USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr99317

Digital data for the geologic framework of the Alaska Peninsula, southwest Alaska, and the Alaska Peninsula terrane

Abstract

These digital databases are the result of the compilation and reinterpretation of published and unpublished 1:250,000- and 1:63,360-scale mapping. The map area covers approximately 62,000 sq km (23,000 sq mi) in land area and encompasses much of 13 1:250,000-scale quadrangles on the Alaska Peninsula in southwestern Alaska. The compilation was done as part of the U.S. Geological Survey's Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment project (AMRAP), whose goal was create and assemble geologic, geochemical, geophysical, and other data in order to perform mineral resource assessments on a quadrangle, regional or statewide basis. The digital data here was created to assist in the completion of a regional mineral resource assessment of the Alaska Peninsula. Mapping on the Alaska Peninsula under AMRAP began in 1977 in the Chignik and Sutwik Island 1:250,000 quadrangles (Detterman and others, 1981). Continued mapping in the Ugashik, bristol bay, and northwestern Karluk quadrangles (Detterman and others, 1987) began in 1979, followed by the Mount Katmai, eastern Naknek, and northwestern Afognak quadrangles (Riehle and others, 1987; Riehle and others, 1993), the Port Moller, Stepovak bay, and Simeonof Island quadrangles (Wilson and others, 1995) beginning in 1983. Work in the Cold bay and False Pass quadrangles (Wilson and others, 1992 [Superseded by Wilson and others 1997, but not incorporated herein]) began in 1986. The reliability of the geologic mapping is variable, based, in part, on the field time spent in each area of the map, the available support, and the quality of the existing base maps. In addition, our developing understanding of the geology of the Alaska Peninsula required revision of earlier maps, such as the Chignik and Sutwik Island quadrangles map (Detterman and others, 1981) to reflect this new knowledge. We have revised the stratigraphic nomenclature (Detterman and others, 1996) and our assignment of unit names to some rocks has been changed. All geologic maps on which this compilation is based were published using the Universal Transverse Mercator projection (UTM; Zones 3, 4, and 5). because of the distortions use of the UTM projection would produce on a map of small scale and large area, the plot and graphics files derived from this data are plotted using a more appropriate Albers Equal-area projection for publication.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 53.98° to 59.13° latitude; -165.02° to -153.11° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Frederic H. Wilson, Robert L. Detterman, Gregory D. DuBois. 1999. Digital data for the geologic framework of the Alaska Peninsula, southwest Alaska, and the Alaska Peninsula terrane. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr99317

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona