SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “GSA Field Guides”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

30 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS2014

The Devonian Marcellus Shale and Millboro Shale

The recent development of unconventional oil and natural gas resources in the United States builds upon many decades of research, which included resource assessment and the development of well completion and extraction technology. The Eastern Gas Shales Project, funded by the U.S. Department of Energy in the 1980s, investigated the gas potential of organic-rich, Devonian black shales in the Appalachian, Michigan, and Illinois basins. One of these eastern shales is the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale, which has been extensively developed for natural gas and natural gas liquids since 2007. The Marcellus is one of the basal units in a thick Devonian shale sedimentary sequence in the Appalachian basin. The Marcellus rests on the Onondaga Limestone throughout most of the basin, or on the time-equivalent Needmore Shale in the southeastern parts of the basin. Another basal unit, the Huntersville Chert, underlies the Marcellus in the southern part of the basin. The Devonian section is compressed to the south, and the Marcellus Shale, along with several overlying units, grades into the age-equivalent Millboro Shale in Virginia. The Marcellus-Millboro interval is far from a uniform slab of black rock. This field trip will examine a number of natural and engineered exposures in the vicinity of the West Virginia–Virginia state line, where participants will have the opportunity to view a variety of sedimentary facies within the shale itself, sedimentary structures, tectonic structures, fossils, overlying and underlying formations, volcaniclastic ash beds, and to view a basaltic intrusion.

GSA Field Guides↗

USGS2014

Stratigraphy, structure and regional correlation of eastern Blue Ridge sequences in southern Virginia and northwestern North Carolina: an interim report from new USGS mapping

Examination of key outcrops in the eastern Blue Ridge in southern Virginia and northwestern North Carolina is used to evaluate existing stratigraphic and structural models. Recent detailed mapping along the Blue Ridge Parkway and the eastern flank of the Mount Rogers massif provides the opportunity to (1) evaluate legacy data and interpretations and (2) formulate new ideas for regional correlation of eastern Blue Ridge geology. Lynchburg Group rocks in central Virginia (metagraywacke, quartzite, graphitic schist, amphibolite, and ultramafic rocks) carry southward along strike where they transition with other units. Wills Ridge Formation consists of graphitic schist, metagraywacke, and metaconglomerate, and marks the western boundary of the eastern Blue Ridge. The Ashe Formation consists of conglomeratic metagraywacke in southern Virginia, and mica gneiss, mica schist, and ultramafic rocks in North Carolina. The overlying Alligator Back Formation shows characteristic compositional pin-striped layers in mica gneiss, schist, and amphibolite. The contact between eastern Blue Ridge stratified rocks above Mesoproterozoic basement rocks is mostly faulted (Gossan Lead and Red Valley). The Callaway fault juxtaposes Ashe and Lynchburg rocks above Wills Ridge Formation. Alligator Back Formation rocks overlie Ashe and Lynchburg rocks along the Rock Castle Creek fault, which juxtaposes rocks of different metamorphism. The fault separates major structural domains: rocks with one penetrative foliation in the footwall, and pin-striped recrystallized compositional layering, superposed penetrative foliations, and cleavage characterize the hanging wall. These relationships are ambiguous along strike to the southwest, where the Ashe and Alligator Back formations are recrystallized at higher metamorphic grades.

North Carolina, Virginia↗

USGS2014

Mount Baker lahars and debris flows, ancient, modern, and future

The Middle Fork Nooksack River drains the southwestern slopes of the active Mount Baker stratovolcano in northwest Washington State. The river enters Bellingham Bay at a growing delta 98 km to the west. Various types of debris flows have descended the river, generated by volcano collapse or eruption (lahars), glacial outburst floods, and moraine landslides. Initial deposition of sediment during debris flows occurs on the order of minutes to a few hours. Long-lasting, down-valley transport of sediment, all the way to the delta, occurs over a period of decades, and affects fish habitat, flood risk, gravel mining, and drinking water. Holocene lahars and large debris flows (>10 6 m 3 ) have left recognizable deposits in the Middle Fork Nooksack valley. A debris flow in 2013 resulting from a landslide in a Little Ice Age moraine had an estimated volume of 100,000 m 3 , yet affected turbidity for the entire length of the river, and produced a slug of sediment that is currently being reworked and remobilized in the river system. Deposits of smaller-volume debris flows, deposited as terraces in the upper valley, may be entirely eroded within a few years. Consequently, the geologic record of small debris flows such as those that occurred in 2013 is probably very fragmentary. Small debris flows may still have significant impacts on hydrology, biology, and human uses of rivers downstream. Impacts include the addition of waves of fine sediment to stream loads, scouring or burying salmon-spawning gravels, forcing unplanned and sudden closure of municipal water intakes, damaging or destroying trail crossings, extending river deltas into estuaries, and adding to silting of harbors near river mouths.

Washington↗

USGS2015

A Laurentian margin back-arc: the Ordovician Wedowee-Emuckfaw-Dahlonega basin

Independent researchers working in the Talladega belt, Ashland-Wedowee-Emuckfaw belt, and Opelika Complex of Alabama, as well as the Dahlonega gold belt and western Inner Piedmont of Alabama, Georgia, and the Carolinas, have mapped stratigraphic sequences unique to each region. Although historically considered distinct terranes of disparate origin, a synthesis of data suggests that each includes lithologic units that formed in an Ordovician back-arc basin (Wedowee-Emuckfaw-Dahlonega basin—WEDB). Rocks in these terranes include varying proportions of metamorphosed mafic and bimodal volcanic rock suites interlayered with deep-water metasedimentary rock sequences. Metavolcanic rocks yield ages that are Early–Middle Ordovician (480–460 Ma) and interlayered metasedimentary units are populated with both Grenville and Early–Middle Ordovician detrital zircons. Metamafic rocks display geochemical trends ranging from mid-oceanic-ridge basalt to arc affinity, similar to modern back-arc basalts. The collective data set limits formation of the WEDB to a suprasubduction system built on and adjacent to upper Neoproterozoic–lower Paleozoic rocks of the passive Laurentian margin at the trailing edge of Iapetus, specifically in a continental margin back-arc setting. Overwhelmingly, the geologic history of the southern Appalachians, including rocks of the WEDB described here, indicates that the Ordovician Taconic orogeny in the southern Appalachians developed in an accretionary orogenic setting instead of the traditional collisional orogenic setting attributed to subduction of the Laurentian margin beneath an exotic or peri-Laurentian arc. Well-studied Cenozoic accretionary orogens provide excellent analogs for Taconic orogenesis, and an accretionary orogenic model for the southern Appalachian Taconic orogeny can account for aspects of Ordovician tectonics not easily explained through collisional orogenesis.

Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina↗

USGS2015

Cenozoic stratigraphy and structure of the Chesapeake Bay region

The Salisbury embayment is a broad tectonic downwarp that is filled by generally seaward-thickening, wedge-shaped deposits of the central Atlantic Coastal Plain. Our two-day field trip will take us to the western side of this embayment from the Fall Zone in Washington, D.C., to some of the bluffs along Aquia Creek and the Potomac River in Virginia, and then to the Calvert Cliffs on the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay. We will see fluvial-deltaic Cretaceous deposits of the Potomac Formation. We will then focus on Cenozoic marine deposits. Transgressive and highstand deposits are stacked upon each other with unconformities separating them; rarely are regressive or lowstand deposits preserved. The Paleocene and Eocene shallow shelf deposits consist of glauconitic, silty sands that contain varying amounts of marine shells. The Miocene shallow shelf deposits consist of diatomaceous silts and silty and shelly sands. The lithology, thickness, dip, preservation, and distribution of the succession of coastal plain sediments that were deposited in our field-trip area are, to a great extent, structurally controlled. Surficial and subsurface mapping using numerous continuous cores, auger holes, water-well data, and seismic surveys has documented some folds and numerous high-angle reverse and normal faults that offset Cretaceous and Cenozoic deposits. Many of these structures are rooted in early Mesozoic and/or Paleozoic NE-trending regional tectonic fault systems that underlie the Atlantic Coastal Plain. On Day 1, we will focus on two fault systems (stops 1–2; Stafford fault system and the Skinkers Neck–Brandywine fault system and their constituent fault zones and faults). We will then see (stops 3–5) a few of the remaining exposures of largely unlithified marine Paleocene and Eocene strata along the Virginia side of the Potomac River including the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum boundary clay. These exposures are capped by fluvial-estuarine Pleistocene terrace deposits. On Day 2, we will see (stops 6–9) the classic Miocene section along the ~25 miles (~40 km) of Calvert Cliffs in Maryland, including a possible fault and structural warping. Cores from nearby test holes will also be shown to supplement outcrops.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2016

Geology and geomorphology of the Carolina Sandhills, Chesterfield County, South Carolina

This two-day field trip focuses on the geology and geomorphology of the Carolina Sandhills in Chesterfield County, South Carolina. This area is located in the updip portion of the U.S. Atlantic Coastal Plain province, supports an ecosystem of longleaf pine ( Pinus palustris ) and wiregrass ( Aristida stricta ), and contains three major geologic map units: (1) An ~60–120-m-thick unit of weakly consolidated sand, sandstone, mud, and gravel is mapped as the Upper Cretaceous Middendorf Formation and is interpreted as a fluvial deposit. This unit is capped by an unconformity, and displays reticulate mottling, plinthite, and other paleosol features at the unconformity. The Middendorf Formation is the largest aquifer in South Carolina. (2) A 0.3–10-m-thick unit of unconsolidated sand is mapped as the Quaternary Pinehurst Formation and is interpreted as deposits of eolian sand sheets and dunes derived via remobilization of sand from the underlying Cretaceous strata. This unit displays argillic horizons and abundant evidence of bioturbation by vegetation. (3) A <3-m-thick unit of sand, pebbly sand, sandy mud, and mud is mapped as Quaternary terrace deposits adjacent to modern drainages. In addition to the geologic units listed above, a prominent geomorphologic feature in the study area is a north-trending escarpment (incised by headwater streams) that forms a markedly asymmetric drainage divide. This drainage divide, as well as the Quaternary terraces deposits, are interpreted as evidence of landscape disequilibrium (possibly geomorphic responses to Quaternary climate changes).

South Carolina↗

USGS2016

The Permian–Triassic transition in Colorado

The Lykins Formation and its equivalents in Colorado are a stratigraphically poorly constrained suite of redbeds and intercalated stromatolitic carbonates, which is hypothesized to span the Permian-Triassic boundary. Herein we present a preliminary detrital zircon geochronology, new fossil occurrences, and δ 13 C chemostratigraphy for exposures along the Front Range and in southeastern Colorado, to refine understanding of the unit's age and depositional history. Detrital zircons from the uppermost Lykins Formation and an overlying eolianite consist of a complex and highly diverse primary and multi-cycle grain population transported from Laurentian and Gondwanan terranes, potentially both by wind and water. Youngest concordant zircons do not rule out deposition of the uppermost Lykins Formation during a portion of Early Triassic time. Conodonts from the lower Lykins Formation require Middle Permian (Guadalupian) deposition. Conodont alteration indices of 1 indicate the unit has a shallow burial history and is amenable to paleomagnetic inquiry. Conodonts, together with other vertebrate, invertebrate, microfossil, and trace fossils, suggest a very shallow to emergent marine origin for the unit's most substantial carbonates, and hint at a marine origin for the unit's intercalated gypsum-anhydrite members. Chemostratigraphy corroborates field evidence of emergence and karst development capping certain units, like the Forelle Limestone Member of the Lykins Formation, where potential sequence boundaries appear to be punctuated by a short-lived meteoric signature. Results presented here are a progress report of ongoing work in these successions. This field trip consists of a brief tour through exposures of the Lykins Formation, in which we will examine well-known localities as well as view new ones for which we seek insights.

GSA Field Guides↗

USGS2016

Geomorphic evolution of the San Luis Basin and Rio Grande in southern Colorado and northern New Mexico

The San Luis Basin encompasses the largest structural and hydrologic basin of the Rio Grande rift. On this field trip, we will examine the timing of transition of the San Luis Basin from hydrologically closed, aggrading subbasins to a continuous fluvial system that eroded the basin, formed the Rio Grande gorge, and ultimately, integrated the Rio Grande from Colorado to the Gulf of Mexico. Waning Pleistocene neotectonic activity and onset of major glacial episodes, in particular Marine Isotope Stages 11–2 (~420–14 ka), induced basin fill, spillover, and erosion of the southern San Luis Basin. The combined use of new geologic mapping, fluvial geomorphology, reinterpreted surficial geology of the Taos Plateau, pedogenic relative dating studies, 3 He surface exposure dating of basalts, and U-series dating of pedogenic carbonate supports a sequence of events wherein pluvial Lake Alamosa in the northern San Luis Basin overflowed, and began to drain to the south across the closed Sunshine Valley–Costilla Plain region ≤400 ka. By ~200 ka, erosion had cut through topographic highs at Ute Mountain and the Red River fault zone, and began deep-canyon incision across the southern San Luis Basin. Previous studies indicate that prior to 200 ka, the present Rio Grande terminated into a large bolson complex in the vicinity of El Paso, Texas, and systematic, headward erosional processes had subtly integrated discontinuously connected basins along the eastern flank of the Rio Grande rift and southern Rocky Mountains. We propose that the integration of the entire San Luis Basin into the Rio Grande drainage system (~400–200 ka) was the critical event in the formation of the modern Rio Grande, integrating hinterland basins of the Rio Grande rift from El Paso, Texas, north to the San Luis Basin with the Gulf of Mexico. This event dramatically affected basins southeast of El Paso, Texas, across the Chisos Mountains and southeastern Basin and Range province, including the Rio Conchos watershed and much of the Chihuahuan Desert, inducing broad regional landscape incision and exhumation.

Colorado, New Mexico↗

USGS2017

Geologic controls on cave development in Burnsville Cove, Bath and Highland Counties, Virginia

Burnsville Cove in Bath and Highland Counties (Virginia, USA) is a karst region in the Valley and Ridge Province of the Appalachian Mountains. The region contains many caves in Silurian to Devonian limestone, and is well suited for examining geologic controls on cave location and cave passage morphology. In Burnsville Cove, many caves are located preferentially near the axes of synclines and anticlines. For example, Butler Cave is an elongate cave where the trunk channel follows the axis of Sinking Creek syncline and most of the side passages follow joints at right angles to the syncline axis. In contrast, the Water Sinks Subway Cave, Owl Cave, and Helictite Cave have abundant maze patterns, and are located near the axis of Chestnut Ridge anticline. The maze patterns may be related to fact that the anticline axis is the site of the greatest amount of flexure, leading to more joints and (or) greater enlargement of joints. Many of the larger caves of Burnsville Cove (e.g., Breathing Cave, Butler Cave–Sinking Creek Cave System, lower parts of the Water Sinks Cave System) are developed in the Silurian Tonoloway Limestone, the stratigraphic unit with the greatest surface exposure in the area. Other caves are developed in the Silurian to Devonian Keyser Limestone of the Helderberg Group (e.g., Owl Cave, upper parts of the Water Sinks Cave System) and in the Devonian Shriver Chert and (or) Licking Creek Limestone of the Helderberg Group (e.g., Helictite Cave). Within the Tonoloway Limestone, the larger caves are developed in the lower member of the Tonoloway Limestone immediately below a bed of silica-cemented sandstone. In contrast, the larger caves in the Keyser Limestone are located preferentially in limestone beds containing stromatoporoid reefs, and some of the larger caves in the Licking Creek Limestone are located in beds of cherty limestone below the Devonian Oriskany Sandstone. Geologic controls on cave passage morphology include joints, bedding planes, and folds. The influence of joints results in tall and narrow cave passages, whereas the influence of bedding planes results in cave passages with flat ceilings and (or) floors. The influence of folds is less common, but a few cave passages follow fold axes and have distinctive arched ceilings.

Virginia↗

USGS2016

Pinedale glacial history of the upper Arkansas River valley: New moraine chronologies, modeling results, and geologic mapping

This field-trip guide outlines the glacial history of the upper Arkansas River valley, Colorado, and builds on a previous GSA field trip to the area in 2010. The following will be presented: (1) new cosmogenic 10 Be exposure ages of moraine boulders from the Pinedale and Bull Lake glaciations (Marine Isotope Stages 2 and 6, respectively) located adjacent to the Twin Lakes Reservoir, (2) numerical modeling of glaciers during the Pinedale glaciation in major tributaries draining into the upper Arkansas River, (3) discharge estimates for glacial-lake outburst floods in the upper Arkansas River valley, and (4) 10 Be ages on flood boulders deposited downvalley from the moraine sequences. This research was stimulated by a new geologic map of the Granite 7.5′ quadrangle, in which the mapping of surficial deposits was revised based in part on the interpretation of newly acquired LiDAR data and field investigations. The new 10 Be ages of the Pinedale terminal moraine at Twin Lakes average 21.8 ± 0.7 ka ( n = 14), which adds to nearby Pinedale terminal moraine ages of 23.6 ± 1.4 ka ( n = 5), 20.5 ± 0.2 ka ( n = 3), and 16.6 ± 1.0 ka ( n = 7), and downvalley outburst flood terraces that date to 20.9 ± 0.9 ka ( n = 4) and 19.0 ± 0.6 ka ( n = 4). This growing chronology leads to improved understanding of the controls and timing of glaciation in the western United States, the modeling of glacial-lake outburst flooding, and the reconstruction of paleotemperature through glacier modeling.

Arkansas River valley↗

USGS2020

Foreward: Geology Field Trips in and around the U.S. Capital

The first annual meeting of the Geological Society of America (GSA) was held in 1888 in Ithaca, New York (Fairchild, 1932), but official Sections of GSA formed much later. During the spring of 1949, a symposium in Knoxville, Tennessee, on mineral resources of the southeastern United States became the catalyst for the creation of the Southeastern Section of the Geological Society of America (King, 1964), and the first annual meeting of the Southeastern Section was held in 1952 in Roanoke, Virginia (Wilson, 1954). The Northeastern Section formed much later, and its first annual meeting was held in 1966 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Socolow, 1968). At all of these section meetings, field trips have been important venues for geologists and especially students to gather together, examine rocks in the field, and discuss ideas. These field trips have been especially important at combined section meetings because they provide settings for geologists who are experienced in one geographic region to examine and compare the geology of other regions. The first combined meeting of the Southeastern and Northeastern sections occurred in 1976 in Arlington, Virginia. Since then, the Southeastern and Northeastern sections have met together on numerous occasions, including 1982 in Washington, DC; 1991 in Baltimore, Maryland; 2004 in Tysons Corner, Virginia; and 2010 in Baltimore, Maryland. Since the first combined section meeting in 1976, there has been a gradual increase in the role of technology in geology field studies. In fact, during the past several decades there has been an increase in emphasis in our society on the instrumental component of science, the goal of which is operational techniques to do or control things, and a corresponding decrease in emphasis on the natural philosophy component of science, the goal of which is a greater understanding of the natural world (Dear, 2006). The modern education acronym STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics), for example, is often used as a catch-all term that implies that science and technology are relatively synonymous, and implies that greater technology leads automatically to greater understanding of the natural world. This assumption, however, is not always valid (Dear, 2006), and technology should not be promoted as a substitute for field experiences. Technology can be a tool that leads to greater understanding of the natural world, but not all Science uses technology as a means of providing greater understanding. The benefits of new technologies include: (1) data of greater resolution; and (2) greater efficiency of capturing, storing, and visualizing data. The risks of new technologies include: (1) an overabundance of data, some of which may be of little value; (2) less time available for analysis of data, if geologists become occupied primarily with capturing and storing data; and (3) errors that arise from complacency and the perception that field-checking may not be necessary. In other words, there is a risk that a glut of data and vast amounts of time devoted to the capturing and storing of data may result in a reduced interest and (or) willingness to field-check data. In the spirit of the early GSA section meetings, we feel that there are still enormous advantages to conducting geology field trips in conjunction with traditional meeting presentations and posters. In 2020, with this current combined Southeastern and Northeastern section meeting in Reston, Virginia, we have assembled eight different field trips that cover a wide range of territory in and around the Nation’s capital. These field trip localities include the immediate vicinity of Washington, DC, as well as various locations in nearby areas of Virginia, Maryland, and West Virginia. The physiographic provinces include Mesozoic Rift Basins, the Piedmont, the Blue Ridge, the Valley and Ridge, and the Allegheny Plateau of the Appalachian Basin. The field trip sites exhibit a wide range of igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rocks, as well as rocks with a wide range of geologic ages from the Mesoproterozoic to the Holocene. We hope that this guidebook provides new motivation for geologists to examine rocks in the field, to discuss ideas with colleagues in the field, and to avoid becoming complacent. The editors of this volume would like to thank the authors of the different field trip guides, the field trip leaders, and all of the reviewers who made suggestions for improving the field trip manuscripts. The editors would also like to thank Elle Derwent of GSA for her logistical help and guidance regarding the field trips, and April Leo and the staff of the GSA Publications Department for seeing this book through to publication.

Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia↗

USGS2017

The Valmy thrust sheet: A regional structure formed during the protracted assembly of the Roberts Mountains allochthon, Nevada, USA

A synthesis of field, biostratigraphic, detrital zircon geochronologic, and remote sensing data across north-central Nevada, United States, defines a thick, regionally extensive sheet of Middle–Upper Ordovician Valmy Formation quartzite that structurally overlies deformed early Paleozoic units of the Roberts Mountains allochthon. Late Paleozoic regional unconformities that record tectonic disruptions have been recognized in the foreland of central and eastern Nevada and locally within the Roberts Mountains allochthon; these identify multiple, regional tectonic events between the Devonian–Mississippian initiation of the Antler orogeny and the Permian–Triassic Sonoma orogeny. However, few studies have documented the regional kinematic history of the Robert Mountains allochthon sensu stricto. In the Independence Mountains of northern Nevada, emplacement of the Roberts Mountains allochthon is restricted to the Mississippian. In the Tuscarora Mountains, the range west and southwest of the Independence Mountains, several deformation events have been identified, and emplacement of the thrust sheet containing the Valmy Formation is restricted to the Late Pennsylvanian–Early Permian. These structural and temporal relations, reflected in the Antler foreland basin adjacent to the Roberts Mountains allochthon and overlap sequences, suggest that the Roberts Mountains allochthon is a composite stratigraphic terrane assembled along the Cordilleran margin during two or more late Paleozoic contractional events. Valmy Formation deposits likely represent the development of coalescing submarine fans below or within bypass channels in a deep slope or rise environment. Petrographic characteristics, biostratigraphy, and detrital zircon U-Pb age populations of the Valmy Formation link it to coeval slope and rise turbidites of the Vinini Formation and shelfal Eureka Quartzite; Valmy Formation detrital zircon age populations are dissimilar to the rift-to-drift facies of the Neoproterozoic–Cambrian Prospect Mountain Quartzite. Throughout north-central Nevada, the Valmy Formation is in fault contact with units of the Roberts Mountains allochthon, including the Devonian–Mississippian Slaven Chert, Silurian–Devonian Elder Sandstone, and Cambrian(?)–Ordovician Vinini Formation, which were deformed prior to, or during, emplacement of the thrust sheet containing Valmy Formation quartzite. Our mapping and data synthesis, guided by regional quartz maps based on remote sensing (Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer [ASTER]) data, delineate similar structural relationships discontinuously for >200 km along strike of the Roberts Mountains allochthon. Exploration for concealed gold deposits within reach of drilling requires knowledge of the relative thicknesses of the Roberts Mountains allochthon and the Valmy Formation. Overall thicknesses of deformed Roberts Mountains allochthon units between the Valmy Formation and underlying carbonate rocks, which host large, world-class Carlin-type gold deposits, vary by hundreds of meters, but are generally less than 700 m in three of the areas studied here. Recognition of windows through and klippen of the Roberts Mountains allochthon is essential for identification of areas where deposits may be at or near the surface. Correspondingly, most ongoing exploration for Carlin-type gold deposits subjacent to the Roberts Mountains allochthon targets concealed deposits. The model proposed in this study is applicable to determining depth to rocks prospective for undiscovered deposits.

Nevada↗