DOCSLIB.ORG

Grand Canyon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Grand Canyon U.S. Department of the Interior Geologic Investigations Series I–2688 14 Version 1.0 4 U.S. Geological Survey 167.5 1 BIG SPRINGS CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS LIST OF MAP UNITS 4 Pt Ph Pamphlet accompanies map .5 Ph SURFICIAL DEPOSITS Pk SURFICIAL DEPOSITS SUPAI MONOCLINE Pk Qr Holocene Qr Colorado River gravel deposits (Holocene) Qsb FAULT CRAZY JUG Pt Qtg Qa Qt Ql Pk Pt Ph MONOCLINE MONOCLINE 18 QUATERNARY Geologic Map of the Pleistocene Qtg Terrace gravel deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Pc Pk Pe 103.5 14 Qa Alluvial deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Pt Pc VOLCANIC ROCKS 45.5 SINYALA Qti Qi TAPEATS FAULT 7 Qhp Qsp Qt Travertine deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Grand Canyon ၧ DE MOTTE FAULT Pc Qtp M u Pt Pleistocene QUATERNARY Pc Qp Pe Qtb Qhb Qsb Ql Landslide deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Qsb 1 Qhp Ph 7 BIG SPRINGS FAULT ′ × ′ 2 VOLCANIC DEPOSITS Dtb Pk PALEOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 30 60 Quadrangle, Mr Pc 61 Quaternary basalts (Pleistocene) Unconformity Qsp 49 Pk 6 MUAV FAULT Qhb Pt Lower Tuckup Canyon Basalt (Pleistocene) ၣm TRIASSIC 12 Triassic Qsb Ph Pk Mr Qti Intrusive dikes Coconino and Mohave Counties, Pe 4.5 7 Unconformity 2 3 Pc Qtp Pyroclastic deposits Mr 0.5 1.5 Mၧu EAST KAIBAB MONOCLINE Pk 24.5 Ph 1 222 Qtb Basalt flow Northwestern Arizona FISHTAIL FAULT 1.5 Pt Unconformity Dtb Pc Basalt of Hancock Knolls (Pleistocene) Pe Pe Mၧu Mr Pc Pk Pk Pk NOBLE Pt Qhp Qhb 1 Mၧu Pyroclastic deposits Qhp 5 Pe Pt FAULT Pc Ms 12 Pc 12 10.5 Lower Qhb Basalt flows 1 9 1 0.5 PERMIAN By George H. Billingsley .5 ၤm EAST KAIBAB ANTICLINE Permian Qtg 3 24 Unconformity Sage Basalt (Pleistocene) DEER FAULT 1.5 45.5 ၤt 29 Pe 2 3.5 KAIBAB Qsp Pyroclastic deposits Digital database by Haydee M. Hampton Dtb ၤba 14 Dtb Pk Pc Ph 15 SURPRISE VALLEY Ql Dtb 6 Qhp 0.5 Qtg Qa LANDSLIDE Ph Qsb Basalt flows Pt Yb ၤt Unconformity 10 Ql Yd Xgr Pt Xv ၤm 11 Qi Basalt dikes and necks (Pleistocene) 2000 36 Ys Mr Pc Ms Yb MARBLE Pe ၤm 75 Ql Mၧu 66 53 SYNCLINE Qa ၤm Qp Pyroclastic deposits (Pleistocene) Qt Yh ၤ ၤba Pt Pk Ph Unconformity Supai Pt Xv t Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. National Park Service Qa Ms ၤba 9 Group Dtb Ql ANTICLINE UNCLE JIM Qhp Mr Yb Upper, Middle, and MESOZOIC AND PALEOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS Qhp Mr ၧ PENNSYLVANIAN Qr Yi Pc Pt M u Lower Pennsylvanian Pk Yh ၣm Qa Pc Ph Pe Pe ၤ Moenkopi Formation (Lower Triassic) Ph Ms Yb t 12 5 ၤm 1 ၧ Dtb ၤt M u Unconformity Qhb 1 1 Ys Pk Pe Pk Kaibab Formation (Lower Permian), undivided—Includes, in descending Yb Mr Ms FAULT Upper order, Harrisburg and Fossil Mountain Members, undivided Qhb Pc 6 3 Ms Pt Qa 25 Ph 3 Mississippian MISSISSIPPIAN 4 Qa Qhb 7.5 Pc ၧ Pt Toroweap Formation (Lower Permian),undivided—Includes, in descending Ql 15.2 M u Unconformity Qtp Qtb Mၧu Pe order, Woods Ranch, Brady Canyon, and Seligman Members, undivided Qti Pe Mr Yb Qa Pt Ys 2 3 Mr Pc Coconino Sandstone (Lower Permian) Qt Dtb Yh Pt Lower Mississippian Pc 1 Qti ၧ Pk M u 2 Pc 2 Unconformity Ph Hermit Formation (Lower Permian) Qtp Dtb 10 Ys ၤm Pt 45.5 Ph 1 Yb Yi 1 Upper and Middle ၤba Pk Dtb DEVONIAN Supai Group (Lower Permian, Pennsylvanian, and Upper Mississippian) Qa 1 Devonian Ph Yi Qr Yi Pc Pe Pe Esplanade Sandstone (Lower Permian) Qa Ms FOSSIL Unconformity Pk Ms Ph Pc Qt Dtb Ms Yb ၧ Ms MONOCLINE Pt M u ၧ ၤt 6 M u Wescogame (Upper Pennsylvanian), Manakacha (Middle Pennsylvanian), Ph Pc Dtb Mr Pk ၤm Qi ၤ m 85 15 Ph Middle and Watahomigi Formations (Lower Pennsylvanian and Upper Xv Pk Tonto Pc Ms 3.5 60 ၤba Cambrian CAMBRIAN Mississippian), undivided Pc 3 Ql Xgr Group Pc 3 3 ၤ Pt Pe Pk 68 ba Ph 3 12 Pc Ms Surprise Canyon Formation (Upper Mississippian) Pe 3 10.5 Xbr Pk ၤt R 3 24.5 Lower Cambrian Dtb 6 Ms Ql Mၧu Ms 1 Pe Pc 18.5 Mr Redwall Limestone (Upper and Lower Mississippian), undivided—Includes, Ms 65 MIDDLE PROTEROZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 3 Pc Xv in descending order, Horseshoe Mesa, Mooney Falls, Thunder Springs, and Mၧu 54 6 Pt 1 Ms 62 Ph Great Unconformity 3 Ms Pt 4 Xr Pe Whitmore Wash Members 1 Mၧu Xbr Mၧu 30.5 1 0.5 ၤm Qi D Yi Dtb Temple Butte Formation (Upper and Middle Devonian) 66 Mၧu E M Xr FA Mr Dtb O Qt 64 Dtb U TTE Tonto Group (Middle and Lower Cambrian) Dtb Ph Ms Pe LT Unconformity Ph Xo Dtb Qi Pe SINYALA FAULT Pk ၤm Muav Limestone (Middle Cambrian) Pe 44 Xec Pt Ql Qr MUAV FAULT 2 Yd 2 Xec Pt ၤ Pe MILK BASIN 3 ၤba Mr Pc ba 2 ၤba Pk Unkar Middle Bright Angel Shale (Middle Cambrian) Qi ၤ Mၧu Qr Pt t Pc Pt Ys Pc Ph Mr 4.5 Group Proterozoic ၤ Pt Qp .5 t 1 Dtb Ys Tapeats Sandstone (Middle and Lower Cambrian) Pe Mr Mr Ms 12 ၤm Unconformity Ms ၤ R ၤba Pc R 3 9 ba ၤ Qi m FAULT Ms BUTCHART ၤ MIDDLE PROTEROZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS Pc Ph 1 3 Qr ၧ Pc t A' Pe FAULT M u FAULT Yh Xbr Pt Ms Ph ၤ Grand Canyon Supergroup 1 Qi Ms 86 t Pk Ys 6 Qtg Xgr Yb Ms ၤt Yh Xv 12 7.5 Unkar Group (Middle Proterozoic) Qt ၤ 31 MATKATAMIBA m Yd 66 Qr Pc 15 R 1 26 9 Pc 3 Pc 18.5 Yi Unnamed diabase sills and dikes Dtb Ms 9 30 Xr 13.5 EARLY PROTEROZOIC CRYSTALLINE ROCKS Qr Mr SYNCLINE Ql 122 Ph ၤ Yi ၤt 45.5 Xgd Pc Pk m 61 18 57 Greatest Angular Unconformity Dtb Yh Ys 71 Yd Dox Formation—Includes part of the Escalante Creek Member 72 15 PROTEROZOIC Ph ၧ 1 ၤ 75 ၤba Yh Ph M u Pe ba 73 26 Xbr 76 12 45.5 17 R Xg 3 Pe Yb 21 Yh Dtb Ys Shinumo Quartzite 65 7.5 Yd ၤt Pc Qr 83 78 46 60 Pt 81 Ys ၤm Mr Pc Xv 122 Yh 18.5 Qr 50 82 29 14 Xgr ၧ Ph Qr 84 52 76 Yh Hakatai Shale ၤ Xec Xo 40 Yi FAULT m M u Pt ၤt Xbr 64 79 Ys Mr R 41 Qr Qt 37 Xgr Pt Qt Xo 55 75 ၧ Pt 24.5 Pt 71 Yh 11 45.5 M u Dtb 44 Xec Ms Xo 25 Xgd Xec 65 56 Xv 75 63 ROARING SPRINGS FAULT Yb Bass Formation—Includes basal Hotauta Conglomerate Member Qr Qr Xr Xgr Yi 1 ၤt 30 52 23 Pc Xec Xec 78 Yb 7 Qt Pe 9 70 Yi Pk 39.5 Dtb ၤba 46 ၤt Ql 2 Xum Pk 1 45 ၤ Yb 9 Pe t 9 EARLY PROTEROZOIC CRYSTALLINE ROCKS 4.5 Yh Ys 2 ၤba Early Mr 13 Yi Mr Xv Dtb 50 Pc 27 Qt 152.5 Intrusive rocks 1.5 Yh .5 Proterozoic Pe Pe Pc 15 Xgr Xgd R Ms Yb Ql 1 24 Xg Mၧu 61 Xbr Young granite and pegmatite 1 E 39.5 SPRINGS 75 Pc FAULT Pc Xgr ZON Yb ၧ Pe 34 Ys Xgr M u HAVASU 0.5 1 Ql Yi Xr Granite, granitic pegmatite, and aplite 3 ၤba Mr A Dtb Ys Pe Pe Qt 87 Pk 1 Ph R ၤm Mၧu Pt 9 R 36.5 Xgd 1 Xgr Yh Xo Granodiorite complexes 28 44 Ph Ph ၤ Ph 10.5 m Pc Xec Xo 0 Yb Xgd Pc R 2 Yi Ms Xum Ultramafic rocks Pt Pc 6 T Xgd Xec Pt 18.5 Xec 3.5 Qt Dtb 2 24 4.5 3 Yh Yi Ys 1 ၤ Dtb Pk FAUL t Pc 1 Pe 6 Metamorphic rocks 25 Ql Ql 0.5 Ql u Qt ၤ ၧ Dtb BASS Xv Yb Ql m Ph Pc 4.5 M Xv Vishnu Schist Mr Pt Pc Pc 44 Yb ၤ D' ၤm 26 ၤ Dtb Dtb ba Pk Mr t ၤ SUPAI MONOCLINE 1 MONUMENT 49 ba Xbr Brahma Schist MONOCLINE Ms Ph Xgr Xgr Ys DRAGON FAULT Pk Mၧu CATARACT Ql Xgd ၤt 152.5 Ms Xr Rama Schist B' 3 Ql 7 Pk Pc Mr Pk ၤba Xgr 9 Xo ၤ Pe Orthoamphibole-bearing gneiss Pe Pc t Mၧu Dtb 77 Yd 78 Ys 4 Yh Xv 5.5 Ys 3 Yi Xec Elves Chasm pluton Mၧu Yi Pc Pe Yb Pc Ys Yb 14 Yh Pk Mr Yi Ph Xgd Xv C 11 Pt Pt ၤm RY 6 Pe ၤ 33 B t Xr 7 ST Yi Pc Xv 78 Ys 6 A 3 Pt 53 82 ၧ 1 Pc Ql L M u Ql Pc ၤt Yh Ql Ph ၤ 44 Yb P ba H A Xv 15 Pt Xv Xv N 7.5 SYNCLINE 1 Pt T Ql Contact Strike and dip of metamorphic foliation Xv 9 O Ql 12 Xgr 68 69 M Ms 4.5 OB STAIRWAY 0.5 Ms FA Ms Yi T 85 Xgr Xr FAULT L 6 I Dtb 21 U U Ms Inclined A Pe Pt 0.5 21 Xv LT ၤt Xr F Fault—Dashed where inferred or approximately located; dotted where Xgr Xbr Ph 14 DEVA 10.5 Ph Pe 59 Ys Yh ၤm 4.5 R 7.5 ၤ concealed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tectonic Imbrication and Foredeep Development in the Penokean
    Tectonic Imbrication and Foredeep Development in the Penokean Orogen, East-Central Minnesota An Interpretation Based on Regional Geophysics and the Results of Test-Drilling The Penokean Orogeny in Minnesota and Upper Michigan A Comparison of Structural Geology U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1904-C, D AVAILABILITY OF BOOKS AND MAPS OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Instructions on ordering publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, along with prices of the last offerings, are given in the cur­ rent-year issues of the monthly catalog "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey." Prices of available U.S. Geological Sur­ vey publications released prior to the current year are listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List." Publications that are listed in various U.S. Geological Survey catalogs (see back inside cover) but not listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List" are no longer available. Prices of reports released to the open files are given in the listing "U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports," updated month­ ly, which is for sale in microfiche from the U.S. Geological Survey, Books and Open-File Reports Section, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225. Reports released through the NTIS may be obtained by writing to the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161; please include NTIS report number with inquiry. Order U.S. Geological Survey publications by mail or over the counter from the offices given below. BY MAIL OVER THE COUNTER Books Books Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water-Supply Papers, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Circulars, publications of general in­ Books of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Canyon U.S
    National Park Service Grand Canyon U.S. Department of the Interior Grand Canyon National Park Arizona Hualapai Tribe and Skywalk The Hualapai (WALL-uh-pie), the “People of the Tall Pines,” have lived in the Southwest for untold generations. Traditionally their homelands stretched from Grand Canyon to the Bill Williams River in west-central Arizona and from the Black Mountains bordering the Colorado River to the San Francisco Peaks. Pri- marily nomadic hunter-gathers, they also traded with nearby tribes. The Hualapai Reservation of just less than 1,000,000 acres (404,686 ha) was established in 1883. Today the tribe counts about 2,300 members. Peach Springs on Highway 66 is the tribal headquarters. The tribe operates a hotel, restaurant, and gift shop in Peach Springs. While limited ranching, timber harvest, and guided hunts provide some income, the tourist industry offers the best opportunity for employment of tribal members. The Skywalk at The Hualapai Tribe has chosen a site at the far The Skywalk, managed by the Hualapai Tribe and Grand Canyon West western end of Grand Canyon about 250 miles located on tribal lands, consists of a horseshoe- (400 km) by road, a five hour drive, from Grand shaped steel frame with glass floor and sides that Canyon Village to offer a variety of visitor services projects about 70 feet (21 m) from the canyon rim. including the Skywalk in a development called While the Skywalk is the most famous attraction Grand Canyon West. Food service is limited and at Grand Canyon West, tours also include other usually as part of a package tour.
    [Show full text]
  • Ron Blakey, Publications (Does Not Include Abstracts)
    Ron Blakey, Publications (does not include abstracts) The publications listed below were mainly produced during my tenure as a member of the Geology Department at Northern Arizona University. Those after 2009 represent ongoing research as Professor Emeritus. (PDF) – A PDF is available for this paper. Send me an email and I'll attach to return email Blakey, R.C., 1973, Stratigraphy and origin of the Moenkopi Formation of southeastern Utah: Mountain Geologist, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 1 17. Blakey, R.C., 1974, Stratigraphic and depositional analysis of the Moenkopi Formation, Southeastern Utah: Utah Geological Survey Bulletin 104, 81 p. Blakey, R.C., 1977, Petroliferous lithosomes in the Moenkopi Formation, Southern Utah: Utah Geology, vol. 4, no. 2, p. 67 84. Blakey, R.C., 1979, Oil impregnated carbonate rocks of the Timpoweap Member Moenkopi Formation, Hurricane Cliffs area, Utah and Arizona: Utah Geology, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 45 54. Blakey, R.C., 1979, Stratigraphy of the Supai Group (Pennsylvanian Permian), Mogollon Rim, Arizona: in Carboniferous Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon Country, northern Arizona and southern Nevada, Field Trip No. 13, Ninth International Congress of Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Geology, p. 89 109. Blakey, R.C., 1979, Lower Permian stratigraphy of the southern Colorado Plateau: in Four Corners Geological Society, Guidebook to the Permian of the Colorado Plateau, p. 115 129. (PDF) Blakey, R.C., 1980, Pennsylvanian and Early Permian paleogeography, southern Colorado Plateau and vicinity: in Paleozoic Paleogeography of west central United States, Rocky Mountain Section, Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, p. 239 258. Blakey, R.C., Peterson, F., Caputo, M.V., Geesaman, R., and Voorhees, B., 1983, Paleogeography of Middle Jurassic continental, shoreline, and shallow marine sedimentation, southern Utah: Mesozoic PaleogeogÂraphy of west central United States, Rocky Mountain Section of Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists (Symposium), p.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon
    CHAPTER 2 PALEOZOIC STRATIGRAPHY OF THE GRAND CANYON PAIGE KERCHER INTRODUCTION The Paleozoic Era of the Phanerozoic Eon is defined as the time between 542 and 251 million years before the present (ICS 2010). The Paleozoic Era began with the evolution of most major animal phyla present today, sparked by the novel adaptation of skeletal hard parts. Organisms continued to diversify throughout the Paleozoic into increasingly adaptive and complex life forms, including the first vertebrates, terrestrial plants and animals, forests and seed plants, reptiles, and flying insects. Vast coal swamps covered much of mid- to low-latitude continental environments in the late Paleozoic as the supercontinent Pangaea began to amalgamate. The hardiest taxa survived the multiple global glaciations and mass extinctions that have come to define major time boundaries of this era. Paleozoic North America existed primarily at mid to low latitudes and experienced multiple major orogenies and continental collisions. For much of the Paleozoic, North America’s southwestern margin ran through Nevada and Arizona – California did not yet exist (Appendix B). The flat-lying Paleozoic rocks of the Grand Canyon, though incomplete, form a record of a continental margin repeatedly inundated and vacated by shallow seas (Appendix A). IMPORTANT STRATIGRAPHIC PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS • Principle of Original Horizontality – In most cases, depositional processes produce flat-lying sedimentary layers. Notable exceptions include blanketing ash sheets, and cross-stratification developed on sloped surfaces. • Principle of Superposition – In an undisturbed sequence, older strata lie below younger strata; a package of sedimentary layers youngs upward. • Principle of Lateral Continuity – A layer of sediment extends laterally in all directions until it naturally pinches out or abuts the walls of its confining basin.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018-5 PGS Newsletter
    SEPTEMBER 2018 PGS NEWSLETTER VOL LXXI NO 1 September 12, 2018 Tectonics of the Social hour 6:00 PM Midcontinent: Looking Dinner 7:00 PM West (Geologically) Program 8:00 PM Dinner costs from Pittsburgh $30.00 per person $10.00 student member Across the Craton Reservations Email your name and number of attendees in your party to: pgsreservations @gmail.com You can also reserve and pay via PayPal at: https://www.pittsburgh geologicalsociety.org/ Dr. Stephen Marshak Location Foster’s Restaurant University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Foster Plaza Bldg. 10 Green Tree PA Deadline for reservations is noon on Monday, Sept. 10. Speaker Abstract Geologists have long held a fascination with and magnetotelluric arrays) that serve to mountain belts, because of their scenic beauty, characterize variations in crustal thickness, the and because they offer cross sections that intensity of faulting, and the relationship of provide access to rocks once deep in the crust. seismicity to structure; 2) structure-contour Datable igneous and metamorphic rocks in maps that help characterize the nature of mountain belts provide a basis for developing a displacement in fault-and-fold zones; 3) chronology of tectonism. The USA subsidence curves that constrain the timing of Midcontinent region doesn't display such basin subsidence; 4) a digital elevation model drama. These interior plains, which extend (DEM) of the Great Unconformity (the contact from Pittsburgh west to the Rockies, are part of between Precambrian and Paleozoic strata), North America's cratonic platform, a region in that gives a clearer image of structural relief which crust that formed over 1 billion years ago between basins and domes; 5) results from a lies buried beneath a veneer of nearly flat-lying thermochronologic study of the Great Phanerozoic sedimentary strata.
    [Show full text]
  • Sell-1536, Field Trip Notes, , MILS
    CONTACT INFORMATION Mining Records Curator Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress St., Suite 100 Tucson, Arizona 85701 520-770-3500 http://www.azgs.az.gov [email protected] The following file is part of the James Doyle Sell Mining Collection ACCESS STATEMENT These digitized collections are accessible for purposes of education and research. We have indicated what we know about copyright and rights of privacy, publicity, or trademark. Due to the nature of archival collections, we are not always able to identify this information. We are eager to hear from any rights owners, so that we may obtain accurate information. Upon request, we will remove material from public view while we address a rights issue. CONSTRAINTS STATEMENT The Arizona Geological Survey does not claim to control all rights for all materials in its collection. These rights include, but are not limited to: copyright, privacy rights, and cultural protection rights. The User hereby assumes all responsibility for obtaining any rights to use the material in excess of “fair use.” The Survey makes no intellectual property claims to the products created by individual authors in the manuscript collections, except when the author deeded those rights to the Survey or when those authors were employed by the State of Arizona and created intellectual products as a function of their official duties. The Survey does maintain property rights to the physical and digital representations of the works. QUALITY STATEMENT The Arizona Geological Survey is not responsible for the accuracy of the records, information, or opinions that may be contained in the files. The Survey collects, catalogs, and archives data on mineral properties regardless of its views of the veracity or accuracy of those data.
    [Show full text]
  • Colin Fletcher, the Complete Walker and Other Titles
    Colin Fletcher, The Complete Walker and other titles Outdoors-Magazine.com http://outdoors-magazine.com Colin Fletcher, The Complete Walker and other titles Schwert - Skills and guides - Library - Publication: Thursday 3 August 2006 Description : The Complete Walker and Colin Fletcher's other nine books are reviewed. The author also weaves in some of his early backpacking experiences. Copyright (c) Outdoors-Magazine.com under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike License Copyright © Outdoors-Magazine.com Page 1/21 Colin Fletcher, The Complete Walker and other titles This review will touch on Colin Fletchers works, classics of backpacking how-to and enjoyment. Colin had a profound impact on my early backpacking days and has remained one of my favorite authors. In some respects his work reminds me of Calvin Rutstrum...a couple of decades more modern, and instrumental in the new age of backpacking, but still having a mixture of how-to with wonderful books of dream trips that utilized his techniques. It is likely that most readers of this site are well acquainted with Fletcher's Complete Walker in at least one of its derivations, but his other less popular works are excellent in their own right and well worth seeking out. This review will touch on these ten publications: The Thousand Mile Summer in Desert and High Sierra The Man Who Walked Through Time The Complete Walker The Winds of Mara The New Complete Walker The Man from the Cave The Complete Walker III Secret Worlds of Colin Fletcher River: One Man's Journey Down the Colorado, Source to Sea The Complete Walker IV with Chip Rawlins Copyright © Outdoors-Magazine.com Page 2/21 Colin Fletcher, The Complete Walker and other titles Colin Fletcher Bookshelf My catalog But first a bit of background....
    [Show full text]
  • Havasupai Nation Field Trip May 16 – 20, 2012 by Melissa Armstrong
    Havasupai Nation Field Trip May 16 – 20, 2012 By Melissa Armstrong The ESA SEEDS program had a field trip to Flagstaff, AZ the Havasupai Nation in Western Grand Canyon from May 16 – 20, 2012 as part of the Western Sustainable Communities project with funding from the David and Lucille Packard Foundation. The focus of the field trip was on water sustainability of the Colorado River Basin from a cultural and ecological perspective. The idea for this field trip arose during the Western Regional Leadership Meeting held in Flagstaff in April 2011 as a way to ground our meeting discussions in one of the most iconic places of the Colorado Plateau – the Grand Canyon. SEEDS alumnus Hertha Woody helped ESA connect with the Havasupai Nation; she worked closely with the former Havasupai tribal council during her tenure with Grand Canyon Trust as a tribal liaison. Hertha was instrumental in the planning of this experience for students. In attendance for this field trip were 17 undergraduate and graduate students, 1 alumnus, 1 Chapter advisor, and 2 ESA staff members (21 people total), representing eight Chapter campuses (Dine College Tuba City and Shiprock campuses, ASU, NAU, UNM, SIPI, NMSU, Stanford) – See Appendix A. The students were from a diverse and vibrant background; 42% were Native American, 26% White, 26% Hispanic and 5% Asian. All four of our speakers were Native American. The overall experience was profound given the esteem and generosity of the people who shared their knowledge with our group, the scale of the issues that were raised, the incredibly beautiful setting of Havasu Canyon, and the significant effort that it took to hike to Supai Village and the campgrounds – approximately 30 miles in three days at an elevation change of 1,500 feet each way.
    [Show full text]
  • Havasu Canyon Watershed Rapid Watershed Assessment Report June, 2010
    Havasu Canyon Watershed Rapid Watershed Assessment Report June, 2010 Prepared by: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service University of Arizona, Water Resources Research Center In cooperation with: Coconino Natural Resource Conservation District Arizona Department of Agriculture Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Arizona Department of Water Resources Arizona Game & Fish Department Arizona State Land Department USDA Forest Service USDA Bureau of Land Management Released by: Sharon Megdal David L. McKay Director State Conservationist University of Arizona United States Department of Agriculture Water Resources Research Center Natural Resources Conservation Service Principle Investigators: Dino DeSimone – NRCS, Phoenix Keith Larson – NRCS, Phoenix Kristine Uhlman – Water Resources Research Center Terry Sprouse – Water Resources Research Center Phil Guertin – School of Natural Resources The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disa bility, po litica l be lie fs, sexua l or ien ta tion, an d mar ita l or fam ily s ta tus. (No t a ll prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C., 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal employment opportunity provider and employer. Havasu Canyon Watershed serve as a platform for conservation 15010004 program delivery, provide useful 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit information for development of NRCS Rapid Watershed Assessment and Conservation District business plans, and lay a foundation for future cooperative watershed planning.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization and Hydraulic Behaviour of the Complex Karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA
    Characterization and hydraulic behaviour of the complex karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA CASEY J. R. JONES1, ABRAHAM E. SPRINGER1*, BENJAMIN W. TOBIN2, SARAH J. ZAPPITELLO2 & NATALIE A. JONES2 1School of Earth Sciences and Environmental Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, NAU Box 4099, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA 2Grand Canyon National Park, National Park Service, 1824 South Thompson Street, Flagstaff, AZ, 86001, USA *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park in the USA contain both shallow and deep karst systems, which interact in ways that are not well known, although recent studies have allowed better interpretations of this unique system. Detailed characterization of sinkholes and their distribution on the surface using geographical information system and LiDAR data can be used to relate the infiltration points to the overall hydrogeological system. Flow paths through the deep regional geological structure were delineated using non-toxic fluorescent dyes. The flow character- istics of the coupled aquifer system were evaluated using hydrograph recession curve analysis via discharge data from Roaring Springs, the sole source of the water supply for the Grand Canyon National Park. The interactions between these coupled surface and deep karst systems are complex and challenging to understand. Although the surface karst behaves in much the same way as karst in other similar regions, the deep karst has a base flow recession coefficient an order of magnitude lower than many other karst aquifers throughout the world. Dye trace analysis reveals rapid, con- duit-dominated flow that demonstrates fracture connectivity along faults between the surface and deep karst.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Kenney Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon
    Michael Kenney Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon The Paleozoic Era spans about 250 Myrs of Earth History from 541 Ma to 254 Ma (Figure 1). Within Grand Canyon National Park, there is a fragmented record of this time, which has undergone little to no deformation. These still relatively flat-lying, stratified layers, have been the focus of over 100 years of geologic studies. Much of what we know today began with the work of famed naturalist and geologist, Edwin Mckee (Beus and Middleton, 2003). His work, in addition to those before and after, have led to a greater understanding of sedimentation processes, fossil preservation, the evolution of life, and the drastic changes to Earth’s climate during the Paleozoic. This paper seeks to summarize, generally, the Paleozoic strata, the environments in which they were deposited, and the sources from which the sediments were derived. Tapeats Sandstone (~525 Ma – 515 Ma) The Tapeats Sandstone is a buff colored, quartz-rich sandstone and conglomerate, deposited unconformably on the Grand Canyon Supergroup and Vishnu metamorphic basement (Middleton and Elliott, 2003). Thickness varies from ~100 m to ~350 m depending on the paleotopography of the basement rocks upon which the sandstone was deposited. The base of the unit contains the highest abundance of conglomerates. Cobbles and pebbles sourced from the underlying basement rocks are common in the basal unit. Grain size and bed thickness thins upwards (Middleton and Elliott, 2003). Common sedimentary structures include planar and trough cross-bedding, which both decrease in thickness up-sequence. Fossils are rare but within the upper part of the sequence, body fossils date to the early Cambrian (Middleton and Elliott, 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • Quantifying the Base Flow of the Colorado River: Its Importance in Sustaining Perennial Flow in Northern Arizona And
    1 * This paper is under review for publication in Hydrogeology Journal as well as a chapter in my soon to be published 2 master’s thesis. 3 4 Quantifying the base flow of the Colorado River: its importance in sustaining perennial flow in northern Arizona and 5 southern Utah 6 7 Riley K. Swanson1* 8 Abraham E. Springer1 9 David K. Kreamer2 10 Benjamin W. Tobin3 11 Denielle M. Perry1 12 13 1. School of Earth and Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, US 14 email: [email protected] 15 2. Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, US 16 3. Kentucky Geological Survey, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, US 17 *corresponding author 18 19 Abstract 20 Water in the Colorado River is known to be a highly over-allocated resource, yet decision makers fail to consider, in 21 their management efforts, one of the most important contributions to the existing water in the river, groundwater. This 22 failure may result from the contrasting results of base flow studies conducted on the amount of streamflow into the 23 Colorado River sourced from groundwater. Some studies rule out the significance of groundwater contribution, while 24 other studies show groundwater contributing the majority flow to the river. This study uses new and extant 1 25 instrumented data (not indirect methods) to quantify the base flow contribution to surface flow and highlight the 26 overlooked, substantial portion of groundwater. Ten remote sub-basins of the Colorado Plateau in southern Utah and 27 northern Arizona were examined in detail.
    [Show full text]