DOCSLIB.ORG

Hydrogeologic Data from Six Test Wells in the Upper Patapsco and Lower Patapsco Aquifers in Southern Maryland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hydrogeologic Data from Six Test Wells in the Upper Patapsco and Lower Patapsco Aquifers in Southern Maryland Department of Natural Resources Resource Assessment Service MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Jeffrey P. Halka, Acting Director BASIC DATA REPORT NO. 22 HYDROGEOLOGIC DATA FROM SIX TEST WELLS IN THE UPPER PATAPSCO AND LOWER PATAPSCO AQUIFERS IN SOUTHERN MARYLAND by Nadine Calis and David D. Drummond Prepared in cooperation with the Boards of County Commissioners of Calvert, Charles, and St. Mary’s Counties and the United States Department of the Interior Geological Survey 2008 State of Maryland Maryland Department of Natural Resources Maryland Department of MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Natural Resources Resource Assessment Service Martin O’Malley 2300 St. Paul Street John R. Griffin Governor Baltimore, Maryland 21218-5210 Secretary (410) 554-5500 TTY users call via the Maryland Relay Anthony G. Brown www.mgs.md.gov Eric Schwaab Lieutenant Governor Deputy Secretary BASIC DATA REPORT NO. 22 HYDROGEOLOGIC DATA FROM SIX TEST WELLS IN THE UPPER PATAPSCO AND LOWER PATAPSCO AQUIFERS IN SOUTHERN MARYLAND by Nadine Calis and David D. Drummond Prepared by the Maryland Geological Survey Jeffrey P. Halka, Acting Director in cooperation with the Boards of County Commissioners of Calvert, Charles, and St. Mary’s Counties and the United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey Publication Number DNR-12-562008-309 July 2008 CONTENTS Page Abstract .............................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 Location of study area and test wells .................................................................................................... 1 Hydrogeologic setting ........................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments................................................................................................................................. 2 Well drilling and construction ........................................................................................................................... 2 Hydrogeologic data ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Lithologic descriptions ......................................................................................................................... 3 Palynologic analyses ............................................................................................................................ 4 Geophysical logs .................................................................................................................................. 4 Aquifer tests .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Water-quality analyses ......................................................................................................................... 5 Water levels........................................................................................................................................... 5 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 References .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 ILLUSTRATIONS Figures Page 1. Map showing location of the study area, test wells, and hydrogeologic section in Southern Maryland ........................................................................................................................... 7 2. Generalized hydrogeologic cross section, from Malcolm to Paw Paw Hollow ................................... 8 3-5. Diagrams showing construction features of test wells: 3. CA Db 96 and CA Fd 85.......................................................................................................... 9 4. CH Bg 17 and CH Cg 24 ......................................................................................................... 10 5. SM Bc 39 and SM Dd 72 ........................................................................................................ 11 6-11. Geophysical logs for test well: 6. CA Db 96, at Prince Frederick ................................................................................................ 12 7. CA Fd 85, at Chesapeake Ranch ............................................................................................. 13 8. CH Bg 17, at Malcolm ............................................................................................................ 14 9. CH Cg 24, at Hughesville ........................................................................................................ 15 10. SM Bc 39, at Persimmon Hills ................................................................................................ 16 11. SM Dd 72, at Paw Paw Hollow ............................................................................................... 17 12-17. Drawdown and recovery data for aquifer test of test well: 12. CA Db 96 ................................................................................................................................ 18 13. CA Fd 85 ................................................................................................................................. 19 14. CH Bg 17 ................................................................................................................................. 20 15. CH Cg 24 ................................................................................................................................. 21 16. SM Bc 39 ................................................................................................................................. 22 17. SM Dd 72 ................................................................................................................................ 23 18-20. Hydrographs of test wells: 18. CA Db 96 and CA Fd 85, in Calvert County .......................................................................... 24 19. CH Bg 17 and CH Cg 24, in Charles County .......................................................................... 25 20. SM Bc 39 and SM Dd 72, in St. Mary’s County...................................................................... 26 ii TABLES Tables Page 1. Geologic and hydrostratigraphic units of Southern Maryland ............................................................. 27 2. Construction and yield characteristics of the six test wells .................................................................. 28 3-8. Driller’s log of drill cuttings for test well: 3. CA Db 96 ............................................................................................................................... 29 4. CA Fd 85 ................................................................................................................................ 30 5. CH Bg 17 ................................................................................................................................ 31 6. CH Cg 24 ................................................................................................................................ 32 7. SM Bc 39 ................................................................................................................................ 34 8. SM Dd 72 ............................................................................................................................... 35 9-14. Composite lithologic description of drill cuttings for test well: 9. CA Db 96 ................................................................................................................................ 36 10. CA Fd 85 ................................................................................................................................ 39 11. CH Bg 17 ................................................................................................................................ 43 12. CH Cg 24 ................................................................................................................................ 46 13. SM Bc 39 ................................................................................................................................ 49 14. SM Dd 72 .............................................................................................................................. 52 15-18. Palynologic analysis of selected drill-cutting samples for test well: 15. CA Db 96.................................................................................................................................. 55 16. CH Cg 24.................................................................................................................................. 60 17. SM Bc 39.................................................................................................................................. 62 18. SM Dd 72 ................................................................................................................................. 65 Explanation and references for palynologic analyses, Tables 15-18. ...................................... 72 19. Water-quality
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RI37 Stratigraphic Nomenclature Of
    ,--' ( UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE DELAWARE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS NO.37 STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE OF NONMARINE CRETACEOUS ROCKS OF INNER MARGIN OF COASTAL PLAIN IN DELAWARE AND ADJACENT STATES BY ROBERT R. JORDAN STATE OF DELAWARE.. NEWARK, DELAWARE JUNE 1983 STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE OF NONMARINE CRETACEOUS ROCKS OF INNER MARGIN OF COASTAL PLAIN IN DELAWARE AND ADJACENT STATES By Robert R. Jordan Delaware Geological Survey June 1983 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT. ....... 1 INTRODUCTION ..... 2 Purpose and Scope. 2 Acknowledgments.. 4 REGIONAL SETTING. 4 Regional Relationships . 4 Structural Features. 5 DESCRIPTIONS OF UNITS .. 8 Historical Summary 8 Potomac Formation. 13 Nomenclature. 13 Extent. 13 Lithology . 14 Patuxent Formation . 18 Nomenclature. 18 Extent.. 18 Lithology .... 18 Arundel Formation. 19 Nomenclature.. 19 Extent. .• 19 Lithology • 20 Page Patapsco Formation. .. 20 Nomenclature . 20 Extent .. 20 Lithology.. 20 Raritan Formation . 21 Nomenclature .. 21 Extent .. 22 Lithology.. 23 Magothy Formation .. 24 Nomenclature . 24 Extent .. 24 Lithology.. 25 ENVIRONMENTS OF DEPOSITION 28 AGES .... 29 SUBDIVISIONS AND CORRELATIONS .. 32 REFERENCES . 34 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Geologic map of nonmarine Cretaceous deposits .. ..•.• •.. 3 2. Structural features of the Coastal Plain. ............ 6 3. Schematic diagram of lateral and vertical relationships of nonmarine Cretaceous deposits•....•... 34 TABLES Page Table 1. Usage of group and formation names. 9 STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE OF NONMARINE CRETACEOUS ROCKS OF INNER MARGIN OF COASTAL PLAIN IN DELAWARE AND ADJACENT STATES ABSTRACT Rocks of Cretaceous age deposited in continental and marginal environments, and now found along the inner edge of the northern Atlantic Coastal Plain, have historically been classified as the Potomac Group and the Potomac, Patuxent, Arundel, Patapsco, Raritan, and Magothy forma­ tions.
    [Show full text]
  • Anne Arundel County
    1 Anne I .\RUNDE1 County ilBII pi I • 'lill Mllvlli 'il I I I 1 ;■ ' 11 {[[•^1 I Dept. 6eo«ogy. 8B< Wj,w Johns Hopkins Univewity Baltimore, Maryland MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY BALTIMORE THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 1917 COMMISSION EMEESON C. HARRINGTON, .... Peesident. GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND JOHN M. DENNIS, COMPTROLLER OF MARYLAND FRANK J. GOODNOW, .... Executive Officer. PRESIDENT OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY H. J. PATTERSON, Secretary. PRESIDENT OF THE MARYLAND AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE ■ SCIENTIFIC STAFF Wm. Bullock Clark, State Geologist. SUPERINTENDENT OF THE SURVEY. Edward B. Matiiews, . Assistant State Geologist. C. K. Swartz, Geologist. E. W. Berry, Geologist. J. T. Singewald, Jr., Geologist. Also with the cooperation of several members of the scientific bureaus of the National Government. LETTER OF TRANSM1TTAL To His Excellency Emerson C. Harrington, Governor of Maryland and President of the Geological Survey Commission. Sir:—I have the honor to present herewith a report on The Physical Features of Anne Arundel County. This volume is the eighth of a series of reports on the county resources, and is accompanied by large scale topographical, geological, and agricultural soil maps. The information contained in this volume will prove of both economic and educational value to the residents of Anne Arundel County as well as to those who may desire information regarding this section of the State. I am, Very respectfully, Wm. Bullock Clark, State Geologist. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. March, 1916. ■ ■ CONTENTS page PREFACE 19 DEVELOPMENT OF KNOWLEDGE CONCERNING THE PHYSICAL FEATURES OF ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY. By Homer P. Little 23 Introductory 23 HISTORICAL REVIEW 23 General Contributions 23 The Lower Cretaceous 26 The Upper Cretaceous 29 The Eocene 30 The Miocene 31 The Pliocene (?) and Pleistocene 32 Bibliography 34 THE PHYSIOGRAPHY OF ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Report on Ground, Virginia
    Plcue rcturn thb publication to thc Virginia Geologicd Suryey when you havc no furthcr uc for it. Portage will be rcfundcd, COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE COMMISSION ON CONSERVATTON AND DEVELOPMENT VIRGINIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ARTHUR BEVAN, Stde e'eologi.t Bulletin 4l 2tt Preliminary Report on Ground, Water Resources of Northern Virginia BY CADY PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE I.II{ITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY UNIVERSITY, VIRGINIA 1933 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE COMMISSION ON CONSERVATION .AND DEVELOPMENT VIRGINIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ARTHUR BEVAN' State Geolosict Bulletin 4l Preliminary Report on Ground, Water Resources of Northern Virginia BY C. CADY PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE'UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY UNIVERSITY, VIRGINIA 1933 RICHMOND: DtvrsroN or Puncseso exo Pnrwrruc 1933 STATE COMMISSION ON CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT Wrr,rranr E. Censon, Chai,runan,, Riverton Cor,Buam Wonrualr, Vi,ce-Chai,rtnoz, Richmond E. Gnrnrrrrr Doosor.r, Norfolk Tnouas L. Fannen, Charlottesville Juxrus P. FrsununN, Roanoke Lne LoNc, Dante Rurus G. Rorrnrs, Culpeper Rrcseno A. Grrr,rem, E r e c wt izt e S e c r e t ar y an d, T r e a s urer, Richmond lll LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ColtlnoNwBALTH oF VrncrNre Vrncrxre Gnor.ocrcer, Sunvev IJmrvensrrv or VrncrNre Crrenr,omesvnr,q Vrncrmre, January 10, 1933. To the State Cowrnissi,on on Conservati,on and Develobrnent: Gpnmeueu: I have the honor to transmit and to recommend for publication as Bulletin 41 of the Virginia Geological Survey series of reports the manuscript and illustrations of a Preliwi,nary Report on Ground'-water Resources of Northern Vbgi.nia., by Mr. R. C.
    [Show full text]
  • HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK of the COASTAL PLAIN of MARYLAND, DELAWARE, and the M
    HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK OF THE COASTAL PLAIN OF MARYLAND, DELAWARE, AND THE m. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA U.S. GEOJ,0 HCM. Hydrogeologic Framework of the Coastal Plain of Maryland, Delaware, and the District of Columbia By DON A. VROBLESKY and WILLIAM B. FLECK REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1404-E UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1991 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Vroblesky, Don A. Hydrogeologic framework of the coastal plain in Maryland, Delaware, and the District of Columbia. (U.S. Geological Survey professional paper ; 1404-E) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs. no. : I 19.16 : 1404E 1. Water, Underground Maryland. 2. Water, Underground Delaware. 3. Water, Underground Washington (D.C.) I. Fleck, William B. II. Title. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey professional paper ; 1404-E. GB1025.M3V76 1989 551.49'0975 87-600120 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225 FOREWORD THE REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS PROGRAM The Regional Aquifer-System Analysis (RASA) Program was started in 1978 following a congressional mandate to develop quantitative appraisals of the major ground-water systems of the United States. The RASA Program represents a systematic effort to study a number of the Nation's most important aquifer systems, which in aggregate underlie much of the country and which represent important components of the Nation's total water supply.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Vertebrate Anatomy Morphology Palaeontology 6:68-72 68 ISSN 2292-1389 Rebuttal of McFeeters, Ryan and Cullen, 2018, ‘Positional variation in pedal unguals of North American ornithomimids (Dinosauria, Theropoda): A Response to Brownstein (2017)’ Chase Doran Brownstein Stamford Museum, 39 Scofieldtown Road, Stamford, CT 06903, USA; [email protected] Abstract: The Arundel Clay of Maryland is among the only Early Cretaceous terrestrial units known from eastern North America. Research on some theropod dinosaur bones from this layer has indicated the presence of two ornithomimosaur taxa in the assemblage. However, a recent paper discussed issues with the definite assignment of any of these unguals to Ornithomimosauria and suggested that morphological differences originally interpreted to be indicative of the presence of two ornithomimosaurs could be explained by positional variation. Here, I show that substantial evidence persists for the presence of two ornithomimosaurs in the Arundel Clay assemblage, even considering the recent description of positional variation in ornithomimosaur pedal unguals. Furthermore, the argument against the confident assignment of these unguals to ornithomimosaurs is shown to be based on oversimplified comparisons that do not take into account the combination of features in the Arundel specimens that allow for their assignment to that clade. Although several small points made in the initial paper describing the Arundel specimens are incorrect or unsubstantiated, the differences between the Maryland unguals are outside the spectrum of positional variation and are indicative of the presence of two ornithomimosaurs in the Arundel Clay assemblage. The Arundel Clay of Maryland is an Aptian unit (e.g., Lipka major acts in that paper: (1) the confident assignment of the et al.
    [Show full text]
  • DINOSAURS Volume 2, Issue 5
    [ABCDE] CURRICULUM GUIDE: DINOSAURS Volume 2, Issue 5 e r I n E d u c a p a p t i o w s n P N e r o t g s r a P o m n t o g i n h s T a h e W C e u h r T r i f c u O l u e r m o C A t e T h h T e t C A o r m KLMNO e u l O u An Integrated Curriculum c f i r Resource Program T r h u e C W e a h s T h i n g t o n P m o a s r t g N o r e P w s n p o a i p t a e c r u I d n E INSIDE 2 Washington, B.C. 7 Official Dinosaur 9 A Look at Dinosaur Did Dinosaurs Live Capitalsaurus and Crossword in the Washington, Astrodon 5 D.C., area? 8 10 June 10 , 2003 © 2003 THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY Volume 2, Issue 5 KLMNO An Integrated Curriculum For The Washington Post Newspaper In Education Program Is Capitalsaurus the Real Thing? Official Words KidsPost Article: “Washington, B.C.” Asteroid: Rocky and metallic objects that orbit Read and Discuss Lesson: Use original documents the Sun but are too small to be considered and multiple sources to form an Give students more information opinion. about dinosaurs in the D.C. planets. Asteroids that are likely to collide Level: Mid- to High metropolitan area: “Did Dinosaurs Subjects: Science, Reading Ever Live in the Washington, D.C., with Earth are called meteoroids.
    [Show full text]
  • BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON SUPERCONDUCTING MAGLEV PROJECT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT and SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION
    Section 4.13 Topography and Geology BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON SUPERCONDUCTING MAGLEV PROJECT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation 0-1 Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation 4.13 Topography and Geology 4.13.1 Introduction Topography relates to the shape and features of the earth; and a geologic resource can be described as a naturally occurring feature that has formed during evolution of the earth. Geologic resources, including fossilized flora and fauna (i.e., paleontological resources), fossil fuels, mineral resources, and rock formations, may provide value to the human and/or physical environment. Geologic hazards, such as earthquakes, sinkholes, and landslides, can be described as a naturally occurring feature that may result in a threat to the human or physical environment. This section evaluates how the Superconducting Magnetic Levitation Project (SCMAGLEV Project) would interact with and potentially impact regional topography, geologic resources and hazards, as well as the SCMAGLEV Project’s location in relation to setting and features such as existing mines. Additional information about the geology of the area can be found in the Natural Environment Technical Report (Appendix D.10). 4.13.2 Regulatory Context and Methodology 4.13.2.1 Regulatory Context In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations, 40 C.F.R. Parts 1500 - 1508, and the Federal Rail Administration’s (FRA) Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts, 64 Fed. Reg. 28545 (May 26, 1999), FRA assessed the existing geologic conditions along the Build Alternatives to determine whether the SCMAGLEV Project would impact geologic resources.
    [Show full text]
  • The Iron Ores of Maryland, with an Account of the Iron Industry
    Hass 77,>0 3- Book ffjZd6 MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC SURVEY WM. BULLOCK CLARK, State Geologist REPORT ON THE IRON ORES OF MARYLAND WITH AN ACCOUNT OF THE IRON INDUSTRY BY JOSEPH T. SINGEWALD, JR.- (Special Publication, Volume IX, Part III) THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS Baltimore, December, 1911 / / MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC SURVEY WM. BULLOCK CLARK, State Geologist REPORT ON r? Sr THE IRON ORES OF MARYLAND / £ WITH AN ACCOUNT OF THE IRON INDUSTRY BY JOSEPH T. SINGEWALD, JR. M (Special Publication, Volume IX, Part III) THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS • Baltimore, December, 1911 V n, ffi ft- sre so i CONTENTS PAGE PART III. REPORT ON THE IRON ORES OF MARYLAND, WITH AN ACCOUNT OF THE IRON INDUSTRY. By Joseph T. Sxngewald, Jr. 121 The Ores of Iron.123 Magnetite . 124 Hematite . 124 Limonite . 124 Carbonate or Siderite. 125 Impurities in the Ores and Their Effects. 125 Mechanical Impurities. 125 Chemical Impurities. 126 Practical Considerations. 127 History of the Maryland Iron Industry. 128 The Colonial Period. 128 The Period from 1780 to 1830. 133 • The Period from 1830 to 1885. 133 The Period from 1885 to the present time. 136 Description of Maryland Iron Works.139 Maryland Furnaces. 139 Garrett County..'... 139 Allegany County. 139 Washington County. 143 Frederick County. 146 Carroll County. 149 Baltimore County. 150 Baltimore City. 159 Harford County. 160 Cecil County. 162 Howard County. 168 Anne Arundel County. 169 Prince George’s County. 171 Worcester County. 172 9 Other Iron Works in Maryland. 173 Allegany County. 173 Baltimore County. 173 Cecil County. 174 CONTENTS PAGE Queen Anne’s County.
    [Show full text]
  • Generalized Structure Contour Maps of Th E New Jersey Coastal Plain
    State of New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Devdopment H. Mat Adams, Commi._.cioner Division of Resource Development Kenneth H. Creveling, Director GENERALIZED STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAPS OF TH E NEW JERSEY COASTAL PLAIN by Horace G. Riehards F. H. Olmsted James L. Ruhle prepared by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation wit£ the State of New Jersey Division of Water Policy and Supply George R Shanklin, Director 1962 .° Reprinted 1983 CONTENTS Abstract .... ; .................................................................. iii Introduction .................................................................. 1 1 Scope and purpose ........................................................ Acknowledgments ......................................................... 1 Previous work ................................................................. 2 Geologieal setting ............................................................. 3 Pre-Cretaceous rocks ........................................................... 12 Nonmarine Cretaceous sediments, undifferentiated ................................ 12 MerchantviUe Formation and Woodbury Clay .................................... 17 Englishtown Formation ........................................................ 19 Marshalltown Formation ...................................................... 19 Wenonah Formation and Mount Laurel Sand ...................................... 22 Navesink Formation . .'... : ..................................................... 22 Red Bank Sand ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bulletin 19 of the Department of Geology, Mines and Water Resources
    COMMISSION OF MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY S. JAMES CAMPBELL Towson RICHARD W. COOPER Salisbury JOHN C. GEYER Baltimore ROBERT C. HARVEY Frostburg M. GORDON WOLMAN Baltimore PREFACE In 1906 the Maryland Geological Survey published a report on "The Physical Features of Maryland", which was mainly an account of the geology and min- eral resources of the State. It included a brief outline of the geography, a more extended description of the physiography, and chapters on the soils, climate, hydrography, terrestrial magnetism and forestry. In 1918 the Survey published a report on "The Geography of Maryland", which covered the same fields as the earlier report, but gave only a brief outline of the geology and added chap- ters on the economic geography of the State. Both of these reports are now out of print. Because of the close relationship of geography and geology and the overlap in subject matter, the two reports were revised and combined into a single volume and published in 1957 as Bulletin 19 of the Department of Geology, Mines and Water Resources. The Bulletin has been subsequently reprinted in 1961 and 1966. Some revisions in statistical data were made in the 1961 and 1968 reprints. Certain sections of the Bulletin were extensively revised by Dr. Jona- than Edwards in this 1974 reprint. The Introduction, Mineral Resources, Soils and Agriculture, Seafood Industries, Commerce and Transportation and Manu- facturing chapters of the book have received the most revision and updating. The chapter on Geology and Physiography was not revised. This report has been used extensively in the schools of the State, and the combination of Geology and Geography in one volume allows greater latitude in adapting it to use as a reference or textbook at various school levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Fossil Plants from the National Park Service Areas of the National Capital Region Vincent L
    Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Fossil Resources Rapid City, SD May 2014 Dakoterra Vol. 6:181–190 ARTICLE FOSSIL PLANTS FROM THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AREAS OF THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION VINCENT L. SANTUCCI1, CASSI KNIGHT1, AND MICHAEL ANTONIONI2 1National Park Service, Geologic Resources Division, Washington, D.C. 20005 2National Park Service, National Capital Parks East, 1900 Anacostia Dr. S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 ABSTRACT—Paleontological resource inventories conducted within the parks of the National Park Service’s National Capital Region yielded information about fossil plants from 10 parks. This regional paleobotanical inventory is part of a service-wide assessment being conducted throughout the National Park System to determine the scope, significance and distribution of fossil plants in parks. Fossil plants from the Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic are documented from numerous localities within parks of the National Capital Region. A Devonian flora is preserved at Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historic Park. Fossil plants from the Cretaceous Potomac Group are identified in several parks in the region including two holotype specimens of fossil plants described by Smithsonian paleobotanist Lester Ward from Fort Foote Park. Cretaceous petrified wood and logs are preserved at Prince William Forest Park. Pleistocene plant fossils and petrified wood were found at Presi- dent’s Park near the White House. A comprehensive inventory of the plant fossil resources found on National Park Service administered lands in the National Capitol Region will aid in our understanding of past climates and ecosystems that have existed in this region through time. INTRODUCTION understanding of past climates and ecosystems that have Fossils are an important resource because they allow existed in this region through time.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the United States National Museum
    THE FAUNA OF THE ARUNDEL FORMATION OF MARYLAND. By Charles W. Gilmore. Associate Curator, Division of Paleontology , United States National Museum. INTRODUCTION. The vertebrate fauna of the Arundel formation of Maryland has long been a subject of interest to all workers in American Mcsozoic formations. The correlation of this fauna with the Morrison (Atlan- tosaurus, Como) beds fauna of the Rocky Mountain region by Prof. O. C. Marsh, and the later 1 and more positive confirmation of that conclusion by Dr. R. S. Lull, has been quite generally accepted as the correct interpretation. The present communication gives the results of a more recent study of all known specimens from the Arun- del formation, and the conclusions reached are quite at variance to those of my predecessors. The evidence appears to show—first, that the vertebrate fauna as a whole is not to be closely correlated with that of the Morrison formation of the West; second, that it contains forms having undoubted Upper Cretaceous affinities; third, that it consists of a combination of dinosaurian forms hitherto unknown in any fauna of this continent—that is, the intermingling of Sauropo- dous dinosaurs with those having Upper Cretaceous affinities. While the discussion of several phases of this question are neces- sarily inconclusive, due to the paucity of the materials, yet the main contentions, I believe, can be fully maintained. SOURCE OF MATERIALS. Practically all of the vertebrate materials known from the Arundel formation of Maryland are now assembled in the United States National Museum. These comprise all of the specimens collected by the late J.
    [Show full text]