by seasonal groundwater recharge. Deformation of the region therefore has remained relatively constant over the past several years, with little change in the Norris area and slight subsidence of the caldera.

(Photo: Sunset over travertine pools near Canary Springs. Mammoth Hot Springs, Yellowstone National Park. NPS photo by Jacob Frank, November 22, 2021.)

Most of the guests on my tours this season had an opportunity to watch these beauties on our way into the park. I had th...
11/17/2021

Most of the guests on my tours this season had an opportunity to watch these beauties on our way into the park. I had the privilege of seeing them grow up all season long. Very special!

11/16/2021

Many of Yellowstone’s hot springs, geysers, mud pots, and fumaroles look different depending on the season, year, or sometimes even the day one visits. Colloidal Pool, in Norris Geyser Basin, is an interesting example of a feature that changed over the course of summer 2021. This week's dives into the mystery!

https://www.usgs.gov/center-news/changing-moods-colloidal-pool-norris-geyser-basin

Colloidal Pool is a thermal feature in the Porcelain subbasin of Norris Geyser Basin, located just down the hill from Norris Museum. A 1904 historic map does not show a feature where Colloidal Pool now exists, so it must have appeared and substantially increased in size over the last ~120 years! Although Colloidal Pool is now a large shallow acid pool, usually with “opalescent bright blue” water, in the past the feature had spectacular geyser activity characterized by eruption of muddy water as high as 30 meters. The National Park Service, tasked with monitoring the >10,000 thermal features in Yellowstone by the Geothermal Seam Act of 1970, has measured the pH, temperature, and electrical conductivity (a measure of water salinity) of Colloidal Pool in 1998, 2018, and 2021. The water temperature and characteristics changed in 2021, including significant cooling and the appearance of foam on the surface of the pool. To investigate the source of these changes, YVO scientists took samples of Colloidal Pool water and solids during a field visit in June 2021.

The collected samples indicate that Colloidal Pool water had high concentrations of sulfate and lower concentrations of chloride, alkalis, silica, and trace metals compared to typical neutral-chloride thermal waters, like those from Old Faithful. The high sulfate concentrations come from the flux of H2S gas through the pool, which oxidizes to H2SO4 in contact with the pool’s water and causes the low pH. This tells us that in June 2021 Colloidal Pool water has no direct input of thermal water (which is indicated by the low chloride concentrations), but it does have a significant flux of geothermal gasses through the pool. The higher temperatures and electrical conductivities observed by measurements in 1998 and 2018 suggest that prior thermal water input did exist into Colloidal Pool but had ceased in 2021. This shift in water chemistry at a thermal feature is not uncommon and may be a result of the interaction between the level of the water table, amount of boiling of deep geothermal waters, subsurface fluid flow paths (controlled by precipitation of hydrothermal minerals and seismicity), and variable mixing with meteoric or other water types. For example, following the 1959 Hebgen Lake earthquake, Opal Spring changed from a discharging alkaline-chloride spring to acid-sulfate water.

The colloids in Colloidal Pool were investigated using a high-powered scanning electron microscope (SEM) that can produce detailed images of very small particles and provide information on their chemical composition. The colloids sampled in 2021 fall into four main categories: 1) hydrated silica, 2) clay particles, 3) sulfur-rich particles, and 4) diatoms. Hydrated silica can precipitate at low pH, as observed in Colloidal Pool, although it typically does not form sinter deposits (like those that make up geyser cones) unless the pH of thermal waters is higher. Clays are typical of acid-sulfate conditions and form from the reaction of high-temperature acidic thermal waters with rhyolitic volcanic rocks (here the underlying Lava Creek Tuff). Alunite, a sulfur-rich mineral with the formula KAl3(SO4)2(OH)6, has been observed in many Yellowstone acid-sulfate thermal features and associated clay deposits, and it forms because of the high sulfate concentrations. Diatoms are microscopic aquatic organisms found in almost all surficial Earth waters from the ocean to glacial meltwater streams to nearly boiling geothermal pools. The diatoms found in Colloidal Pool belong to the genera Eunotia, which grow in acidic to near-neutral waters (pH 3-6) in shallow-water habitats. Diatom populations have also been documented in nearby Beowolf Spring (pH < 3 and at temperatures >50°C) in the 100 Spring Plain subbasin of Norris Geyser Basin.

As is common for many thermal features around Norris Geyser Basin, Colloidal Pool had rapid and noticeable changes in activity, pool color, and chemistry in 2021. The decrease in water temperature and electrical conductivity indicates a decrease in the flux of thermal water flowing into the pool. This could be due to below average precipitation, which can result in lowering of the water table. This, in turn, could lead to more boiling of subsurface geothermal water. Another possible explanation is that precipitation of hydrothermal minerals in the subsurface caused the closure or shrinking of gas and water pathways, which throttled down the thermal water flow to Colloidal Pool.

A hallmark of geothermal features in Yellowstone is how they change on timescales ranging from hours to years. Exploring why these changes occur, the timescales associated with different transformations, and the local and regional extent of variations are key data for scientists who study Yellowstone and other hydrothermal areas. This information is used to ensure visitor safety, assess Yellowstone hazards, and understand large-scale volcanic hydrothermal systems. And we all can do our part—next time you visit Norris Geyser Basin, stop by Colloidal Pool and observe whether the water is “opalescent bright blue” from thermal water input or if it is “brown and covered in foam” as it was in June 2021. Your observations can be valuable input to better understanding the timescales and causes of changes to Yellowstone features!

(Figure: Comparison of (a) 1904 Historical map with (b) 1988 USGS map. Colloidal Pool is a large, labeled pool roughly located on a straight line between Hurricane vent and Whirligig Geyser on the 1988 map (b); this same transect on the 1904 map (a) shows no feature at that location (white circle). Note: maps are not at the same scale or orientation. Panels c and d show photos of Colloidal Pool’s variations in water appearance from the Yellowstone Flickr page. (c) Teal-blue water without foam (photo taken August 27, 2009, by Greg L. Jones). (d) Foamy conditions with opaque blue-brown water (photo taken August 4, 2019 by Joe Shlabotnik).

---------------

Yellowstone Caldera Chronicles is a weekly column written by scientists and collaborators of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory. This week's contribution is from Lauren Harrison, postdoctoral researcher with the U.S. Geological Survey.

11/09/2021

About 631,000 years ago, a massive eruption formed what today is known as Yellowstone Caldera. New deposits, discovered within the caldera, are changing our perspective on how that eruption might have unfolded. This week’s heads to the field to investigate.

https://www.usgs.gov/center-news/exciting-insights-yellowstone-s-youngest-supereruption

Although Yellowstone is very unlikely to have another major explosive eruption in our lifetimes, understanding the timing of past eruptions and what triggered them can give volcanologists insight as to what the beginning of any future eruption might look like. Currently, the best way to determine the timing and causes of past eruptions is through a combination of thorough field mapping and geochemical analyses. Today, we dive into why this is important, and how volcanologists are trying to tackle the question of the Lava Creek Tuff eruption.

About 631,000 years ago, Yellowstone Volcano returned to life after a hiatus that lasted tens of thousands of years. It was the beginning of the Lava Creek eruption. This eruption deposited 1000 km¬3 of rock and spread ashy material across the western United States, southern Canada, and northern Mexico. Despite being the most recent of Yellowstone’s two supereruptions (the other being the 2.1-million-year-old Huckleberry Ridge eruption; the 1.3-million-year-old formation of Henrys Fork Caldera was too small to be considered a supereruption), we know surprisingly little about it. For instance, scientists recently found two new units of this eruption that were previously unrecognized, with profound implications for the duration of this eruption.

Many people might think of a supereruption as a singular, large event where a shallow magma chamber, located a few miles beneath the surface, is effectively emptied, causing the overlying ground to collapse into the vacated space. One might envision this eruption to be a vast outpouring of gas mixed with molten material that creates a hot, dense ash-flow deposit (called an ignimbrite), which cools as one cohesive unit. However, this is not always an accurate view. Studies of the Huckleberry Ridge Tuff from the 2.1-million-year-old caldera-forming eruption have highlighted that these events can have time breaks of hours to decades, shown by layering in the deposits and by evidence for cooling as well as movement of material by wind and water. Work on the Huckleberry Ridge Tuff also showed that the eruption was fed from multiple magma bodies.

But what about the Lava Creek Tuff? Work in the Sour Creek Dome region, on the east side of Yellowstone National Park, has revealed that the Lava Creek eruption is more complicated than previously thought. In this area, two ignimbrite units (temporarily named by the geologists studying the area as units 1 and 2) that were mapped in the 1960s and 1970s as Huckleberry Ridge Tuff have been shown by age dating to be parts of the Lava Creek Tuff. So, what’s the big deal? The older unit 1 is found as boulders in a coarse, near-vent deposit, showing that it must have been erupted, completely cooled, and then broken up and transported in the next event. The other newly recognized ignimbrite (unit 2) was then deposited on top of the deposit containing boulders of unit 1. Since large ignimbrites take a long time to completely cool, these deposits suggest that there was a break between the two events of years to decades. And all this happened before any of the material mapped previously as the Lava Creek Tuff was erupted!

The picture that emerges is of a complex sequence that started with multiple explosive events that might have been separated by years to decades before the better-mapped explosive eruptions ensued.

To further understand the geological history of the eruption, Montana State University graduate student Raymond Salazar will be re-mapping the entire Sour Creek Dome area and collecting samples (under a permit issued by Yellowstone National Park). Geochemical analyses of these rock samples will identify the pre-eruptive magma compositions and can be used to estimate the temperature and depth of the magma chamber. The importance of this information lies in determining whether these two new units were “leaks” of a single large “Lava Creek magma body,” or were separate pools of magma, as well as trying to understand what triggered these earlier outbreaks.

Even in a place like Yellowstone, where the geology has been studied for decades, there are always new stories to tell, and new mysteries to solve.

(Photo: Hand-sample of what is known to be Lava Creek Tuff “unit 2.” Small black scoria pieces are distinctive of this unit compared to the previously recognized Member A and Member B of the Lava Creek Tuff. Photo by Ray Salazar on August 16, 2021.)

---------------------

Yellowstone Caldera Chronicles is a weekly column written by scientists and collaborators of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory. This week's contribution is from Raymond Salazar, graduate student at Montana State University, Madison Myers, Assistant Professor of Igneous Processes at Montana State University, and Colin Wilson, Professor in the School of Geography, Environment and Earth Sciences at Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand.

So much to learn about this lake!
10/25/2021

So much to learn about this lake!

The floor of Yellowstone Lake provides a unique opportunity to assess heat flow in a dynamic hydrothermal area. Join this week on a trip beneath the waves to one of the hottest areas in Yellowstone National Park!

https://www.usgs.gov/center-news/how-much-heat-emitted-hydrothermal-areas-floor-yellowstone-lake

Yellowstone is hot. The many thermal features within the 631,000-year-old Yellowstone Caldera, including geysers, hot springs, mud pots, and fumaroles, reflect the enormous quantity of heat being released from the magmatic and hydrothermal systems. Measuring this heat and its variation across the region is important for understanding the energetics of Yellowstone. Heat flux is most directly estimated through observations of the thermal gradient and thermal conductivity. The thermal gradient reflects the increase of temperature with depth, and thermal conductivity is a material property describing the ease at which heat can flow through specific material. The product of these two quantities yields the conductive heat flux.

In continental settings like Yellowstone, determinations of heat flux usually require deep boreholes because heating and cooling of the Earth’s surface due to daily, seasonal, and longer temperature changes at the Earth’s surface affect thermal gradient measurements at shallow depths. These boreholes are expensive and undesirable in environmentally sensitive areas, so they aren’t used at Yellowstone. Instead, researchers use indirect methods to estimate the flux of heat, like satellite thermal data. The bottom of Yellowstone Lake, however, offers a stable thermal environment without the noisy on-land temperature variations and where short probes can be used to map variations in heat flux directly.

Heat flux measurements on the floor of Yellowstone Lake were done in 2016–2018 as part of a large, multidisciplinary project called Hydrothermal Dynamics of Yellowstone Lake (HD-YLAKE; https://hdylake.org), which was funded largely by the National Science Foundation with additional support from the National Park Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Global Foundation for Ocean Exploration. HD-YLAKE researchers borrowed techniques used on the ocean floor to make many closely spaced heat flux measurements in Yellowstone Lake. The primary focus of the measurements was the Deep Hole vent field, east of Stevenson Island in the deepest part of lake (about 120 m, or 400 ft).

Measurements by the HD-YLAKE team were designed to measure the total heat flux through the Deep Hole vent field, and to map spatial patterns of heat flux in and around the vent field. The primary tool was a 1-m (3-ft) probe that was inserted into the lake-bottom sediment by the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) Yogi deployed from the research vessel Annie. The probe has five precision thermistors along its length for measuring the thermal gradient with depth, and a heating wire used to measure thermal conductivity. Once the probe is inserted into sediment, the thermal gradient is determined by measuring the temperature along the length of the probe, and the thermal conductivity is estimated by heating the probe for a short period of time and monitoring the decay of heat as the probe cools.

The overall heat flux around Yellowstone is estimated to be about 2 W/m2, about 30 times greater than the global average heat flux of about 0.065 W/m2. Measurements around the Deep Hole vent field range between 69 and 0.84 W/m2. Not surprisingly, lower values are found outside the vent field, and higher values are found inside. The median value for measurements within the Deep Hole area was 13 W/m2. The larger flux of heat within the vent field is due to fluids that focus heat as they rise through the sediments at the lake floor.

As might be expected, some of the largest values of heat flux are in the core of the vent field, where hot fluids are discharged into the lake. Fluids discharging through the vents have a mean temperature of 132° C (270° F). Fluids can exist at these high temperatures due to the pressure (about 12 times normal atmospheric pressure) of the overlying lake water. The total heat output of the vent field is about 30 MW—enough to power about 20,000 homes—making it among the highest of any hydrothermal field in Yellowstone. The large quantity of heat released through the Deep Hole vent field is likely due to the high boiling temperatures associated with the elevated pressure found on the lake floor and the character of the hydrothermal fluids rising through the Deep Hole vent field.

These data, published earlier this year (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2020JB021098), offer a fascinating view of the dynamics of the Deep Hole vent field—a hydrothermal area that is among Yellowstone’s most dynamic—and emphasize the many interesting geothermal features at the bottom of Yellowstone Lake.

(Map: Yellowstone Lake bathymetry showing the location of the Deep Hole vent field. Inset shows locations of heat-flux measurements (red dots) in the Deep Hole vent field.)

----------------

Yellowstone Caldera Chronicles is a weekly column written by scientists and collaborators of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory. This week's contribution is from Rob Harris, Professor in the College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences at Oregon State University.

Address

Gardiner, MT
59030

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Wild Bear Adventures posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Wild Bear Adventures:

Videos

Share