DOCSLIB.ORG

AER/AGS Open File Report 2018-03

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AER/AGS Open File Report 2018-03 AER/AGS Open File Report 2018-03 Geochronology of Selected Igneous Rocks in the Alberta Rocky Mountains, with an Overview of the Age Constraints on the Host Formations AER/AGS Open File Report 2018-03 Geochronology of Selected Igneous Rocks in the Alberta Rocky Mountains, with an Overview of the Age Constraints on the Host Formations D.I. Pană1, A.S. Rukhlov2, L.M. Heaman3 and M. Hamilton4 1 Alberta Energy Regulator / Alberta Geological Survey 2 Formerly Alberta Energy Regulator / Alberta Geological Survey (see page ii for current address) 3 University of Alberta 4 University of Toronto March 2018 ©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta, 2018 ISBN 978-1-4601-2690-5 The Alberta Energy Regulator / Alberta Geological Survey (AER/AGS), its employees and contractors make no warranty, guarantee or representation, express or implied, or assume any legal liability regarding the correctness, accuracy, completeness or reliability of this publication. Any references to proprietary software and/or any use of proprietary data formats do not constitute endorsement by AER/AGS of any manufacturer’s product. If you use information from this publication in other publications or presentations, please acknowledge the AER/AGS. We recommend the following reference format: Pană, D.I., Rukhlov, A.S., Heaman, L.M. and Hamilton, M. (2018): Geochronology of selected igneous rocks in the Alberta Rocky Mountains, with an overview of the age constraints on the host formations; Alberta Energy Regulator, AER/AGS Open File Report 2018-03, 60 p. Publications in this series have undergone only limited review and are released essentially as submitted by the author. Author addresses: A.S. Rukhlov L.M. Heaman British Columbia Geological Survey Department of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences Ministry of Energy and Mines University of Alberta 1810 Blanshard Street, Edmonton, AB T6G 2E3 Victoria, BC V8W 9N3 Canada Canada 780.492.3265 250.952.0396 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] M. Hamilton Department of Earth Sciences University of Toronto 22 Russell Street Toronto, ON M5S 3B1 Canada 416.946.7424 Email: [email protected] Published March 2018 by: Alberta Energy Regulator Alberta Geological Survey 4th Floor, Twin Atria Building 4999 – 98th Avenue Edmonton, AB T6B 2X3 Canada Tel: 780.638.4491 Fax: 780.422.1459 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ags.aer.ca AER/AGS Open File Report 2018-03 (March 2018) • iii Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... vi Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Regional Geology ................................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Tectonics ......................................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Tectonostratigraphic Assemblages ................................................................................................. 3 3 Previous Geochronological Constraints on Igneous Rocks of the Alberta Rocky Mountains and Foothills .................................................................................................................................................. 5 3.1 Mafic Sills and Lava Flows in the Mesoproterozoic Purcell Supergroup ...................................... 5 3.1.1 Age of the Belt-Purcell Supergroup .................................................................................... 8 3.1.2 Belt-Purcell Supergroup Metamorphism ............................................................................ 9 3.1.3 Previous Radiogenic Dating of Mafic Sills Intruding the Belt-Purcell Supergroup ........... 9 3.2 Isolated Dikes and Sills in the Miette Group ................................................................................ 11 3.2.1 Age of the Miette Group ................................................................................................... 11 3.2.2 Miette Group Metamorphism ........................................................................................... 13 3.2.3 Geikie Dike ....................................................................................................................... 13 3.2.4 Crowfoot Dike .................................................................................................................. 13 3.2.5 Blackbear Sill .................................................................................................................... 15 3.3 Cretaceous Alkaline Intrusions ..................................................................................................... 16 3.4 Crowsnest Formation .................................................................................................................... 19 3.4.1 Crowsnest Formation Metamorphism ............................................................................... 20 4 Sampling and Analytical Techniques ................................................................................................... 21 4.1 Mafic Sills and Lava Flows in the Mesoproterozoic Purcell Supergroup, Clark Range .............. 21 4.2 Isolated Dikes and Sills in the Miette Group ................................................................................ 23 4.3 Cretaceous Felsic Alkaline Sills and Dikes .................................................................................. 23 4.4 Crowsnest Formation .................................................................................................................... 24 4.4.1 Analytical technique ......................................................................................................... 24 5 Results and Geological Significance .................................................................................................... 25 5.1 Mafic Sills and Lava Flows in the Mesoproterozoic Purcell Supergroup, Clark Range .............. 25 5.1.1 Baddeleyite Age of Mafic Sill .......................................................................................... 25 5.1.2 SHRIMP Dating of Zircon from Purcell Mafic Sills ........................................................ 25 5.1.3 Preliminary Results of the 40Ar/39Ar Dating of the Purcell Mafic Rocks ......................... 34 5.1.4 Possible Sources for Inherited Zircon in the Purcell Mafic Sills ...................................... 37 5.2 Isolated Dikes and Sills in the Miette Group ................................................................................ 39 5.3 Cretaceous Sills ............................................................................................................................ 40 5.3.1 U-Pb Dating of the Largest Felsic Alkaline Sill in Clark Range ...................................... 40 5.3.2 40Ar/39Ar Dating of the Crowsnest Lake Trachyte (DP11-26) .......................................... 41 5.4 Age of Melanite Garnet from the Crowsnest Formation .............................................................. 45 5.5 Contemporaneous and Petrologically Similar Intrusive and Volcanic Rocks in the Southern Canadian Rockies ......................................................................................................................... 45 6 Discussion and Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 46 7 References ............................................................................................................................................ 49 Tables Table 1. Samples of Purcell mafic sills processed for isotope dating ..................................................... 22 Table 2. Samples of diabase intruded into the Miette Group .................................................................. 23 AER/AGS Open File Report 2018-03 (March 2018) • iv Table 3. Samples of Cretaceous alkaline sills and dikes processed for mineral separation at the University of Alberta ................................................................................................................. 24 Table 4. U-Pb baddeleyite ID-TIMS data for dolerite sills from the Purcell basin, Clark Range ........... 26 Table 5. Summary of sensitive high-resolution ion microprobe (SHRIMP) data for Purcell mafic sills .................................................................................................................................. 28 Table 6. Summary of 40Ar/39Ar from mafic rocks in the Purcell Supergroup ......................................... 35 Table 7. Summary of 40Ar/39Ar data from the Crowfoot dike ................................................................. 40 Table 8. Summary of U-Pb data from the titanite trachyte sill DP11-36 at Crowsnest Lake ................. 43 Table 9. Summary of 40Ar/39Ar from the Crowsnest Lake trachyte sill .................................................. 44 Table 10. U-Pb Garnet Results for Crowsnest Volcanics, Alberta ........................................................... 45 Figures Figure 1. Regional geology of the southern Alberta Rocky Mountains, showing the location of examined igneous rocks .............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Volcanology and Mineral Deposits
    THESE TERMS GOVERN YOUR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT Your use of this Ontario Geological Survey document (the “Content”) is governed by the terms set out on this page (“Terms of Use”). By downloading this Content, you (the “User”) have accepted, and have agreed to be bound by, the Terms of Use. Content: This Content is offered by the Province of Ontario’s Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) as a public service, on an “as-is” basis. Recommendations and statements of opinion expressed in the Content are those of the author or authors and are not to be construed as statement of government policy. You are solely responsible for your use of the Content. You should not rely on the Content for legal advice nor as authoritative in your particular circumstances. Users should verify the accuracy and applicability of any Content before acting on it. MNDM does not guarantee, or make any warranty express or implied, that the Content is current, accurate, complete or reliable. MNDM is not responsible for any damage however caused, which results, directly or indirectly, from your use of the Content. MNDM assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the Content whatsoever. Links to Other Web Sites: This Content may contain links, to Web sites that are not operated by MNDM. Linked Web sites may not be available in French. MNDM neither endorses nor assumes any responsibility for the safety, accuracy or availability of linked Web sites or the information contained on them. The linked Web sites, their operation and content are the responsibility of the person or entity for which they were created or maintained (the “Owner”).
    [Show full text]
  • Extending the Late Holocene White River Ash Distribution, Northwestern Canada STEPHEN D
    ARCTIC VOL. 54, NO. 2 (JUNE 2001) P. 157– 161 Extending the Late Holocene White River Ash Distribution, Northwestern Canada STEPHEN D. ROBINSON1 (Received 30 May 2000; accepted in revised form 25 September 2000) ABSTRACT. Peatlands are a particularly good medium for trapping and preserving tephra, as their surfaces are wet and well vegetated. The extent of tephra-depositing events can often be greatly expanded through the observation of ash in peatlands. This paper uses the presence of the White River tephra layer (1200 B.P.) in peatlands to extend the known distribution of this late Holocene tephra into the Mackenzie Valley, northwestern Canada. The ash has been noted almost to the western shore of Great Slave Lake, over 1300 km from the source in southeastern Alaska. This new distribution covers approximately 540000 km2 with a tephra volume of 27 km3. The short time span and constrained timing of volcanic ash deposition, combined with unique physical and chemical parameters, make tephra layers ideal for use as chronostratigraphic markers. Key words: chronostratigraphy, Mackenzie Valley, peatlands, White River ash RÉSUMÉ. Les tourbières constituent un milieu particulièrement approprié au piégeage et à la conservation de téphra, en raison de l’humidité et de l’abondance de végétation qui règnent en surface. L’observation des cendres contenues dans les tourbières permet souvent d’élargir notablement les limites spatiales connues des épisodes de dépôts de téphra. Cet article recourt à la présence de la couche de téphra de la rivière White (1200 BP) dans les tourbières pour agrandir la distribution connue de ce téphra datant de l’Holocène supérieur dans la vallée du Mackenzie, située dans le Nord-Ouest canadien.
    [Show full text]
  • Highway 3: Transportation Mitigation for Wildlife and Connectivity in the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem
    Highway 3: Transportation Mitigation for Wildlife and Connectivity May 2010 Prepared with the: support of: Galvin Family Fund Kayak Foundation HIGHWAY 3: TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FOR WILDLIFE AND CONNECTIVITY IN THE CROWN OF THE CONTINENT ECOSYSTEM Final Report May 2010 Prepared by: Anthony Clevenger, PhD Western Transportation Institute, Montana State University Clayton Apps, PhD, Aspen Wildlife Research Tracy Lee, MSc, Miistakis Institute, University of Calgary Mike Quinn, PhD, Miistakis Institute, University of Calgary Dale Paton, Graduate Student, University of Calgary Dave Poulton, LLB, LLM, Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative Robert Ament, M Sc, Western Transportation Institute, Montana State University TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables .....................................................................................................................................................iv List of Figures.....................................................................................................................................................v Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................................vi Introduction........................................................................................................................................................1 Background........................................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • AN OVERVIEW of the GEOLOGY of the GREAT LAKES BASIN by Theodore J
    AN OVERVIEW OF THE GEOLOGY OF THE GREAT LAKES BASIN by Theodore J. Bornhorst 2016 This document may be cited as: Bornhorst, T. J., 2016, An overview of the geology of the Great Lakes basin: A. E. Seaman Mineral Museum, Web Publication 1, 8p. This is version 1 of A. E. Seaman Mineral Museum Web Publication 1 which was only internally reviewed for technical accuracy. The Great Lakes Basin The Great Lakes basin, as defined by watersheds that drain into the Great Lakes (Figure 1), includes about 85 % of North America’s and 20 % of the world’s surface fresh water, a total of about 5,500 cubic miles (23,000 cubic km) of water (1). The basin covers about 94,000 square miles (240,000 square km) including about 10 % of the U.S. population and 30 % of the Canadian population (1). Lake Michigan is the only Great Lake entirely within the United States. The State of Michigan lies at the heart of the Great Lakes basin. Together the Great Lakes are the single largest surface fresh water body on Earth and have an important physical and cultural role in North America. Figure 1: The Great Lakes states and Canadian Provinces and the Great Lakes watershed (brown) (after 1). 1 Precambrian Bedrock Geology The bedrock geology of the Great Lakes basin can be subdivided into rocks of Precambrian and Phanerozoic (Figure 2). The Precambrian of the Great Lakes basin is the result of three major episodes with each followed by a long period of erosion (2, 3). Figure 2: Generalized Precambrian bedrock geologic map of the Great Lakes basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Investigations in the Bird River Sill, Southeastern Manitoba (Part of NTS 52L5): Geology and Preliminary Geochemical Results by C.A
    GS-19 Geological investigations in the Bird River Sill, southeastern Manitoba (part of NTS 52L5): geology and preliminary geochemical results by C.A. Mealin1 Mealin, C.A. 2006: Geological investigations in the Bird River Sill, southeastern Manitoba (part of NTS 52L5): geology and preliminary geochemical results; in Report of Activities 2006, Manitoba Science, Technology, Energy and Mines, Manitoba Geological Survey, p. 214–225. Summary and gravitational differentiation. In 2005, this study was initiated to examine the Bird Theyer (1985) identified unusual River Sill (BRS), a mafic-ultramafic layered intrusion cooling conditions requiring several magma pulses and located in the Bird River greenstone belt in southeastern cast doubt on a single magmatic intrusion theory. Manitoba. The BRS is currently an exploration target In 2005, this study was initiated to examine the for Ni-Cu–platinum group element (PGE) deposits and, controls on Ni-Cu-PGE mineralization and test the single in the past, hosted two Ni-Cu mines (Maskwa West and versus multiple injection hypothesis to establish the Dumbarton mines). relationship between mineralization and the magmatic Nickel-copper mineralization on the western half history. Specific objectives include of the BRS consists primarily of disseminated to blebby • detailed mapping of the Chrome, Page, Peterson pyrrhotite+chalcopyrite and is present in the ultramafic Block and National-Ledin properties (Figure GS-19-1); series of the Chrome and Page properties and the mafic • determination of the sulphur source for the Ni-Cu- series of the Wards property. During this study, several PGE mineralization; new sulphide-bearing localities in both the ultramafic and • delineation of the sill’s sulphur saturation history; mafic units of the sill have been identified.
    [Show full text]
  • Municipal Development Plan
    Municipality of Crowsnest Pass MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN BYLAW NO. 1059, 2020 © 2021 Oldman River Regional Services Commission Prepared for the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass This document is protected by Copyright and Trademark and may not be reproduced or modified in any manner, or for any purpose, except by written permission of the Oldman River Regional Services Commission. This document has been prepared for the sole use of the Municipality addressed and the Oldman River Regional Services Commission. This disclaimer is attached to and forms part of the document. ii MUNICIPALITY OF CROWSNEST PASS BYLAW NO. 1059, 2020 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN BYLAW BEING a bylaw of the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass, in the Province of Alberta, to adopt a new Municipal Development Plan for the municipality. AND WHEREAS section 632 of the Municipal Government Act requires all municipalities in the provinceto adopt a municipaldevelopment plan by bylaw; AND WHEREAS the purpose of the proposed Bylaw No. 1059, 2020 is to provide a comprehensive, long-range land use plan and development framework pursuant to the provisions outlined in the Act; AND WHEREAS the municipal council has requested the preparation of a long-range plan to fulfill the requirementsof the Act and provide for its consideration at a public hearing; NOW THEREFORE, under the authority and subject to the provisions of the Municipal Government Act, Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000, Chapter M-26, as amended, the Council of the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass in the province of Alberta duly assembled does hereby enact the following: 1. Bylaw No. 1059, 2020, being the new Municipal Development Plan Bylaw is hereby adopted.
    [Show full text]
  • Complex Basalt-Mugearite Sill in Piton Des Neiges Volcano, Reunion
    THE AMERICAN MINERALOGIST. VOL. 52, SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER, 1967 COMPLEX BASALT-MUGEARITE SILL IN PITON DES NEIGES VOLCANO, REUNION B. G. J. UetoN, Grant Institute oJ Geology,Uniaersi,ty oJ Ed.inburgh, Edinbwrgh, Scotland, AND W. J. WaoswoRru, Deportmentof Geology,The Un'it;ersity, Manchester,England.. ABsrRAcr An extensive suite of minor intrusions, contempcraneous with the late-stage differenti- ated lavas of Piton des Neiges volcano, occurs within an old agglomeratic complex. An 8-m sill within this suite is strongly difierentiated with a basaltic centre (Thorton Tuttle Index 27.6), residual veins of benmoreite (T. T. Index 75.2), and still more extreme veinlets of quartz trachyte. Although gravitative settling of olivine, augite and ore irz silzr is believed to be responsible for some of the observed variation, the over-all composition of the sill is con- siderably more basic than the mugearite which forms the chilled contacts. It is therefore concluded that considerable magmatic difierentiation must have preceded the emplacement of the sill. This probably took place in a dykeJike magma body with a compositional gra- dient from mugearite at the top to olivine basalt in the lower parts. INrnonucrroN The island of Reunion, in the western Indian Ocean, has the form of a volcanic doublet overlying a great volcanic complex rising from the deep ocean floor. The southeastern component of this doublet is still highly active and erupts relatively undifierentiated, olivine-rich basalts of mildly alkaline or transitional type (Coombs, 1963; Upton and Wads- worth, 1966). The northwestern volcano however has been inactive a sufficient time for erosionalprocesses to have hollowed out amphitheatre- headed valleys up to 2500 meters deep in the volcanic pile.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Piedmont in the Savage and Relay Quadrangles, Howard, Baltimore, and Anne Arundel Counties, Maryland
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geologic Map of the Piedmont in the Savage and Relay Quadrangles, Howard, Baltimore, and Anne Arundel Counties, Maryland By Avery Ala Drake, Jr.1 Open-File Report 98-757 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 'Reston, VA 1998 GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE PIEDMONT IN THE SAVAGE AND RELAY QUADRANGLES, HOWARD, BALTIMORE, AND ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTIES, MARYLAND by Avery Ala Drake, Jr. INTRODUCTION The Piedmont in the Savage and Relay quadrangles (fig. 1) is largely in Howard County, Maryland. The northeasternmost part is in Baltimore County, Maryland and about 0.03 square miles is in Anne Arundel County. Most of the area is suburban and almost all outcrops are restricted to the Patapsco, Middle Patuxent, Little Patuxent, and other stream valleys. Crystalline rocks of the central Appalachian Piedmont within these quadrangles are overlain in many places by Coastal Plain deposits of Cretaceous age. Alluvium occurs along most streams. The geology of adjacent quadrangles on the west and south has been mapped by Drake (in press, unpublished data, 1991-1997) and J.N. Roen and A.A. Drake, Jr. (in press), and that to the north and east by Crowley (1976). The tectonics of the area were interpreted by Crowley (1976) and Drake (1995). Aeromagnetic and gravity surveys of the area were interpreted by Bromery (1968).
    [Show full text]
  • AGENDA November 14, 2017 5:30 P.M
    DISTRICT OF ELKFORD COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA November 14, 2017 5:30 P.M. Council Chambers Elkford's Mission - Through innovative leadership we provide opportunities for responsible growth, in harmony with industry and the environment. We take advantage of opportunities that enhance affordable community living and sustain the quality of life citizens, businesses and visitors expect. Page 1 APPROVAL OF AGENDA (a) Approval of November 14, 2017 Agenda 2 ADOPTION OF MINUTES 3 - 4 (a) Adoption of August 28, 2017 Minutes 3 DELEGATIONS 5 - 134 (a) Draft Community Wildfire Protection Plan • Presenter: Tove Pashkowski, B.A. Blackwell & Associates Ltd. 4 ADJOURNMENT (a) Move to Adjourn Page 1 of 134 Page 2 of 134 DISTRICT OF ELKFORD COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Minutes August 28, 2017 Present: Mayor McKerracher, Chair Councillor McGregor Councillor Fairbairn Councillor Wildeman Councillor Bertrand Councillor Zarowny Absent: Councillor Robinson Staff Present: Curtis Helgesen, Chief Administrative Officer Scott Beeching, Director, Planning and Development Services Garity Stanley, Director, Leisure Services Duane Allen, Superintendent, Public Works Marilyn Rookes, Director, Financial Services Corey Kortmeyer, Director, Fire Rescue and Emergency Services Curtis Nyuli, Deputy Director, Fire Rescue and Emergency Services Dorothy Szawlowski, Deputy Director, Corporate Services, Recorder There being a quorum of Council, Mayor McKerracher called the meeting to order at 5:37 pm. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (a) Approval of August 28, 2017 Agenda Moved, Seconded AND RESOLVED THAT the agenda for the August 28, 2017 Committee of the Whole Meeting be approved as circulated. CARRIED ADOPTION OF MINUTES (a) Adoption of August 14, 2017 Minutes Moved, Seconded AND RESOLVED THAT the minutes from the August 14, 2017 Committee of the Whole Meeting be adopted as circulated.
    [Show full text]
  • RURAL ECONOMY Ciecnmiiuationofsiishiaig Activity Uthern All
    RURAL ECONOMY ciEcnmiIuationofsIishiaig Activity uthern All W Adamowicz, P. BoxaIl, D. Watson and T PLtcrs I I Project Report 92-01 PROJECT REPORT Departmnt of Rural [conom F It R \ ,r u1tur o A Socio-Economic Evaluation of Sportsfishing Activity in Southern Alberta W. Adamowicz, P. Boxall, D. Watson and T. Peters Project Report 92-01 The authors are Associate Professor, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton; Forest Economist, Forestry Canada, Edmonton; Research Associate, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton and Research Associate, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton. A Socio-Economic Evaluation of Sportsfishing Activity in Southern Alberta Interim Project Report INTROI)UCTION Recreational fishing is one of the most important recreational activities in Alberta. The report on Sports Fishing in Alberta, 1985, states that over 340,000 angling licences were purchased in the province and the total population of anglers exceeded 430,000. Approximately 5.4 million angler days were spent in Alberta and over $130 million was spent on fishing related activities. Clearly, sportsfishing is an important recreational activity and the fishery resource is the source of significant social benefits. A National Angler Survey is conducted every five years. However, the results of this survey are broad and aggregate in nature insofar that they do not address issues about specific sites. It is the purpose of this study to examine in detail the characteristics of anglers, and angling site choices, in the Southern region of Alberta. Fish and Wildlife agencies have collected considerable amounts of bio-physical information on fish habitat, water quality, biology and ecology.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Stocking Report, 2020 (Final)
    Fish Stocking Report 2020 (Final) Fish stocking managed by the Government of Alberta and the Alberta Conservation Association Updated February 18, 2021 Notes There are no cutthroat trout stocked in the 2020 stocking season, as we will not be operating the Job Lake spawn camp due to COVID-19 restrictions. Average Length = adult fish stocked. Reference Species Stocked Strains Stocked Ploidy Stocked ARGR = Arctic Grayling BEBE = Beity x Beity TLTLJ = Trout Lodge / Jumpers 2N = diploid BKTR = Brook Trout BRBE = Bow River x Beity TLTLK = Trout Lodge / Kamloops 3N = triploid BNTR = Brown Trout CLCL = Campbell Lake TLTLS = Trout Lodge / Silvers AF2N = all female diploid CTTR = Cutthroat Trout JLJL = Job Lake AF3N = all female triploid RNTR = Rainbow Trout LYLY = Lyndon TGTR = Tiger Trout PLPL = Pit Lakes For further information on Fish Stocking visit: https://mywildalberta.ca/fishing/fish-stocking/default.aspx ©2021 Government of Alberta | Published: February 2021 Page 1 of 24 Waterbody Waterbody ATS Species Strain Genotype Average Number Stocking Official Name Common Name Length Stocked Date (2020) ALFORD LAKE SW4-36-8-W5 RNTR Campbell Lake 3N 18 3000 18-May-20 BEAR POND NW36-14-4-W5 RNTR Trout Lodge/Jumpers AF3N 19.7 750 22-Jun-20 BEAUVAIS LAKE SW29-5-1-W5 RNTR Trout Lodge/Jumpers AF3N 16.3 23000 11-May-20 BEAVER LAKE NE16-35-6-W5 RNTR Trout Lodge/Jumpers AF3N 21.3 2500 21-May-20 BEAVER LAKE NE16-35-6-W5 TGTR Beitty/Bow River 3N 16.9 500 02-Sep-20 BEAVER LAKE NE16-35-6-W5 TGTR Beitty/Bow River 3N 20 500 02-Sep-20 BEAVER MINES LAKE NE11-5-3-W5
    [Show full text]
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for Canada (Alberta – VE6) Summits on the Air
    Summits on the Air – ARM for Canada (Alberta – VE6) Summits on the Air Canada (Alberta – VE6/VA6) Association Reference Manual (ARM) Document Reference S87.1 Issue number 2.2 Date of issue 1st August 2016 Participation start date 1st October 2012 Authorised Association Manager Walker McBryde VA6MCB Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged Page 1 of 63 Document S87.1 v2.2 Summits on the Air – ARM for Canada (Alberta – VE6) 1 Change Control ............................................................................................................................. 4 2 Association Reference Data ..................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Programme derivation ..................................................................................................................... 8 2.2 General information .......................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Rights of way and access issues ..................................................................................................... 9 2.4 Maps and navigation .......................................................................................................................... 9 2.5 Safety considerations ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]