DOCSLIB.ORG

Oil and Gas Fields Map of Utah E R ” Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration V P L L 8 ” A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oil and Gas Fields Map of Utah E R ” Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration V P L L 8 ” A 114°W 113°W 19W 18W 112°W 17W 16W 15W 111°W 14W 13W 12W 11W 10W 9W 8W 7W 6W 5W 4W 3W UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 42°N 2W 1W 1E 2E 3E 4E 5E 6E 7E 8E 15N a division of W 42°N Department of Natural Resources G Plate 1 P B L 14N N in cooperation with Utah Geological Survey Circular 119 e W C a 2 14N H 2 Oil and Gas Fields Map of Utah E r ” Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration V P L L 8 ” a k e ” PC 1 0 13N HOGBACK Q r e RIDGE v 13N i (A) ^d R r a e ” Q B PC 0 1 ” r e & 0 v ” 1 12N i 8 C R C G r G Q a 12N Q e Logan B Ç 11N QGC 10” QGC 4” L. 42” T 11N OIL AND GAS FIELDS MAP OF UTAH KM A E N Ç Randolph CACHE Q PIK TE S I P S C N IC 1 E R 2 10N D TO ” L IS O H QGC 20” Rebekah E. Wood and Thomas C. Chidsey, Jr. G 10N 2015 9N RICH Brigham City Ç 9N Scale 1:700,000 KM 42” QPC 20” 8N 10 5 0 10 20 30 40 Miles ROZEL POINT (A) Tb 8N 10 5 0 10 20 30 40 Kilometers 7N Q G C 1 7N 2 Q Q ” P G C C 2 6” & 8WEBER 0” COORDINATE SYSTEM Great ” BOX ELDER NAD 1983 UTM Zone 12N 6N QGC 8” Q Uintah Special GC QGC 10” 4” Salt 6N Meridian Ç ” P 16 PAAL Ogden FIRTH (A) (HS) P*w 8” 5N Lake PPC Q G Salt Lake Base C Q 5N County boundaries, county seat locations, federal boundaries, Public Land Survey System (PLSS), 14 CAVE CREEK P and Meridian ” C ” (A) (HD) Jtc, Pp (HS) 6 2 highways and roads, water bodies, and land ownership are from the Utah Automated Geographic C P*w (HS), Mm (HS) 0 MORGAN ” G Reference Center. Q ANSCHUTZ RANCH EAST Q P Public Land Survey Systems C (HD) (NI) Jtc, Jn 4N 1 on this map ” 6 ANSCHUTZ RANCH ” 8 (WEBER) (A) (HS) P*w ” 4N 109°W C Q 0 P G 1 PPC 6” P 110°W C ANSCHUTZ RANCH C 8 P PPC 6” Morgan 5 ” QPC 10” (D) (HD) Jtc, Jn Q 25E 41°"N 23E 24E 3N 20E 21E 22E 8E 9E 10E 11E 12E 13E 14E 15E 16E 17E 18E 19E DAVIS Q CLAY BASIN 41°N G QPC C 18” 18” 20” Ç QPC 0” 6 Manila 2 Kf, Kd (GS) ” Ç Farmington NORTH PINEVIEW YELLOW CREEK 3N FARMINGTON 80 MMcfd FLAMING GORGE CHALK CREEK (D) Jn (A) Q EP 6” C (GS) Kk GREEN RIVER BASIN 2N QP 20” BRIDGER LAKE Coalville KR (D) (GI) Kd KR 36” 36 QPC 20 Ç ” AAGARD RANCH BRIDGER LAKE ” ELKHORN 25 MMcfd 2N HOLLY REFINING & MARKETING (A) (HD) Jtc (A) (D) Kk NATL. REC. AREA (25,050 B/D) COALVILLE PINEVIEW (GS) Kf Q SILVER EAGLE REFINING PINEVIEW (D) (HD) Kk (A), Js (A), Jtc, Jn P 15 MMcfd C 1N (15,000 B/D) 2 0 BIG WEST OIL LODGEPOLE ” KR 3 (29,400 B/D) 6” (D) (HD) Jtc, Jn (A) DAGGETT 1N CHEVRON U.S.A. W G Wendover (45,000 B/D) P Ç QG L 1S C 6” N ” W 4 20” QPC 2 C TESORO WEST COAST ^_ P SUMMIT 2 Q 6 Q ” (57,500 B/D) G QGC 12” Salt C 4” 1S ” 4N 0 ” 1 Lake 8 C Q C ? G Q Q City G G Q G Q G Q C G C ” C 0 6 2S 1 C ” 2 ” ” UINTA UPLIFT 2 ” 1 6 2 3 0 1 C 1 ” ” ” L ” 0 0 G C P C 1 H 1 V E Q E G C V H 2S C P C Q G L 3N SALT LAKEG 1 Q 0 K Q ” R EP 16” 6” 3 QGC QGC 8” 6 ” UINTAH 3S Q ? G Q QGC 6” C QPC 20” G QG 6 C 8” 2N C 3S ” 4 Ç ” Tooele STARR FLAT ” COTTONWOOD WASH (A) Tgr 2 1 QGC 16” Ç (A) Tgr 4S V E W N Heber City G U ROBIDOUX Vernal P DINOSAUR ” L 4 Q C N G ? 1N Tw Ç QG 4S C W NATL. MON. 1 DUCHESNE 0 2 ” 6 ” 5S ” 8 ASHLEY VALLEY TOOELE C G BLUEBELL (GI) (HS) Jm, Je Q TIMPANOGOS CAVE 22 MMcfd QGC 8” TWELVE Ppc (A), PIPw QGC 5S 6” NATL. MONUMENT 1S MILE WASH Q ” (A) Tgr G GC 4” L 8 BLUEBELL Q Q C ALTAMONT VP 2 G 0 27 MMcfd HE (D) (HD) Tgr, Tw ” C HALFWAY C WASATCH 4 Q 6S ” HOLLOW ” CHEVPL 10 ” P 8 C Tgr, Tw RED WASH QGC 16 2 ” C 4” 2S C GUSHER 0 80 MMcfd P P Q ” ALTAMONT Q WALKER 6S Tgr ” (D) (HD) Tgr, Tw QP MOFFAT CANAL 2 HOLLOW (WF) 1 C 1 (D) Tgr, Tw Tu, Tgr, Kmv W 2 1W 1E 2E C N 12W 11W 10W 9W H 4W ” 3W 2W 8W 7W 6W 5W E HORSESHOE BEND L VP P P L INDEPENDENCE G E 7S Utah 10 (WF) Tu, Tgr Q UTAH W Ç ” (HD) Tgr Provo S POWDER t NORTH MYTON BENCH Q r SPRINGS Lake a 7S G BRENNAN BOTTOM WHITE RED WASH w (D) (HD) Tgr WINDY RIDGE Tgr C CEDAR RIM b 3S (HD) (WF) Tu, Tgr, Tw RIVER (D) (HD) (WF) 1 e (D) (HD) Tgr, Tw (D) (HD) (WF) Tgr 8 (HD) (WF) Tgr r RANDLETT Tu, Tgr, Kmv ” r y QGC 3 (D) Tgr ” PLEASANT VALLEY R THREE 8S e Ç (HD) Tgr, Tw LELAND RIVERS s ” e Duchesne BENCH (D) Tgr 0 r WONSITS VALLEY 1 v DUCHESNE (HD) Tgr COYOTE P o (D) (HD) (WF) BIG VALLEY E K i (D) (HD) BASIN r S. MYTON Tgr, Tw, Km R GYPSUM HILLS (D) Tgr, Tw, Kmv Tgr, Tw KENNEDY (WF) Tgr 8S 3 BENCH (WF) (HD) Tgr, Tw Q Km, Kf, Kd 6 4S P WASH (WF) ” BRIDGELAND (HD) Tgr C QGC 6” Q NORTH 8 Tw, Kmv NR P (A) Tgr, Tw UTNJ 6” ” BONANZA C 8 MILE 6 Tgr FLAT NORTH 9S ” QPC 12” 20” (HD) (WF) PARIETTE BENCH DEVILS Tgr, Tw, Kmv NATURAL BUTTES LAKE (D) Tgr, Kmv PLAYGROUND 5S MONUMENT BUTTE 180 MMcfd CANYON QP (D) Tgr, Tw, Kmv 40°N BRUNDAGE CANYON (HD) (WF) Tgr C 16” 9S (HD) Tgr W (HD) (WF) Tgr GP L WEST WILLOW NW 40°N 1 CHIPETA PLANT QPC 24” CREEK (GI) 2 970 MMcfd W ” 10S Tgr, Tw C G C EIGHT MILE P BONANZA H I L NATURAL BUTTES E G FLAT (HD) N Tw, Kmv V 2 (D) (HD) (WF) P MATHEWS Tgr, Tw W L 0 10S 6 ” 6S 1 Tgr, Tw, Kmv, Km, Kd, Kf (HD) Tgr ” ANTELOPE CREEK ” 2 C SOWERS 2 ” I G 1 HELL’S HOLE (D) (HD) (WF) Tgr, Tw CANYON 1 C Km, Kd, Jm 2 Tgr P ” Q 11S UINTA CHOKECHERRY BIG SPRING HILL CREEK UTELAND ASPHALT CANYON Kmv ALGER PASS Tw, Kmv ROCK HOUSE 7S PETES WASH BUTTE LOVE BITTER CREEK (D) Tw, Kmv WASH (A) Tgr Kmv Tw, Kmv Tw, Kmv (A) Kbh (HD) (WF) Tw, Kmv 11S Tgr, Tw, Kmv BUCK GATE CANYON MIDDLE KICKER CASTLEGATE BENCH CANYON (SI) Tw (CBM) (D) (HD) Kbh (D) Kmv (D) Tw Q Tw, Kmv 12S PC EVACUATION 2 4 P BBC 4 CREEK ” NR 8” STONE ” Kd, Kcm Q CABIN PC SCOFIELD SOLDIER CREEK AGENCY 12S 18 Kmf (A) (CBM) (HD) Kbh (WF) Tw DRAW ” OIL SPRINGS ATCHEE RIDGE Tw, Kmv, Km M BB AGENCY DRAW E (HD) Tw, Kmv Kmv, Kmb DAVIS C 6 SA JUAB 5 WEST (A) Kmv 1 TABYAGO CANYON CLEAR / 2” WHISKEY CREEK Nephi 8 ” Tw, Kmv Kmv, Kd 13S Ç CREEK NINE MILE (SI) Km LITTLE SAHARA Q (D) Kmf CANYON DRY BURN G NAVAL RESERVE (SI) Km C GORDON CREEK (D) Tw, Kmv Kd SEEP RIDGE 1 Kmbg, Kmf, ^m (A) (CO ) 0 2 (D) (WF) Kd 13S REC. AREA ” PETER'S POINT SWEETWATER CANYON Pwr (A) (CO2) (D) (HD) Tgr, Tw, Km, Kd, Kcm, Jm E HELPER P (CBM) (D) Kmf BC 3” Kmv, Km, Kd 1 B CROOKED 0 CANYON RAT HOLE CANYON ” (SI) Km 14S SEEP RIDGE B Kd Q Kd LONE SPRING G W MAIN CANYON (SI) Km C G Kcg, Km, Kcm, Jm, Je 14S 6 ” Ç P ” L 6 NW SWEETWATER RIDGE C P Price PINE SPRINGS 6” Q (SI) Kmb ” CARBON Tw, Km, Kd, Kcg 0 1 JOE’S VALLEY SOUTH CANYON C BASIN (A) Kmf, Kd P Q 4” WOLF POINT (SI) Km C GC 15S Km, Kd, Jm EAST 15S DRUNKARDS WASH FLAT ROCK CANYON BLACK (CBM) (D) (HD) Kmf MILLER FARNHAM DOME Tw, Kmv, Km, Kd, Kd, Kcm, Jm HORSE CYN (CO ) Jn, ^m CREEK 2 Kcm, Jm, Je, Jw Kcg, Kd DELTA (GS) CEDAR CAMP WG (SI) Kmf FENCE P L Kd, Kcm CANYON N ” W 6 Kd, Kcm, Jm 1 SAN ARROYO C ICE 0” P W 15 MMcfd 16S G FLAT CANYON Q CANYON P ” L HORSE MIDDLE ” 6 Kmf, Kd Kd, Kcm N 2 C GRASSY TRAIL W POINT 1 G MOON CANYON 16S Q 4 Kd, Kcm, Jm W (D) (HD) ^m r BASIN RIDGE ” Kd, Kcm e N Kd, Kcm L v SEGUNDO i WESTWATER P SAN ARROYO G R CANYON Km, Kd, Kcm, Jm, Je U Kmv, Kd, Kcm, W Kd, Kcm n DIAMOND Jm, Je e N RIDGE Ç e 17S Delta r C (A) Kd, Jm G O WG DARK 17S PLN CANYON BRYSON W AND M 3” Kd, Kcm CANYON BAR X PETERSON SPRINGS Kmv, Kd, Km, Kd, Kcm, BUZZARD BENCH P (A) Kd, Kcm Kcm, Jm, Je Jm, Je (CBM) (D) (HD) Kmf ” STATELINE 18S 0 U T A 2 Ç BUSHY Kd, Kcm, WINTER Manti C PEAR P Km, Kd Jm, Je P PARK CAMP Q H 18S Kd, Kcm MANCOS (A) Kd F L BOOK FLAT CLIFFS G Ç I I (HD) Km RANGE Castle Dale F Kd R ” 19S 6 W HARLEY DOME 3 T G L P Kd (A) , Jm (A) (CO ) (He) R ” L E 2 K 6 SANPETE N C W Je (CO2) (He) P WOODSIDE 19S Q 4 ” LEFT HAND ” 6 P (A) Pk (CO2) ( He) 2 CANYON W Kd, Je N L P G 20S U W PROVIDENCE Jn GREATER CISCO (WF) Km, Kd, Kcm 20S FERRON Jm, Je WG Kmf, Pk (A) GRAND PL In older publications, Greater Cisco WASATCH N L W 39°N MILLARD 6 included the following fields: ” Agate - Kcm, Jm 21S Green River Cisco Dome - Km, Kd, Kcm, Jm, Je E 39°N Ç Cisco Springs - Km, Kd, Kcm, Jm QGC 6” Cisco Townsite/Wash - Kd, Kcm, Jm Ç BLAZE CANYON Danish Wash - Kd, Jm 21S Fillmore A Jn Gravel Pile - Kd, Jm PLATEAU Sage - Kd F Sieber Nose - Kcm, Jm 22S ” ” 0 8 1 C A P E G Q GREENTOWN R *p 22S 23S ” 4 COVENANT C G Jt, Jn Q T N 23S SALT WASH L (D) (HD) Richfield Ç A *p, Ml, De (A) EMERY r 24S E e iv S R ” o SEVIER 6 d 2 a B or 24S TEN MILE W ol N C (HD) *p L P ARCHES G W HELL ROARING NATIONAL 25S (HD) *p BIG FLAT (HD) *p, Ml (A) PARK 25S T CANE CREEK GOLD BAR (HD) *p (A) *p MOAB S (A) (D) (GS) *p 26S LONG Ç U LAST CHANCE CANYON Moab R (SI) ^m *p H 26S BIG FLAT WEST T ” (A) (HD) *p 4 PARK ROAD S (HD) *p UG 27S KANE CREEK CANYONLANDS SHAFER CANYON (A) *p (A) *p E LION MESA P 27S NATL.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UMNP Mountains Manual 2017
    Mountain Adventures Manual utahmasternaturalist.org June 2017 UMN/Manual/2017-03pr Welcome to Utah Master Naturalist! Utah Master Naturalist was developed to help you initiate or continue your own personal journey to increase your understanding of, and appreciation for, Utah’s amazing natural world. We will explore and learn aBout the major ecosystems of Utah, the plant and animal communities that depend upon those systems, and our role in shaping our past, in determining our future, and as stewards of the land. Utah Master Naturalist is a certification program developed By Utah State University Extension with the partnership of more than 25 other organizations in Utah. The mission of Utah Master Naturalist is to develop well-informed volunteers and professionals who provide education, outreach, and service promoting stewardship of natural resources within their communities. Our goal, then, is to assist you in assisting others to develop a greater appreciation and respect for Utah’s Beautiful natural world. “When we see the land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect.” - Aldo Leopold Participating in a Utah Master Naturalist course provides each of us opportunities to learn not only from the instructors and guest speaKers, But also from each other. We each arrive at a Utah Master Naturalist course with our own rich collection of knowledge and experiences, and we have a unique opportunity to share that Knowledge with each other. This helps us learn and grow not just as individuals, but together as a group with the understanding that there is always more to learn, and more to share.
    [Show full text]
  • The Secret Mormon Meetings of 1922
    University of Nevada, Reno THE SECRET MORMON MEETINGS OF 1922 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History By Shannon Caldwell Montez C. Elizabeth Raymond, Ph.D. / Thesis Advisor December 2019 Copyright by Shannon Caldwell Montez 2019 All Rights Reserved UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL We recommend that the thesis prepared under our supervision by SHANNON CALDWELL MONTEZ entitled The Secret Mormon Meetings of 1922 be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS C. Elizabeth Raymond, Ph.D., Advisor Cameron B. Strang, Ph.D., Committee Member Greta E. de Jong, Ph.D., Committee Member Erin E. Stiles, Ph.D., Graduate School Representative David W. Zeh, Ph.D., Dean, Graduate School December 2019 i Abstract B. H. Roberts presented information to the leadership of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in January of 1922 that fundamentally challenged the entire premise of their religious beliefs. New research shows that in addition to church leadership, this information was also presented during the neXt few months to a select group of highly educated Mormon men and women outside of church hierarchy. This group represented many aspects of Mormon belief, different areas of eXpertise, and varying approaches to dealing with challenging information. Their stories create a beautiful tapestry of Mormon life in the transition years from polygamy, frontier life, and resistance to statehood, assimilation, and respectability. A study of the people involved illuminates an important, overlooked, underappreciated, and eXciting period of Mormon history.
    [Show full text]
  • The Frontiers of American Grand Strategy: Settlers, Elites, and the Standing Army in America’S Indian Wars
    THE FRONTIERS OF AMERICAN GRAND STRATEGY: SETTLERS, ELITES, AND THE STANDING ARMY IN AMERICA’S INDIAN WARS A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Government By Andrew Alden Szarejko, M.A. Washington, D.C. August 11, 2020 Copyright 2020 by Andrew Alden Szarejko All Rights Reserved ii THE FRONTIERS OF AMERICAN GRAND STRATEGY: SETTLERS, ELITES, AND THE STANDING ARMY IN AMERICA’S INDIAN WARS Andrew Alden Szarejko, M.A. Thesis Advisor: Andrew O. Bennett, Ph.D. ABSTRACT Much work on U.S. grand strategy focuses on the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. If the United States did have a grand strategy before that, IR scholars often pay little attention to it, and when they do, they rarely agree on how best to characterize it. I show that federal political elites generally wanted to expand the territorial reach of the United States and its relative power, but they sought to expand while avoiding war with European powers and Native nations alike. I focus on U.S. wars with Native nations to show how domestic conditions created a disjuncture between the principles and practice of this grand strategy. Indeed, in many of America’s so- called Indian Wars, U.S. settlers were the ones to initiate conflict, and they eventually brought federal officials into wars that the elites would have preferred to avoid. I develop an explanation for settler success and failure in doing so. I focus on the ways that settlers’ two faits accomplis— the act of settling on disputed territory without authorization and the act of initiating violent conflict with Native nations—affected federal decision-making by putting pressure on speculators and local elites to lobby federal officials for military intervention, by causing federal officials to fear that settlers would create their own states or ally with foreign powers, and by eroding the credibility of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historianshistorians99 Corner
    the historianshistorians99 corner ronald W walker with dean C jessee this issue ofthe historianscornerHistorianhistorians cornersCorner prints three documents which shed lightfighthight on the first relations between the latter day saints and the native americans in the great basin the first document reports the conversation of dimick B huntington with the legendary ute chief walker the second is a letter from president brigham young answering walkers request for communication and the third records the resulting council that took place between the mormon and ute leaders together these documents introduce the reader to the personalities and themes that dominated mormon indian relations during the first years of the pioneer period when the cormonsmormons entered utah in july 1847 they chose to make their first colonies on the southeast rim of the great salt lake fifty miles north of the most prized land the fertile shoreline of the freshwaterfresh water fish laden utah or Timpanotimpanogosgos lake the cormonsmormons wisely shunned this land fearing the ute indians there known variously as the Timpanotimpanogosgos timpany or timpanawach bands these native americans had a reputation for aggressiveness with the white people who had preceded the cormonsmormons into the region within two years of the Morcormonsmormonsmons arrival in the great basin a Timpanotimpanogosgos band under the leadership of kone also known as roman nose caused serious trouble kone and his family had found the mormon cattle grazing at the southern end ofthe salt lake
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Maudina Mine Area, Northern Santa Catalina Mountains, Pinal County, Arizona
    Geology of the Maudina Mine area, northern Santa Catalina Mountains, Pinal County, Arizona Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); maps Authors Bromfield, Calvin Stanton, 1923- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 28/09/2021 04:41:04 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/553781 GEOLOGY OF THE MAUDINA MINE AREA, NORTHERN SANTA CATALINA MOUNTAINS, PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA by Calvin S. Bromfleld M A Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Department of Geology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in the Graduate College, University of Arizona 1950 Approved: Director of Thesis aniM AHIOT'Ah 2HT TC TBCJOaO A8 51. Xfl t) \ bi °itnio*!t? .2 «JLvl/,D alaoriT & edcr c j AaJiimcfu# ad Of 4^ 5" ' % Nt. A / tTR^A osejc !6* voiacA iigsw w ^ r m s ----- - £ <H1C\\ CONTENTS Page H H H m Introduction...................... Location..................... Previous Investigations...... Field Work and Acknowledgments Climate...................... Topography................... General Geology.................................. 9 General Statement........................... 9 Sedimentary RocKs......................... 12 Cambrian System...................... 12 Middle Cambrian................. 12 Troy quartzite............. 12 Santa Catalina formation.... 14 Southern Belle quartzite.... 17 Upper Cambrian.................. 18 . Abrigo formation........... 18 Peppersauce sandstone...... 20 Devonian System...................... 22 Upper Devonian................. 22 Martin limestone.......... 22 Lower Ouray formation..... 25 Misslssippian System................ 27 Lower Misslssippian............ 27 Escabrosa limestone....... 27 Cretaceous System................... 31 Cretaceous Strata.............
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Northern Part of the Slate Mountains, Pinal County, Arizona
    Geology of the northern part of the Slate mountains, Pinal county, Arizona Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); maps Authors Hogue, William Gibson, 1914- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 26/09/2021 20:11:37 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/551077 GEOLOGY OF THE NORTHERN PART OF THE SLATE MOUNTAINS, PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA by William Gibson Hogue A Thesis Vy submitted to the faculty of the Department of Geology in .partial fulfillment of =' . j j the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the Graduate College University of Arizona 1940 Approved: /Date. <^9'79/ TABLE OF CONTENTS .gage. Acknov/ledgments .... Location Previous Work ...... Climate ...... Flora and Fauna ...... Topography and Drainage Miscellaneous ..... Sedimentary Rocks ..... Sedimentary Section ... Pinal Schist ........................... 11 Pioneer Shale ......................... .....12 Barnes Conglomerate ........................... 13 Dripping Spring Quartzite .................... -= 14 Mescal Limestone ............................. 15 Troy Quartzite ...........•.................. 16 Santa Catalina Formation ...................... 17 Southern Belle Quartzite ............. 19 Abrigo Formation ............... *............
    [Show full text]
  • The Devonian Fauna of the Ouray Limestone
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR 391 THE DEVONIAN FAUNA OF THE OURAY LIMESTONE BY E. M. KINDLE ' WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1909 CONTENTS. Page. Introduction,.............................................................. 5 Nomenclature and stratigraphic relations. ..................................... 6 Comparison of the two faunas in the Ouray limestone........................... 11 Distribution of the fauna..........................................:......... 13 Description of fauna....................................................... 15 Ccelenterata............................................................ 15 Vermes............................................................... 15 Brachipoda........................................................... 15 Pelecypoda........................................................... 30 Gastropoda............................................................ 33 Cephalopoda.......................................................... 36 Index.................................................................... 59 ILLUSTRATIONS. Page. PLATE I. Quray fauna. 40 II. Ouray fauna. 42 III. Ouray fauna. 44 IV. Ouray fauna. 46 V. Ouray fauna. 48 VI. Ouray fauna. 50 VII. Ouray fauna. 52 VIII. Ouray fauna. 54 IX. Ouray fauna. 56 X.- Ouray fauna. 58 THE DEVONIAN FAUNA OF THE OURAY LIMESTONE, By E. M. KINDLE. INTRODUCTION. The first discovery of a Devonian fauna in Colorado was made by F. M. Endlich in 1875, during his survey of the San Juan district.
    [Show full text]
  • MINERAL POTENTIAL REPORT for the Lands Now Excluded from Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument
    United States Department ofthe Interior Bureau of Land Management MINERAL POTENTIAL REPORT for the Lands now Excluded from Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument Garfield and Kane Counties, Utah Prepared by: Technical Approval: flirf/tl (Signature) Michael Vanden Berg (Print name) (Print name) Energy and Mineral Program Manager - Utah Geological Survey (Title) (Title) April 18, 2018 /f-P/2ft. 't 2o/ 8 (Date) (Date) M~zr;rL {Signature) 11 (Si~ ~.u.. "'- ~b ~ t:, "4 5~ A.J ~txM:t ;e;,E~ 't"'-. (Print name) (Print name) J.-"' ,·s h;c.-+ (V\ £uA.o...~ fk()~""....:r ~~/,~ L{ ( {Title) . Zo'{_ 2o l~0 +(~it71 ~ . I (Date) (Date) This preliminary repon makes information available to the public that may not conform to UGS technical, editorial. or policy standards; this should be considered by an individual or group planning to take action based on the contents ofthis report. Although this product represents the work of professional scientists, the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, makes no warranty, expressed or implied, regarding it!I suitability for a panicular use. The Utah Department ofNatural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, shall not be liable under any circumstances for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to claims by users ofthis product. TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................... 4 Oil, Gas, and Coal Bed Methane ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Oil & Natural Gas Technology
    Oil & Natural Gas Technology DOE Award No.: DE-FC26-02NT15133 QUARTERLY TECHNICAL PROGRESS REPORT Reporting Period Start Date: July 1, 2007 End Date: September 30, 2007 MAJOR OIL PLAYS IN UTAH AND VICINITY Submitted by: Utah Geological Survey 1594 West North Temple, Suite 3110 P.O. Box 146100 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-6100 Ph.: (801) 537-3300/Fax: (801) 537-3400 Prepared for: United States Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory February 29, 2008 Office of Fossil Energy DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Although this product represents the work of professional scientists, the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, makes no warranty, expressed or implied, regarding its suitability for a particular use. The Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, shall not be liable under any circumstances for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to claims by users of this product.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhumation of the North American Cordillera Revealed by Multi-Dating of Upper Jurassic–Upper Cretaceous Foreland Basin Deposits
    Exhumation of the North American Cordillera revealed by multi-dating of Upper Jurassic–Upper Cretaceous foreland basin deposits Clayton S. Painter†, Barbara Carrapa, Peter G. DeCelles, George E. Gehrels, and Stuart N. Thomson Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, 1040 E. 4th Street, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA ABSTRACT AFT and U-Pb) shows that volcanic contami- eroded and later obscured by Basin and Range nation is a signifi cant issue that can, however, extensional tectonics, leaving only the foreland New low-temperature thermochronol- be addressed by double dating. basin deposits as a record of exhumation history. ogy and geochronology data from Upper Despite the great potential of such an approach Jurassic–Upper Cretaceous strata from the INTRODUCTION in North America, to date, no detailed detrital North American Cordilleran foreland ba- thermochronological study had been applied in sin in Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, and South Foreland basin deposits are an impor- the retro arc foreland basin of the North Ameri- Dakota document rapid exhumation rates tant archive of orogenic growth and tectonic can Cordillera. The goal of this study is to deter- of the adjacent Cordilleran orogenic belt to processes (Aubouin, 1965; Dickinson, 1974; mine the timing, pattern, and rates of cooling of the west. Both zircon (U-Th-[Sm])/He (zircon Dickinson and Suczek, 1979; Jordan, 1981; the North American Cordillera in order to better He) and apatite fi ssion track (AFT) thermo- DeCelles and Giles, 1996; DeCelles, 2004; understand the modes of exhumation and con- chronology were applied to proximal and Miall, 2009). Many researchers have used tribute to models of fold- thrust belt and foreland distal synorogenic deposits in order to iden- coarse-grained foreland basin deposits to date basin evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Stratigraphy of the Wasatch Range Near Salt Lake City, Utah
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 296 STRATIGRAPHY OF THE WASATCH RANGE NEAR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH .. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Douglas McKay, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director · GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 296 STRATIGRAPHY OF THE WASATCH RANGE NEAR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH By Arthur E. Granger Washington, D. C., 1953 Free on application to the Geological Survey, Washington 25, D. C. 113° 112° 111° I D 0 42° 42° C!:) z c H • X E L I c H :g 0 B E R. \ Ogden ...._// l_ ---........ ...... _// ) 0 R G A N _ _,)__~ _f H SUMMIT I J AREA OF REPORT L A K E ').....-= I /~ / I T 0 0 E L E ..r' I I w A \ --~ \ ...___, • \ \ \ I 5 0 20 Miles I H ,, Index map of north-central Utah showing area of report. iv STRATIGRAPHY OF THE WASATCH RANGE NEAR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH By Arthur E. Granger CONTENTS Page Page Introduction.. 1 Permian system-Continued Pre-Cambrian rocks.......................... 2 Park City formation . 3 Lower pre-Cambrian rocks. 2 Triassic system,. 3 Upper pre-Cambrian rocks............... 2 Woodside shale........................... 3 Cambrian system. 2 Thaynes formation . 4 Brigham quartzite...................... 2 Ankareh shale. 4 Ophir shale. 2 Jurassic system, . 4 Maxfield limestone . • . 2 Nugget sandstone......................... 4 Ordovician system. 2 Twin Creek limestone. 4_ Swan Peak(?) formation... • . 2 Preuss sandstone . 4 Devonian system . 2 Morrison(?) formation.................... 4 Pinyon Peak limestone.................. 2 Cretaceous system. 4 Carboniferous system......................... 2 Kelvin formation .................._....... 4 Mississippian series.................... 2 Frontier formation. 4 Madison limestone. 3 Conglomerate~ ... -. 5 Deseret limestone . 3 Tertiary system .
    [Show full text]
  • Synoptic Taxonomy of Major Fossil Groups
    APPENDIX Synoptic Taxonomy of Major Fossil Groups Important fossil taxa are listed down to the lowest practical taxonomic level; in most cases, this will be the ordinal or subordinallevel. Abbreviated stratigraphic units in parentheses (e.g., UCamb-Ree) indicate maximum range known for the group; units followed by question marks are isolated occurrences followed generally by an interval with no known representatives. Taxa with ranges to "Ree" are extant. Data are extracted principally from Harland et al. (1967), Moore et al. (1956 et seq.), Sepkoski (1982), Romer (1966), Colbert (1980), Moy-Thomas and Miles (1971), Taylor (1981), and Brasier (1980). KINGDOM MONERA Class Ciliata (cont.) Order Spirotrichia (Tintinnida) (UOrd-Rec) DIVISION CYANOPHYTA ?Class [mertae sedis Order Chitinozoa (Proterozoic?, LOrd-UDev) Class Cyanophyceae Class Actinopoda Order Chroococcales (Archean-Rec) Subclass Radiolaria Order Nostocales (Archean-Ree) Order Polycystina Order Spongiostromales (Archean-Ree) Suborder Spumellaria (MCamb-Rec) Order Stigonematales (LDev-Rec) Suborder Nasselaria (Dev-Ree) Three minor orders KINGDOM ANIMALIA KINGDOM PROTISTA PHYLUM PORIFERA PHYLUM PROTOZOA Class Hexactinellida Order Amphidiscophora (Miss-Ree) Class Rhizopodea Order Hexactinosida (MTrias-Rec) Order Foraminiferida* Order Lyssacinosida (LCamb-Rec) Suborder Allogromiina (UCamb-Ree) Order Lychniscosida (UTrias-Rec) Suborder Textulariina (LCamb-Ree) Class Demospongia Suborder Fusulinina (Ord-Perm) Order Monaxonida (MCamb-Ree) Suborder Miliolina (Sil-Ree) Order Lithistida
    [Show full text]