First, since the feature's activity seems associated with Little Squirt, why was it not given a designation like "GT-TD2-Little Squirt"? Seems like it's being associated with the wrong feature.
The activity around this feature has been around for at least 2-1/2 years. I noted it and posted a photo of the area on 2021 May 23. Later on I noted in the May 26 report that it seemed to be active along with Little Squirt.
On Geyser Hill, these sorts of areas of hot ground come and go, and a few years from now this feature may not even be locatable. (For example, back in the 1980s several deep holes appeared next to the boardwalk near Plume. The NPS put railings up. After a few years the holes naturally filled in, but the railings were still there until a boardwalk renovation was done. Now the location of the holes can only be found if you know where to look. No activity, so no name left hanging.)
So why the need for a name now? A designation is fine, but who tried to slap the name "Pygmy" on this, and why? I guess it's a way for people to leave their mark. But until the activity stabilizes, any name would be inappropriate. We have a proliferation of many ephemeral features with silly names already. Plus, a feature that's evolving shouldn't be named for a characteristic that can easily change. (The best example of that is Graceful Geyser at Norris, which really was graceful until it turned itself into a ragged hole.)
Which leads to the part about "USBGN's policy on derogatory names." Because of the long standing policy of not naming thermal features after people, living or dead, we have been spared iconoclasm from the perpetually offended over geyser names now being considered somehow offensive to someone, somewhere. With a few exceptions. But, the last time I looked, a few years ago, "Chinese Spring" did not appear in the USBGN online database, but "Chinaman Spring" still did. (I've always thought Belgian Pool will get the rename treatment someday...)
Yes, "pygmy" is a word that was used to describe some groups of people. It's also a synonym for "small", as is "midget", or "dwarf" or "runt", or "elf", or "model", or "fairy", or "shrimpy", all meaning "littleness". Shall we assume that any geyser name implying "littleness" needs to be changed, lest someone somewhere who doesn't care at all about geysers is momentarily offended on behalf of someone no one has ever met?
Finally, under current policy, it appears the USBGN is never going to approve "Pygmy", or any other name, for any feature any more, no matter how inoffensive. Last century I put in the effort get a number of Sawmill group features made "official". A few years after that I encountered Whittlesey who made a comment about how wonderful it was that GOSA had done the work on those names. I pointed out to him that GOSA had nothing to do with it, but it was one individual who took the initiative and did all the work alone. It was shortly after that that the moratorium on looking at making thermal feature names official came down, which I find to be an interesting coincidence.
So at this point the owners of GeyserTimes have become an arbiter of thermal feature names, taking on the role abdicated by the USGBN and the bureaucrats at Mammoth. I hope they put this power to use wisely for the future.
Recently Cynthia Barwin noticed a listing on eBay.com. Since she wasn't interested in bidding, I went and acquired this stereo photo. The image is taken from the listing, as I currently have no good way to scan it. A notation on the Kodachrome slide mount implies that it was taken at 10:50.
For some reason, the same Haynes photo of an eruption of Excelsior was used exclusively for years, as if it was the only known photo of Excelsior in eruption.
Maybe it was the only or best one he had, but there are others. Here's that photo, tinted for a postcard.
Here's a slightly different stereoview.
Next are a couple of Haynes cabinet prints. These were photographs larger than a postcard mounted to cardboard backing.
Finally, here's another eruption view, taken by Ingersoll.
Here are a series of prints and photographs showing bridges in the Upper Geyser Basin that no longer exist.
First are a couple of series of lithographs. The Haynes "Souvenirs of Yellowstone" and W.C.Riley's "The World's Wonderland" are similar and different. Both contain many of the same pictures, some of which are still commonly recognizable. Other pictures are unique to that particular publication. Both are fanfolded-- a long strip folded to look like pages, but the Riley is in "landscape" format, wider than it is high, which the Haynes is in "portrait". The Riley was published in 1889, while the Haynes is undated, but was from Fargo, D.T.
Souvenir of Yellowstone - Haynes
The World's Wonderland - Riley
Souvenir of Yellowstone - Haynes
The World's Wonderland - Riley
Stereoviews document the wide variety of bridges in the Upper Basin.
Firehole River and Bridge [Fan & Mortar activity in background] O.W.Watson
Our Cook at the Hot Springs [Terra Cotta Geysers] T.W.Ingersoll (from M.A.Bellingham collection)
Beehive Geyser and Old Faithful Inn, Co-operative View Co.
Footbridge over Firehole River back of Old Faithful Geyser Stereo-Travel Co.
General view of Upper Basin, looking down Firehole River Stereo-Travel Co.
Crowd coming from Geyser Hill to see Old Faithful Play Stereo-Travel Co.
Next are some photographs. The first two are postcards, while the last two are panoramas over a foot wide.
Wesley Andrews Postcard
Photo postcard, source unknown
Unpublished panorama
Unpublished panorama
As a bonus, here's a couple more images from "Souvenir", showing how different some features were back then.
Lithograph from "Souvenir Yellowstone National Park" by Haynes, 1879.
"Waiting for the Splendid" is something that neither I nor anyone else has done this century. While that sput up at Norris may be known for having intervals "from four days to fifty years", Splendid has had intervals from one hour to 25 years, a much larger range. And, unfortunately, it appears that the current 25 year interval is going to get longer.
What does one look for while waiting for Splendid, and what was it like?
Observations of Splendid's activity must be done from the northern walkway. The pool can't be seen from the southern. The only advantage the southern walkway has is that the Giant Platform is visible and any activity over there can be seen.
There are two runoff channels toward the north that pass under the boardwalk. Both would have a trickle of water coming out Splendid's pool. The western one was where Marie Wolf place her marker. Originally a pinecone, it became a stick once the pinecone disappeared. The stick was about 25cm long, and normally would be moved several meters down the runoff during an eruption. But on several occasions, it too would disappear, and need to be replaced.
There was a band of sputs between Comet and Splendid. At least two of them were within the crater itself, one along the wall, the other nearer to the vent. Their activity was only noticeable when the crater was drained. Over by Comet there was at least one good sized sput between the cone and the walkway. Many of these sputs are no longer visible, and the remaining activity seems to be decreased. No variations were ever noted in relation to Splendid and Daisy's eruption cycles. And except after concerted eruptions, Comet didn't show much variation in its activity either.
If those side vent sputs to the west of Splendid's crater ever got a name, I don't remember Marie Wolf ever using it. And they have never varied in activity either.
Activity for Daisy when Splendid wasn't active was fairly consistent. We joked that 3m43s was normal, and that any variation of more than a few seconds was noteworthy. The same held for intervals. Daisy intervals were around 80 to 85 minutes long. As short as 75 wouldn't be considered unusual, and over 90 could happen if it was windy. But consistent variation in interval could indicate that Splendid was perhaps preparing to erupt, especially if the barometer was dropping.
As Daisy erupted, the activity from Splendid calmed down, and the water level dropped. By the end of the eruption of Daisy, Splendid would be down about 30cm or so, and calm. Over the next few minutes, it might have an upwelling of water, but no boiling or bursting. After about five minutes, there would then be a large surge from the vent, as high as a meter, and the crater would quickly fill. Soon Splendid would be back into overflowing down those two runoff channels. As the next Daisy eruption approached, Splendid would drop slightly.
Splendid erupts in series. While some series could consist of a single eruption, it was more common to have about half a dozen eruptions over the next few hours. Some series could last as long as 36 hours.
When Splendid was in an active series, the activity of Daisy could change. Intervals could be as long as seven hours. Some of the solo eruptions during a series could be as short as two minutes, and short and weak, big minors. Or they could last up to five minutes and be quite powerful and tall, which was typical for the solo after a long interval.
There were two windows in which Splendid would erupt to start a series. The first one was about ten minutes after the start of an eruption of Daisy. This was a common time for a big surge as Splendid refilled, and it wasn't usual for there to be a false start during that time. And false starts could build into actual eruptions. Most of these initial eruptions immediately after Daisy lasted about two minutes, and were not known to be particularly tall.
The second window was about ten minutes prior to an eruption of Daisy. If you considered the average interval to be 80 minutes, then this meant that there could be an eruption about 70 minutes after a Daisy eruption. These tended to be stronger eruptions, with durations from three to five minutes.
After the initial eruption, both Splendid and Daisy would quickly refill and become even more vigorous in their activity. A second Splendid eruption could follow within 60 to 90 minutes, or sometimes take several hours.
When the interval was shorter, and the initial Splendid eruption was prior to the expected time for Daisy's eruption, this could result in a concerted eruption. Later in the series, a short interval cold also result in a concerted. Concerted eruptions did not follow a solo Daisy eruption. They seemed to need a solo Splendid to precede them.
Many of the Splendid eruptions came in pairs, the first eruption being about four minutes long, then about an hour later followed by a longer, stronger eruption that usually was in concert with Daisy.
A concerted eruption almost always started with an eruption of Splendid, with Daisy joining in after a minute or so. Daisy could be huge, with a long duration, or it could be weak. In the 1980s, it seemed that the strong eruptions would stimulate Splendid into a strong eruption also. That wasn't the case in during the 1997 activity. Then, when Daisy started, Splendid would weaken, and often quickly finish erupting. There were proportionally a lot more concerted eruptions that year, but they weren't as good.
A strong concerted would cause the entire system to drain, including Comet. No water would be visible in any vent. As it refilled, Brilliant pool would erupt sideways across its pool. A concerted eruption also usually meant that it would be four to six hours before the next eruption in the group, and that eruption was often a solo Daisy. Splendid's intervals would be more in the eight to ten hour range, although I remember getting caught by unexpected intervals in the four hour range.
In the summers of 1986 and 1987, Splendid eruption series did tend to start during low barometric pressure. I kept a barograph running and when the line started dropping, we paid closer attention to the Daisy Group. It seemed like the series usually started when the pressure started to rise back up, even temporarily before a deeper drop. So it wasn't unusual for the series to start in rotten weather, and end up when it was nice.
On the other hand, more than once I spent all my time out there waiting in rain gear. Sometimes we'd wait out at night if it cleared up. But those were cold nights. Once fell asleep in a down bag on the walkway and when awakened a few hours later by some gazers, I had to crack the ice off the bag. The temperature was 16°F. (Because it was a long quiet period, when Splendid did erupt, it had one of the more spectacular concerted eruptions to end the series.)
Splendid has two centers of activity down in its vent-- the "Side Boiler" and the "Main Vent". The Side Boiler is not to be confused with the sputs on the other side of the bridge. It was over the Side Boiler where Marie Wolf once got a temperature of 217°F using a maximum thermometer at the surface.
When Splendid is active, both of these vents can boil up in a full pool to heights of at least a meter. The Main Vent is wider and behind the Side Boiler as seen from the walkway. The Side Boiler activity was considered to be a bad sign, in that its activity never built up into an actual eruption, or even a false start.
An eruption of Splendid starts with the activity of the Main Vent climbing higher than the usual one meter boils. It can slowly build, and at some point the boiling turns into more of a weak jetting. At the same time, the water starts pouring out of Splendid's crater and down the runoff.
The jetting can reach as high as five or six meters, then, about 20 to 30 seconds after the start, it will suddenly stop. This is a "false start", and they were quite common during the 1980s active series. Or the activity would start to climb, slowly over the next half-minute or so to reach the maximum height. In either case, the start of the eruption or false start was the time when the jetting started.
An eruption of Splendid is probably the least noisy of any large geyser. At times, most of the noise comes from the water landing around the vent. Toward the end of a strong eruption that lasts over six minutes, Splendid can start to turn to steam, and get noisier. I never saw them, but in the late 1970s there were eruptions where it had a definite, noisy steamphase that could be heard over by Grand or even farther away.
Currently the activity in the group shows no sign of any shift toward Splendid becoming active. (Yes, it's always possible for a single isolated eruption to occur, especially in response to an earthquake.) The cycle of Splendid responding to Daisy is still there, but muted and not approaching the levels shown in those years.
What's primarily needed, I believe, is for there to be overflow from Splendid, especially as the time of a Daisy eruption approaches. Daisy's intervals need to get shorter, back to under 100 minutes, and Daisy's durations need to be about 20 to 30 seconds longer.
Even when not in an active mode there would be isolated eruptions of Splendid, as was the case during between the activity that died down in 1987 and picked back up in 1996. Many of these solo eruptions were the type right after Daisy erupted, and during springtime. There were at least two Memorial Day weekends where I was in the crowd at Grand and we got to see Splendid, too.
In 1997 there was so much going on, with eruptions of Giant, Fan & Mortar, and Splendid, and Grand still being interesting, that I had to prioritize my attention. I never saw Fan & Mortar erupt that year. The last five burst Grand I've seen was from Splendid, about an hour after an eruption, during the 1997 activity. (Mike Keller was there, too.) As it turned out, I was one of the few to concentrate on seeing Splendid, and if my count was accurate, I saw one hundred eruptions that year. Splendid hasn't been seen since, so I made the right decision.
A view of Round Geyser in eruption as seen from Geyser Hill, near Depression Geyser. I don't know who took this photo, or remember how I got a copy.
Next are three photos Mary Ann Moss took. Opal was a geyser that she saw several times over the years.
Opal Pool, 1979 Sept 13. Photo by M.A.MossCauliflower Geyser, 1983 Sept 22. Photo by M.A.Moss.Excelsior Geyser, 1983 Sept 15. Photo by M.A.Moss.
This eruption doesn't look all that big, but note the figure standing on the far overlook at the left. Also, the jet from the big boil is easily well above the rim.
Here's a series of photos showing some of the activity of Link Geyser and the Chain Lakes Group during the activity in October 1983. Over a period of five days, Mary Ann Moss, Marie Wolf and I got to see several dozen major eruptions. We missed much of the activity of the first day.
Mary Ann took these photos, and as you can see, it was cold, damp and gray that week, which made seeing the eruptions difficult at times, but it didn't snow or rain. For more details on the activity, see my article in one of the early GOSA Transactions. Think of this as a supplement to that article.
Runoff from Link Geyser eruption in Oct 1983. Photos by M.A.Moss.
Here's what we saw of one of the first eruptions we witnessed. A lot of steam coming from opaque water. The ruts produced by the runoff channel didn't get much deeper or wider over the next few days, which supports our conclusion that the first few eruptions that no one saw were even more voluminous and powerful than what we saw.
Link Geyser eruption, October 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
Here's one of the better photos, showing some of the details of the jets. I would estimate the height here at around 15 meters. We think we saw higher, more angled jets at times.
Link Geyser runoff, Oct. 1983. Photos by M.A.Moss.
A couple more views of the discharge from an eruption.
Next are a series of close-up views of the drained vents of the Chained Lakes.
Clasp Geyser vent, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
North Chain Lake Geyser vent, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
Vent between North and Middle Chain Lake Geysers, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
Middle Chain Lake Geyser vent, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
Bottomless Pit vent, Oct, 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
Link Geyser vent, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss
Link Geyser vent, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss
Eruption of Link Geyser, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
Firehole River just after eruption of Link Geyser, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
Aftermath of eruption of Link Geyser, Oct. 1983. Photo by M.A.Moss.
Note the debris washed onto the bike trail. We never saw an eruption put out enough water to reach that far, which again supports our assumption that the first eruptions were even larger.
And that's J.Randolph Railey watching the eruption.
It appears that the locations and designations of the various sputs that have appeared in and around the old site of North Triplet are in need of further documentation. In going through some old files, I came across photos that Lynn Stephens took of that area in October 1989. While a lot of things there have changed since then, this does give a good record of what was happening there, and how it relates to current activity.
Sketch map of Grand's Sputs area. From 1989.
The map comes from my original GOSA Transactions article on the area, and is still a good guide. The only major difference is the disappearance of East Triplet, and the associated Sput-Cs near it.
Sputs overview, Oct 1989. Photo by L.Stephens.
In the center of this photo, with a downed branch beside it, is Sputnik, or Sput-B. To the left, the plume of steam, is Delta, or Sput-D. In the foreground are several frying pans constituting Sput-E, which are no longer active, but the area is still devoid of vegetation.
Sputs-F, Sputnik and East Triplet. Photo by L.Stephens.
On the left edge of the photo the rim of East Triplet's vent can be made out. Above and to the right, beside the downed log is Sputnik. The large brown area of dead grass is Sput-F. Eventually, three areas of activity became more pronounced and were given sub-designations.
Sput-F. Photo by L.Stephens.Sput-F3. Photo by L.Stephens.Sput-F1 and Sput-F2. Photo by L.Stephens.Sput-B1. Photo by L.Stephens.Sputnik (Sput-B), 1989 Sep 17. Photo by L.Stephens.
Sputnik also developed some satellite vents, one on each side. Over the years the craters have been filled and cleared out, so which is which is probably not possible to determine any more.
Sput-E1 and Sput-B2. Photo by L.Stephens.
In the foreground is the wet frying pan at the north end of Sput-E. Behind it, in the middle of the photo is Sput-B2, while Sputnik itself is near the top of the photo.
Note that at this time, Sput-D was a small hole which steamed heavily. Over the years it enlarged itself.
Grand Sputs in 2020. Photo by H.Koenig
The photo I took last year isn't from up close, but one can still see the are of Sput-F is still active, and the grass there hasn't recovered. Finally, here is a short video showing the area with everything that was active in June 2020.
I was digging around in my files, looking for something else, and I came across this copy of a letter I sent to a friend two days after Giant Geyser erupted in 1986. Since I wrote it while the memories were fresh, I figure it might be interesting. The photos posted here were taken by George Strasser (Paul's brother), who not only had a camera, but remembered to use it.
On 20 August at 1136, Giant erupted. I was at Daisy for the start, and had just passed Giant five minutes earlier. At that time, it looked like it has all summer, fairly dead. So I get to Daisy, see that Splendid's markers are in place (it had four eruptions the next day), and start to unload my pack. Then I looked over at Daisy, and saw this huge steam cloud rise above the trees.
View from Old Faithful Lodge
Paul Strasser, John Railey and I have been using CB radios to keep in touch. They have been useful, but this time they paid for themselves. I grabbed the radio as I was running down the boardwalk and yelled into it, "Paul, something's erupting in the Giant Group!" He had just turned his on, and heard the "erupting in the Giant Group" part from the Lodge Cabins. He and Suzanne were down there in twelve minutes. Several other people saw the steamcloud from the VC, Lower Ham's store, or from Fantail (Biscuit Basin) and assumed either Grand or Oblong. They didn't see it.
[Paul and Suzanne were about to head out with the family of his brother George, "to look for animals", when the call came. The family was abandoned, allowing George to walk out on his own. Fortunately, he took the only series of photos of this eruption that I know about.]
Talked with some people there at the start, and they said that the sputs started maybe 30 seconds before Giant, and Mastiff was erupting only three to four feet high, but overflowing. When it started, Giant sent out a wall of water, running over the south end of the "T" boardwalk. They were afraid of scalded feet.
As I ran around the trees, I could see the water column still climbing. Mastiff was steaming and splashing heavily, while Catfish was sending a thin angled spray to 25 feet. Bijou was steaming only, and the others quickly followed. I took a short cut, and was quite pleased with events.
Giant was now near maximum height, which I estimated [measured?] to be between 150 and 180 feet (~165'). Two night before Sam Martinez and I were going to lay out a baseline, but decided not to since we would never get a chance to use it. [I think I told Sam: "It'll get stolen before we can use it."] The water column was thick, a lot like Ol' Filthy in that sense only. It also pulses, like Beehive, so it doesn't stay at max height, but drops to about 80', then surges back up. The water seemed clear, and the weather was excellent. Clear sky, dead calm but a bit humid. Paul said the steam cloud had to be several thousand feet high. Earlier that day was a thick fog, and later it rained.
By the time Paul and Suzanne arrived, surges were still in the 120' range, but the power had definitely diminished, Originally the water column appeared vertical, now it began to angle to the west slightly. It also sent spray toward the boardwalk. But on the whole, it looked exactly like the old photos.
A half hour later, Giant was still hitting 50', but there was little runoff. By now several sputs were erupting on the platform. They looked like little Uncertains, but only ~4' high. They also surged at the same time as Giant.
By 1227, Giant was mostly steam, and all steam by 1236. Grotto was not erupting all this time.
Note wet boardwalk.
This was a strange eruption for coincidences. Not just Sam and I at the baseline. The day before at Splendid (no eruptions) T.Scott commented that he didn't have his camera, and if Giant erupted, he would kill himself.
South Purple pool had had several heavy surges of water earlier this year, and now was down below overflow. Later Grotto had some sort of steam phase, or minor eruption. The sputs between it and Rocket were erupting, but Rocket and Grotto made lots of noise and occasionally splashed. The next "real" Grotto [eruption] did not have an eruption of Grotto Fountain [preceding it].
Oblong has been weird this year, with intervals from 32 minutes(!) to 24 hours. Most intervals seem to tend toward 20 hours. Now it had three eruptions in a three hour period, with one interval of 37 minutes. These closing eruptions of a short interval are strange. The water is ejected from an empty pool, and some jets [from the north side] reach the river. They area also very noisy.
It took Bijou about 24 hours to recover, but the next day, the group looked as good, if not better, than it had all year. Now I'm hoping for an interval of less than a year. Say this coming March.
That night, we measured out the distance markers for Giant. Holding one end of the tape over Giant's vent, knowing that it couldn't erupt, was a scary experience.
In the previous thirty years, there had been only four known eruptions of Giant— in 1963, 1978, 1982 and 1984. It's been twenty four years since the last known eruption of Splendid...
M.A.Bellingham recently came across a photo in which I am "figure". Here's what I remember of that visit, which, after 35 years, may not be accurate.
Blowout pit west of Norris. Photo by R.A.Hutchinson, 1986.
Over the winter in 1986, probably in February, a snowcoach driver reported seeing a huge steamcloud off to the west of Norris. By July, someone had visited the area, and reported that there was at least one new, deep crater there, which had uprooted trees in what appeared to be a non-thermal area.
On 31 Jul 1986, Rick Hutchinson went out to investigate, and I tagged along. He parked at the large turnout in Elk Park, southwest of Norris. We forded the river and headed off to the north. The meadow area was pretty dry, so we didn't need to deal with marshy areas. We then we headed through the trees. Rick pointed out at one point that we were passing through a very old sinter shield area. For some old trees that had fallen over, and the white sinter among the roots was obvious.
As we approached the blowout crater, we went along a creek. For about 50 meters (or more), there were a series of frying pans in the bed of the creek. I don't remember if we were headed upstream or down. The blowout was near the creek.
Rick knew what to expect, as part of the gear he had brought out was a rope for rappelling into the crater so he could take samples of the water and soil and rocks. I told him that I didn't know how to help him if he got in trouble, but he said that there shouldn't be any problem. He also brought a small saw, in order to cut one of the tree trunks that had been snapped off and then count the rings, and get an idea of how long it had been since there had been thermal activity there.
So while Rick was down in the crater, I picked a nice sized tree and cut off the section. We counted 75 rings on a tree that had been alive when the eruption happened. I'm not sure what sort of things Rick collected, but he never needed my assistance while down in the pit.
As for a name, at the time I thought that "Sizzling Creek" would be a nice, bland, almost generic name that still was descriptive of a memorable feature of the area.
Back in the mid 1990s I learned that one of the microbiologists had gotten the name she'd given to her favorite slime source near Sulphur Cauldron at Mud Volcano made official by the U.S. Board of Geographic Names. This kinda annoyed me, because it seemed self-important, while people who had been observing geyser activity for years had never tried to inflict their names in this fashion. But it also gave me an idea.
I tend to not want to give new features names. I prefer, if needed, to reference new, small holes in relation to nearby, more established features. Hence all those sputs near Grand with designations like Sput A and Sput D and such.
The only names I can remember being responsible for were joint efforts with other gazers like Tomáš Vachuda-- Mortar's "Bottom Vent" and the nearby "Norris Pool." Not much chance of getting names like those approved, and for good reason. (And of course, "The Great Flounder.")
But there were, and still are, a lot of names which have been in use for decades which weren't official. Most of the Sawmill and Grand Groups, for example. Thhe only official names were Grand Geyser, Turban Geyser, Sawmill Geyser, Spasmodic Geyser and Tardy Geyser and Bulger Spring.
So I decided that all those names should get the official treatment. I threw in Link Geyser just because a big geyser like that needed to have its name be nailed down, too.
I proposed fifteen names in total. Twelve were successful, one got changed slightly and two didn't make it.
Belgian Pool
Bulger Geyser (rename from Bulger Spring)
Churn Geyser
Crystal Geyser
East Triplet Geyser
Link Geyser
Old Tardy Geyser
Oval Spring
Penta Geyser
Percolator
Rift Geyser
Slurp Geyser
Uncertain Geyser
Vent Geyser
West Triplet Geyser
I proposed "Percolator", without the "Geyser" suffix because having every name ending in "Geyser" or "Spring" or "Pool" gets tiresome and repetitive. Here was an opportunity to do something different. Unfortunately, one of the reviewers noticed this and commented on it. Rather than fighting for the proposed name, I amended the submission to include "Geyser".
The two names that didn't make it were "Slurp Geyser" and "Crystal Geyser". Another reviewer objected to Slurp because the name "Crystal Springs Satellite Geyser"* was an alternate name, and this person didn't see a need for a change. And of course, that name is dependent on not changing Crystal Spring to Crystal Geyser, so that name needed to stay the same, too. Again, instead of fighting for those changes with someone who showed signs of insisting on those names, I just withdrew the proposals.
I've since learned that proposing geyser names like this will not be accepted. Not sure why, don't really care. Since, other than Slurp, I got all my names through. Although, I do regret not getting Plume Geyser and Morning Geyser made official, or getting Dragon Geyser changed to Aurum Geyser. Maybe I was thinking of saving them for a round two.
* Note: It is USBGN policy to not include apostrophes in names, which makes this name even more ungainly.)
I was digging around recently looking for some old geyser data when I came across something that might be of general interest.
Back in 1993 I was working with Rick Hutchinson on recording geyser activity. He let me use some of the TempMentor devices, and I wrote a Mac application so I could access and download and display the data. The TempMentor that I used was inside a self-contained cylinder, about a foot high and about four inches across that provided a waterproof place for the recorder. The sensor itself was in the bottom of the cylinder, so I had to place it directly in the runoff channel of the feature I wanted to record. Fortunately, even back then there was enough space under the boardwalks that I could easily place it, even during the daytime. (When the boardwalks were rebuilt, they were raised, mostly to prevent them from continuing to provide marmot and tree-rat habitat.)
I placed the devices at Grand, West Triplet, and Plume. I also have Castle data, but I think that was from a device Rick placed, as even back then we were not encouraged to go that far off trail.
I still have the data I collected, but it's in a format that I would have to reconstruct. Fortunately, part of the program that I wrote did some processing to look for eruptions. That's what I came across, and it's interesting to look at now, 28 years later. I've attached the text files to this posting, as they are a bit too big to just add as is.
Plume runs from 09 Jul 1993 through 12 Aug 1993, without any gaps in coverage. During that time not only was Plume "going to sleep" but there were also a couple of Giantess eruptions. So the data shows not only the overnight pauses in activity, but the shortened intervals in response to Giantess' eruption. Most of the non-Giantess eruption intervals were around an hour, but in the 36 or so hours afterward, that interval dropped in half.
Most of the time Plume went to sleep around midnight, and woke up around noon, so many of the sleeps were in the twelve hour range, But there are also some that lasted the better part of a day (19 hours in one case). The recovery from Giantess mode was pretty abrupt, too. In one case it there were just four transition intervals before it was back into the hour range. In the other case, there were just three, and then it went to sleep two more intervals later.
West Triplet was also interesting. I moved the Plume recorder there so there's a record from 13 Aug 1993 through 15 Sep 1993. I noted the Rift times in the file, but not sure how/where I got them. Sam Martinez was also doing some recording, and he may have been the source. In any case, the recordings clearly show that the West Triplet eruptions that preceded Rift lasted longer and Rift started about 1/2 hour in (at the time West Triplet would have normally quit.)
Grand activity is in several segments. The first runs from 09 Apr 1993 through 10 Jun 1993, while the second is from 04 Jul 1993 through 15 Sep 1993. The shortest intervals were just under seven hours, while there were no intervals over 12 hours. For back then, that was nice, consistent behavior for it.
Finally, Castle runs from 21 Aug 1993 through 11 Sep 1993. During that time most intervals were eleven hours, give or take. There were one to three minor eruptions a week, and several major eruption intervals between them. The intervals after the minor eruption varied from three to seven hours, and the major eruption interval after that was about an hour longer than usual.
Since the start of the latest period of activity of New Crater/Steamboat, I've managed to see fourteen of the eruptions, all from the start, and all from my chosen viewpoint (platforms or the bridge). The amount of time waiting for each has varied considerably. I've seen enough eruptions that some statistics on the waits can be gathered.
First, there are two ways to determine how long is a wait. It can either be the amount of time waiting for an eruption since the previous eruption, or the amount of time waiting since the last observed eruption. Going by the first, I've waited 24 times, and didn't see anything ten of those waits. Only three times did I see an eruption on the first day of waiting after seeing the previous eruption.
Since I have seen eruptions from the start, I don't feel the need to wait in the cold and dark to experience a lot of noise with not much of a view. So I'm not going to arrive much before dawn, and will clear out around dark. (That I'd rather drive as little in the dark as possible, especially in the evening, is another factor. I have no desire to encounter a bison on the road.)
The amount of daylight varies depending on the season, but even in October there can be as much as nine hours of daylight. In June I have put in close to fifteen hour days.
The shortest waits were less than a day. In October of the first year of activity I actually had a wait of 2h20m, and in several other cases I got the eruption in the middle of the day or early evening.
On the other hand, I've had long waits. The most for a particular eruption, without seeing it, was early in 2020, when I waited almost 55 hours without success. I've also had other waits well over 30 hours with nothing to show for it.
When looking at just the amount of time put in since the previous eruption, things get worse. I had to put in 154 hours, going back to the start of September last year, for the first eruption I saw in 2020. In the middle of the summer of 2019, there was another 62 hour stretch.
Date
Seen?
Days
Wait Time
Total Wait
2018 May 27
Seen
2
19h05m
19h05m
2018 Jul 20
1
9h45m
2018 Aug 04
Seen
3
22h50m
32h35m
2018 Sep 07
Seen
2
12h50m
12h50m
2018 Sep 17
Seen
1
5h35m
5h35m
2018 Oct 08
Seen
1
2h20m
2h20m
2018 Oct 15
Seen
3
16h40m
16h40m
2019 May 20
Seen
2
12h05m
12h05m
2019 May 27
3
34h45m
2019 Jul 24
1
12h20m
2019 Jul 30
Seen
2
15h40m
62h55m
2019 Aug 27
Seen
2
17h10m
17h10m
2019 Sep 03
2
27h25m
2019 Sep 11
3
37h35m
2020 May 31
4
54h40m
2020 Jun 29
2
26h00m
2020 Jul 03
Seen
1
8h30m
154h10m
2020 Aug 03
Seen
1
3h40m
3h40m
2020 Aug 09
3
30h50m
2020 Aug 14
Seen
1
9h30m
40h20m
2020 Aug 20
1
9h35m
2020 Aug 26
Seen
3
40h10m
49h45m
2020 Sep 01
1
13h05m
2020 Sep 09
Seen
3
30h15m
43h20m
Totals
14 (24)
48
471h30m
Ave: 33h40m
That's a total of over 471 hours, not quite ten hours per day, spread over 48 days. Or 33h40m per eruption seen, or 19h40m for each wait.
The whole point of this is that there is no "luck" involved in when a person sees sees so many eruption. I wasn't the only person who spent a lot of time on that platform, and ended up seeing as many or more eruptions. We all put in a lot of time out there.
The wait time for the first eruption I saw also doesn't include the time I spent in 1982 and didn't see anything. It was late August/early September, and I was in Yellowstone for a two week vacation, before going back to work in Oregon. At the time there weren't that many gazers, so Fred Hirschmann, the head naturalist at Norris, let us sleep out on the old middle platform, as long as our gear wasn't visible when visitors were around. His rationale was that it was better to have us out where our locations would be known, rather than our skulking around in the woods and becoming bear bait. (Despite this, at least one person still insisted on skulking about during the night.) I ended up spending about 100 hours, straight, on that platform waiting for nothing to happen. Occasionally would wander over for Echinus, but didn't want to be out of sight any more than necessary.
That was the year some those of us waiting got so tired of the constant repetition of the same questions that we started pinning cards with answers to those common questions on the railing. (A FAQ before the term was invented.)
I finally gave up when I had just a couple of days left in my visit, just so I could see something else erupt. As it turned out, the eruption finally took place about two days after I left. Other than stopping by while visiting Norris for other reasons, I never did wait again until 2018.
So in some sense, I put in about 120 hours for that first eruption, in two sessions spaning 36 years.
While preparing for another attempt at visiting the thermal areas of New Zealand and Iceland, as well as the western U.S., it occurred to me that it shouldn't be too difficult to compare the sizes of the various area. In The Transactions Vol. 7, T.Scott Bryan does a comparison of the size of some thermal areas. He just presents some basic line drawings, while I figured I could download satellite maps set to the same scale, which would give a lot more details.
The two areas I couldn't include completely are the Upper and Lower Geyser Basins. They are huge compared to everywhere else. Instead I limited them to Geyser Hill/Old Faithful areas and the Fountain Paint Pots. The only other thermal area presented here that doesn't quite fit is Waimangu, where I wasn't able to include the lakeside thermal area.
Geyser Hill, Upper Geyser BasinFountain Paint Pots, Lower Geyser BasinMidway Geyser BasinBack Basin, Norris Geyser BasinShoshone Geyser BasinWest Thumb Geyser BasinHaukadulur, IcelandHveravellir, IcelandOrakeikorako, New ZealandWhakarewarewa/Te Puia, New ZealandWaimangu, New ZealandWaiotapu, New ZealandMickey H.S., OregonSteamboat Springs, Nevada
Update 2020-Mar-27: Added section comparing aerial views from 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2018.
In 1984, Bill Pulliam wrote up a paper on his observations of New Crater/Steamboat Geyser entitled "The 100 Meter Sput." In it, he pointed out that only two features were known to have reached that height, the other being Waimangu Geyser at Waimangu, New Zealand. Many other features have reached 90 meters (300 feet), but in the past year, I've discovered references to a third eruptive feature that was estimated to erupt well over 100 meters.
My very rough measurements of New Crater/Steamboat Geyser eruptions have returned heights as much as 123 meters (405ft), and others have arrived at similar and even much higher heights.
Waimangu Geyser hasn't been active in over a century. It's not just dormant, it's gone, and won't be coming back. When we visited the Waimangu thermal area of New Zealand in 2019, the tourist trail between Frying Pan Lake and Inferno Cauldron goes right through the site of the geyser crater. We walked through there without realizing it. Only on our return trip out did we notice that unlike much of the rest of the crater, there was a large circular area where not much was growing. This is an area where otherwise the "bush" is thick where it's not been cleared for agriculture. What thermal activity there is in that area consists of sputs along the stream that empties Frying Pan Lake. I think there's little danger of Waimangu itself coming back to life.
What are the three hundred foot/ninety meter sputs? I've found references to a few of them.
The obvious ones are Giant Geyser and Excelsior Geyser in Yellowstone. There have not been reports of Giant erupting up to 300 feet although I've measured an eruption at 72 meters, and know I've seen higher.
Excelsior is said to have erupted to "as high as" 300ft, which would be 90 meters.
The first eruptions of Semi-Sentinial, north of Norris, were described as being around 300 feet.
Some say that Great Fountain superbursts can reach up to 250ft, but i've not heard of any hard measurements to support anything higher.
In Iceland, there's Geysir, said to erupt to up to 200ft in years past, but that's nowhere close to 90 meters.
At Dolina Geizerov, Grot was reported to have a horizontal throw of 250ft, but in a broad arc without a similar height.
In New Zealand, before the Ohaki Dam flooded the area, Orakeikorako had Minguini Geyser, which was described as erupting up to 295 feet. That's almost exactly 90 meters.
This past year I discovered references to a third "100 meter sput" feature.
In New Zealand there was an eruption of a feature to heights estimated well over 100 meters. That feature is S-721, located in Kuirau Park in downtown Rotorua. On the eastern side of the park are numerous muddy thermal features. These are mostly in a line south of the large, clear, boiling Kuirau Lake at the north end, and there is a second line of features perpendicular to that forming a sort of sideways "T". There are also a few hot holes here and there. The smaller features are surrounded by wooden fences, either as groups or individual springs, and the areas between them are mowed lawns or thick stands of trees. In the larger areas in the southwest quadrant of the park, there are athletic fields for cricket and rugby, and in the middle, parking lots have been used for a Saturday farmer's market. Since restrictions on well use were put in place in the 1980s, a number of buried features have reappeared at the western end of the perpendicular line of features, to the consternation of the landowners who build houses over some of them. Several of those lots on the west boundary have been incorporated into the park. It's definitely a unique thermal area.
Kuirau Park, 2001 January 26 after eruption of S-721
On 26 January 2001 at c. 1600 hrs NZST, a hydrothermal eruption occurred from an acid sulphate pool in Kuirau Park, mapped as S721. Some 1200m3 of material (about 2000 tonnes) was erupted within about 4 minutes, with blocks of 1m diameter being thrown 70m to the northeast and blocks to 0.15m diameter being thrown to -110m, also to the northeast. This eruption was unusual because the eruption column was inclined to the east from vertical, and erupted debris was ejected to the east, with very little being distributed to the west, north or south. Breccia clasts were examined by Siako (2002) and an older hydrothermal eruption event was recognised by its cemented breccia clasts within the 26 January 2001 ejecta, although its source vent was not identified. [pg.28]
Peter Goodwin (ROC) was in the Aquatic Centre [southwest of the feature] at the time and a colleague called out to him to look at the eruption. He indicated an angle at which he looked up to its top, which equated to 25° or 30° over a distance of -250 m. This gives a height range of 117-144 metres. From his vantage point it appeared to be a vertical column, with big rocks falling out of the dark muddy column, which was surrounded in white steam clouds. [pg.49]
S721 was quite unnotable and without any progressive change throughout several spring surveys spanning 1920s until 1998. It is located at about U16 946361 (Map 3, Map Pocket), and on the afternoon of Friday 26 January 2001 at c. 1645 hrs it suddenly erupted into a powerful hydrothermal eruption. The eruption column was unusual in that it was strongly inclined off the vertical towards the east. It rose to about 100 m height and persisted for about 4-4.5 minutes, with large blocks emitted from amongst a dark muddy column and white steam cloud. A steady loud roaring noise accompanied the eruption, which appeared to be steady in its emission of fine ejecta. [pg.90]
At the time of eruption the weather was overcast and showery rain, with a strong westerly wind of about 20-30 kilometres per hour. It is estimated that 99% or more of eruption ejecta was dispersed in an easterly direction, with very little material landing to the north, south or west of the crater (Fig. 3.32). This ejecta deposit was aligned strongly to the east with two conspicuously separate axes of distribution. A fine wind borne plume of grey mud composed of silt to clay size particles was swept off along an axis of 082°. This formed a continuous ground cover to at least 200 metres distance, over and beyond Ranolf Street and over the Fletcher Challenge Rescue helicopter at its helipad up on Hospital Hill. The mud plume coated cars parked at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, about 1.5 km to the east. Aerial photographs and field studies confirmed the block ejecta dispersed along an axis of about 066°, with the wind-borne mud dispersed along about 082°. [pg.94]
There was also a short report on the eruption a few days later:
Near a road that goes through the park there had been a fairly quiet, murky pool about three meters across, not much different from all the other pools that dot this park. That feature, for 15 minutes in the afternoon of 2001 January 26, erupted to heights estimated well over 100 meters. When the activity subsided, the pool was now about 10 meters across, and left several debris fields across the park and onto a city street well over 100 meters away. [26 January 2001 - Eruption at Kuirau Park, Rotorua]
A second, smaller eruption occurred in the park on 10 December 2006. This eruption lasted over an hour and ejected mud and blocks 15 m into the air, landing up to 30 m from the pool (New Zealand Herald, 2006). This eruption, from Spring 615, occurred close to the 2001 eruption of Spring 721 but was much smaller in size.
Unfortunately, despite spending several hours in the park during our visit there last year, recording video of the features, I didn't go past either S-721, and didn't know about S-615's past. They're now high on the list should I ever visit again. (S-615 is the large pool in the upper right of the photo, next to "JC's Fountain" monument.) Then again, imagine an eruption of New Crater/Steamboat in the middle of a city park, because that's what happened, and it could happen again.
Update: Came across a NZ government website with aerial photos taken over the last 20 years. Below are comparisions of the area around S-721 showing the area before the eruption, and years later.
2001 (Pre-eruption)
2006
2011
2018
Kuirau Park Aerial Views 2001-2018
Note on pronunciation-- In Te Reo Maori, the language of the Maori iwi (tribes) of New Zealand, syllables of the words consist of an optional consonant followed by a vowel or vowel pair. No exceptions, even for imported, foreign words. There are only 12 consonant sounds. The letter pairs "wh" and "ng" are considered to be single consonants. The first, "wh" is now pronounced like a soft "f", but originally was more of a "fw" sound. The other, "ng" is described in a pronunciation guide as "sounds soft like singer, not hard like finger." So "Waimangu" should be pronounced Wai-ma-ngu, not Wai-mang-u or Wai-man-gu.
I don't normally care much for anniversaries, but here's just a quick note that it was 150 years ago on 1870 Sep 18 that a number of geysers were named, including Old Faithful, Beehive, and Grotto.
Then again, get ready for the hype for 2022 March 01, which fortunately, will be at a time when the park will be mostly shut down.
