DOCSLIB.ORG

Geologic Map of the Prescott National Forest and the Headwaters of the Verde River, Yavapai and Coconino Counties, Arizona

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Geologic Map of the Prescott National Forest and the Headwaters of the Verde River, Yavapai and Coconino Counties, Arizona Geologic Map of the Prescott National Forest and the Headwaters of the Verde River, Yavapai and Coconino Counties, Arizona By Ed DeWitt1, Victoria Langenheim1, Eric Force1, R.K. Vance2, P.A. Lindberg3, and R.L. Driscoll1 1U.S. Geological Survey 2Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, Ga. 3Consulting geologist, Sedona, Ariz. Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 2996 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2008 About USGS Products For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS About this Product For more information concerning this publication, contact: Team Chief Scientist, USGS Central Mineral Resources Team Box 25046 Denver Federal Center MS 973 Denver, CO 80225-0046 (303) 236-1562 Or visit the Central Mineral Resources Team Web site at: http://minerals.cr.usgs.gov This publication is available online at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/2996 Publishing support provided by: Denver Publishing Service Center, Denver, Colorado Manuscript approved for publication November 1, 2007 Map jacket by Amber Hess Suggested citation: DeWitt, Ed, Langenheim, Victoria, Force, Eric, Vance, R.K., Lindberg, P.A., and Driscoll, R.L., 2008, Geologic map of the Prescott National Forest and the headwaters of the Verde River, Yavapai and Coconino Counties, Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 2996, scale 1:100,000, 100-p. pamphlet. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. ISBN 978-141132090-1 iii Contents Description of Map Units ............................................................................................................................ 1 Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................................... 81 References Cited ........................................................................................................................................ 81 Figures 1. Index map showing extents of geologic map and boundary of Prescott National Forest ... 2 2–20. Major-element classification diagrams: 2. For 4- to 6-Ma volcanic rocks north of Perkinsville ............................................................. 4 3. For 4- to 6-Ma volcanic rocks in northwest corner of map area ....................................... 5 4. For 4- to 6-Ma volcanic rocks near Paulden ......................................................................... 6 5. For 4- to 6-Ma volcanic rocks in Verde River valley and east of Sedona ......................... 7 6. For 8- to 10-Ma volcanic rocks at Hackberry Mountain and along Interstate 17 ........... 9 7. For 8- to 10-Ma volcanic rocks at Mt. Hope, west of map area ....................................... 10 8. For 8- to 10-Ma volcanic rocks west and northwest of Prescott, and from near Paulden ................................................................................................................... 11 9. For 10- to 15-Ma volcanic rocks of Hickey Formation near Prescott .............................. 14 10. For 10- to 15-Ma volcanic rocks of Hickey Formation in the Black Hills and northeast of Cordes Junction ................................................................................................ 15 11. For 10- to 15-Ma volcanic rocks of Hickey Formation east and southeast of Sedona 17 12. For 10- to 15-Ma volcanic rocks of Hickey Formation in Hackberry Mountain and Arnold Mesa areas .................................................................................................................. 18 13. For 10- to 15-Ma volcanic rocks of Hickey Formation near House Mountain ............... 19 14. For 10- to 15-Ma volcanic rocks in Milk Creek Formation near Wagoner and from a latite body south of Mayer ......................................................................................... 21 15. For 21- to 27-Ma volcanic rocks in Sullivan Buttes volcanic field ................................... 23 16. For 21- to 27-Ma volcanic rocks in Sullivan Buttes volcanic field ................................... 24 17. For 24- to 36-Ma volcanic rocks in Santa Maria Mountains, Juniper Mountains, and Martin Mountain ..................................................................................................................... 25 18. For Paleocene and Late Cretaceous plutonic rocks in Bradshaw Mountains .............. 26 19. For 1,400-Ma plutonic rocks between Skull Valley and Juniper Mountains .................. 29 20. For 1,400-Ma Dells Granite north of Prescott ...................................................................... 31 21. Index map showing locations of geochemical zones (1–6) in map area ............................... 32 22–49. Major-element classification diagrams: 22. For Early Proterozoic gabbros from zones 1–5 in Bradshaw Mountains and zone 6 in the Black Hills and near Dugas ............................................................................................ 33 23. For Early Proterozoic gabbros from zone 2 in Bradshaw Mountains ............................. 35 24. For Early Proterozoic gabbros from zone 3 in Bradshaw Mountains ............................. 36 25. For Early Proterozoic gabbros from zone 4 in Bradshaw Mountains ............................. 37 26. For Early Proterozoic gabbros from zone 5 in Bradshaw Mountains ............................. 38 iv 27. For Early Proterozoic gabbros and tonalite from zones 6A and 6B in the Black Hills and from zone 6B in Dugas area ................................................................................................... 39 28. For Early Proterozoic plutonic rocks from zones 1–6 in Bradshaw Mountains and the Black Hills ........................................................................................................................... 41 29. For Early Proterozoic plutonic rocks from zone 1 in Bradshaw Mountains ................... 42 30. For Early Proterozoic plutonic rocks from zone 2 in Bradshaw Mountains ................... 43 31. For Early Proterozoic plutonic rocks from zone 3 in Bradshaw Mountains ................... 44 32. For Early Proterozoic plutonic rocks from zone 4 in Bradshaw Mountains ................... 45 33. For Early Proterozoic plutonic rocks from zone 5 in Bradshaw Mountains ................... 46 34. For Early Proterozoic plutonic rocks from zone 6 in the Black Hills ................................ 47 35. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks in zones 1–5 in Bradshaw Mountains ........ 57 36. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks in zone 6 in the Black Hills ........................... 58 37. For unaltered Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks from zone 2 in Bradshaw Mountains ................................................................................................................................. 60 38. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks from zone 3A in Bradshaw Mountains ...... 61 39. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks from zone 3B in Bradshaw Mountains ...... 62 40. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks from zone 4A in Bradshaw Mountains ...... 63 41. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks from zone 4B in Bradshaw Mountains ...... 64 42. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks from zone 4C in Bradshaw Mountains ...... 65 43. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks from zone 5A in Bradshaw Mountains ...... 66 44. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks from zone 5B in Bradshaw Mountains ...... 67 45. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks of intermediate to mafic composition from zone 6A in the Black Hills ....................................................................................................... 68 46. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks of felsic to intermediate composition from zone 6A in the Black Hills and near Dugas .......................................................................... 69 47. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks of intermediate to mafic composition from zone 6B in the Black Hills ....................................................................................................... 70 48. For Early Proterozoic metavolcanic rocks of felsic to intermediate composition from zone 6B in the Black Hills ....................................................................................................... 71 49. For hydrothermally altered Early Proterozoic felsic metavolcanic rocks south of Jerome ....................................................................................................................................... 79 Tables [Other tabular data not included in this pamphlet are spreadsheets for geochemistry and water wells; both files are available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/2996] 1. Geochronologic data, in order of increasing age, for the map area .................................... 89 2. Deep water wells for which interpreted logs were provided by this study ...............
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Big Bug Watershed: Money Metals and Providence Mines Bradshaw Mountains Prescott National Forest, Arizona
    Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis Big Bug Watershed: Money Metals and Providence Mines Bradshaw Mountains Prescott National Forest, Arizona Prepared for: USDA Forest Service 333 Broadway SE Albuquerque, NM 87102 Prepared by: Weston Solutions, Inc. 960 West Elliot Road, Suite 201 Tempe, Arizona 85284 Contract No. AG-8371-D-09-0191 December 2010 Final Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis Big Bug Watershed: Money Metals and Providence Mines Bradshaw Mountains, Prescott National Forest, Arizona December 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................E1 1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 1 1.2 AREA POPULATION ............................................................................................................. 2 1.3 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................. 2 1.3.1 Geologic and Hydrologic Setting .......................................................................... 2 1.3.1.1 Hydrology ................................................................................................. 3 1.3.2 Regional Climate ................................................................................................... 4 1.4 SITE OPERATION
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vita - Stephen J
    Curriculum Vita - Stephen J. Reynolds School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1404 (480) 965-9049 (work) Website: http://reynolds.asu.edu email: [email protected] Degrees/Registration University of Texas, El Paso: B.S., Geology, 1974 University of Arizona: M.S., Geosciences, 1977, Ph.D., Geosciences,1982 Arizona Registered Geologist #26773 (1993-present) Recent Professional Experience Arizona State University, Dept. of Geology: Professor (6/97 to present), Associate Professor (8/91 to 6/97). Teaching responsibilities include Advanced Geologic Field Mapping, Advanced Structural Geology, Applied Arizona Geology, Cordilleran Regional Geology, Geology of Arizona, Geotectonics, Introductory Geology, Orogenic Systems, Summer Field Geology, Methods of Geoscience Teaching ASU Center for Research on Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology, Associate Director (6/99 to present); chairman of founding committee. Arizona Geological Survey and Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology: Research Geologist (6/88 to 7/91), Associate Research Geologist (6/87 to 6/88); Assistant Research Geologist (2/81 to 6/87). University of Arizona, Dept. of Geosciences: Visiting Associate Professor, (1991 to ~1997); Adjunct Associate Research Scientist (1987 to 1991); Research Associate and Assistant (1/75 to 12/80); Teaching Assistant (8/74 to 7/75) Geologist and Consulting Geologist: Clients include Animas Resources (2007 to present), Pediment Exploration, Ltd. (2007 to present), Clear Creek
    [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]
  • General Plan 2025 Chapter 1: Introduction
    Chapter 1 Introduction Every 10 to 20 years, towns, cities, and counties throughout Arizona and the What is a General Southwest revisit their general plans to ensure that an up-to-date connection exists Plan? between residents’ values, visions, and objectives; State law; and the physical development of their community. In 2011, the Town of Prescott Valley initiated an In simple terms, a general plan can be best described as a update process for its 2025 General Plan. The outcome of the 14-month update community's blueprint for future process is The Prescott Valley General Plan 2025 — A Community Blueprint for the development. It represents a Future. community's vision for the future; it is a constitution comprised of goals and policies used by a According to State law, towns, cities and counties are required to prepare and adopt a community's planning commission comprehensive, long-range general plan for the development of the community. In and town/city council to make land use and development-related Arizona, general plans consist of statements of community goals and development decisions. The general plan — policies, and include maps, any necessary diagrams and text setting forth objectives, and the goals, policies, and diagrams within — have a long- principles, development standards and plan proposals. term outlook, identifying the types of development patterns allowed Implementing General Plan 2025 is very important to present and future generations. and the spatial relationships of land uses. General plans (with In Prescott Valley, residents have a strong sense of civic pride, value the quality of life emphasis on the land use map) the Town offers, and desire to preserve the community’s positive characteristics into provide the foundation from which the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Porphyry and Other Molybdenum Deposits of Idaho and Montana
    Porphyry and Other Molybdenum Deposits of Idaho and Montana Joseph E. Worthington Idaho Geological Survey University of Idaho Technical Report 07-3 Moscow, Idaho ISBN 1-55765-515-4 CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 Molybdenum Vein Deposits ...................................................................... 2 Tertiary Molybdenum Deposits ................................................................. 2 Little Falls—1 ............................................................................. 3 CUMO—2 .................................................................................. 3 Red Mountain Prospect—45 ...................................................... 3 Rocky Bar District—43 .............................................................. 3 West Eight Mile—37 .................................................................. 3 Devil’s Creek Prospect—46 ....................................................... 3 Walton—8 .................................................................................. 4 Ima—3 ........................................................................................ 4 Liver Peak (a.k.a. Goat Creek)—4 ............................................. 4 Bald Butte—5 ............................................................................. 5 Big Ben—6 ................................................................................. 6 Emigrant Gulch—7 ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Forest Action Plan 2015 Status Report and Addendum
    Arizona Forest Action Plan 2015 Status Report and Addendum A report on the strategic plan to address forest-related conditions, trends, threats, and opportunities as identified in the 2010 Arizona Forest Resource Assessment and Strategy. November 20, 2015 Arizona State Forestry Acknowledgements: Arizona State Forestry would like to thank the USDA Forest Service for their ongoing support of cooperative forestry and fire programs in the State of Arizona, and for specific funding to support creation of this report. We would also like to thank the many individuals and organizations who contributed to drafting the original 2010 Forest Resource Assessment and Resource Strategy (Arizona Forest Action Plan) and to the numerous organizations and individuals who provided input for this 2015 status report and addendum. Special thanks go to Arizona State Forestry staff who graciously contributed many hours to collect information and data from partner organizations – and to writing, editing, and proofreading this document. Jeff Whitney Arizona State Forester Granite Mountain Hotshots Memorial On the second anniversary of the Yarnell Hill Fire, the State of Arizona purchased 320 acres of land near the site where the 19 Granite Mountain Hotshots sacrificed their lives while battling one of the most devastating fires in Arizona’s history. This site is now the Granite Mountain Hotshots Memorial State Park. “This site will serve as a lasting memorial to the brave hotshots who gave their lives to protect their community,” said Governor Ducey. “While we can never truly repay our debt to these heroes, we can – and should – honor them every day. Arizona is proud to offer the public a space where we can pay tribute to them, their families and all of our firefighters and first responders for generations to come.” Arizona Forest Action Plan – 2015 Status Report and Addendum Background Contents The 2010 Forest Action Plan The development of Arizona’s Forest Resource Assessment and Strategy (now known as Arizona’s “Forest Action Plan”) was prompted by federal legislative requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Mule Deer and Antelope Staff Specialist Peregrine Wolff, Wildlife Health Specialist
    STATE OF NEVADA Steve Sisolak, Governor DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE Tony Wasley, Director GAME DIVISION Brian F. Wakeling, Chief Mike Cox, Bighorn Sheep and Mountain Goat Staff Specialist Pat Jackson, Predator Management Staff Specialist Cody McKee, Elk Staff Biologist Cody Schroeder, Mule Deer and Antelope Staff Specialist Peregrine Wolff, Wildlife Health Specialist Western Region Southern Region Eastern Region Regional Supervisors Mike Scott Steve Kimble Tom Donham Big Game Biologists Chris Hampson Joe Bennett Travis Allen Carl Lackey Pat Cummings Clint Garrett Kyle Neill Cooper Munson Sarah Hale Ed Partee Kari Huebner Jason Salisbury Matt Jeffress Kody Menghini Tyler Nall Scott Roberts This publication will be made available in an alternative format upon request. Nevada Department of Wildlife receives funding through the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration. Federal Laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you’ve been discriminated against in any NDOW program, activity, or facility, please write to the following: Diversity Program Manager or Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Nevada Department of Wildlife 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mailstop: 7072-43 6980 Sierra Center Parkway, Suite 120 Arlington, VA 22203 Reno, Nevada 8911-2237 Individuals with hearing impairments may contact the Department via telecommunications device at our Headquarters at 775-688-1500 via a text telephone (TTY) telecommunications device by first calling the State of Nevada Relay Operator at 1-800-326-6868. NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 2018-2019 BIG GAME STATUS This program is supported by Federal financial assistance titled “Statewide Game Management” submitted to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Prescott Valley Relocation Guide 2015-2016 1 Location & Climate
    www.azrelocationguides.com Top quality education is offered by many local area colleges and universities, along with the local school district. TABLE OF CONTENTS Location & Climate ...........................2 Housing & Shopping .........................3 Community Profile ........................ 4-6 Prescott Valley, Arizona Education ...................................... 7-9 Adult Living ......................................10 Healthcare ................................ 11-13 Recreation & Attractions .......... 14-16 ocated among the midst rolling hills and Day Trips .................................... 17-20 L grasslands between the Bradshaw and Cultural Arts ....................................21 Mingus Mountains, lies one of the newest and friendliest communities in Arizona. History ..............................................22 Situated about two hours by car north of Resources .................................. 23-27 Phoenix, Prescott Valley (incorporated in Places of Worship ......................23 1978) offers many opportunities for it's size Organizations & Clubs ..............23 in a generally mild four season climate. Coming Events ..........................24 The Town Center in citizen friendly Restaurants ................................25 Prescott Valley offers many amenities, such as the Harkins 14 Screen Luxury Cineplex, Important Numbers ............. 26-27 located within the Prescott Valley Entertainment Center. Numerous Advertisers Index ............................28 restaurants have joined the theater in making
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Chino Valley North 7½' Quadrangle, Yavapai County, Arizona
    DIGITAL GEOLOGIC MAP DGM-80 Arizona Geological Survey www.azgs.az.gov GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE CHINO VALLEY NORTH 7½’ QUADRANGLE, YAVAPAI COUNTY, ARIZONA, V. 1.0 Brian. F. Gootee, Charles A. Ferguson, Jon E. Spencer and Joseph P. Cook December 2010 ARIZONA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geologic Map of the Chino Valley North 7½' Quadrangle, Yavapai County, Arizona by Brian F. Gootee, Charles A. Ferguson, Jon E. Spencer, and Joe P. Cook Arizona Geological Survey Digital Geologic Map DGM-80 version 1.0 December, 2010 Scale 1:24,000 (1 sheet, with text) Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress St., #100, Tucson, Arizona 85701 This geologic map was funded in part by the USGS National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program, award no. 08HQAG0093. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Government. Table of Contents Table of Contents......................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. ii Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Geologic Discussion ................................................................................................................... 3 Quaternary faulting ...........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012
    The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012 (Photographs: Arizona Game and Fish Department) Arizona Game and Fish Department In partnership with the Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ i RECOMMENDED CITATION ........................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ iii DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................ iv BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 1 THE MARICOPA COUNTY WILDLIFE CONNECTIVITY ASSESSMENT ................................... 8 HOW TO USE THIS REPORT AND ASSOCIATED GIS DATA ................................................... 10 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 12 MASTER LIST OF WILDLIFE LINKAGES AND HABITAT BLOCKSAND BARRIERS ................ 16 REFERENCE MAPS .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lands Suitable for Timber Management
    C a S r l a en C Hefty, Mount d k Bushnell Hill z e g Fro r e e e C r k T ree r C C C e olts e r n C k e h e e k k e en e h Tuchuck Mountain r is ek C K re e n C T c tio u a r rv p Sta Th S om a Cr Creek eek Johnson T uc hu ck C T r rail C Bald Mountain ee reek k k e T ek e re r N t C C o Yakinikak Creek ef a k l tl i C o Trailcreek in C k ! Twin Buttes e Cleft Rock Mountain K re e k e r e k C e A T r o C k m o e d k r e a Lewis, Mount S o l ek F a e Cr Wedge Mountain C y r tle e n T e A k Hornet MountainHorne t Creek N Tepee Creek in T Thompson-Seton, Mount k o C T r ee In k u K y oop T a ee Cr Babb C eek Whale Buttes ! re Center Mountain e k k e TT re t Akinkoka Peak n C e m a ge k k na k e o a ree T M C e k k r e e le r n e b ha i r m C i W k T Locke, Mount C se r o o A f o y le M b t ta i Red Buttes T r Su H o ds a n w h La k S Cr eek Huntsberger Peak T Young, Mount T Nasukoin Mountain k n T e a k l e e t P e r s r re C C o F w e 6 c 8 o 9 Hoodoo Hill d u 1 Lake Mountain ea pr S M S p ed rin T R g C re Fortine ek ! T Polebridge !@ Link Mountain ! Ha WhiteTfish Mountain y C re ek Wetzel T ,000 ! k 5 ree 7 n C 1 ra : Mo 1 k e e k .
    [Show full text]
  • Paleoproterozoic Mafic and Ultramafic Volcanic Rocks in the South Savo Region, Eastern Finland
    Development of the Paleoproterozoic Svecofennian orogeny: new constraints from the southeastern boundary of the Central Finland Granitoid Complex Edited by Perttu Mikkola, Pentti Hölttä and Asko Käpyaho Geological Survey of Finland, Bulletin 407, 63-84, 2018 PALEOPROTEROZOIC MAFIC AND ULTRAMAFIC VOLCANIC ROCKS IN THE SOUTH SAVO REGION, EASTERN FINLAND by Jukka Kousa, Perttu Mikkola and Hannu Makkonen Kousa, J., Mikkola, P. & Makkonen, H. 2018. Paleoproterozoic mafic and ultramafic volcanic rocks in the South Savo region, eastern Finland. Geological Survey of Finland, Bulletin 407, 63–84, 11 figures and 1 table. Ultramafic and mafic volcanic rocks are present as sporadic interlayers in the Paleo- proterozoic Svecofennian paragneiss units in the South Savo region of eastern Finland. These elongated volcanic bodies display locally well-preserved primary structures, have a maximum thickness of ca. 500 m and a maximum length of several kilometres. Geo- chemically, the ultramafic variants are picrites, whereas the mafic members display EMORB-like chemical compositions. The picrites, in particular, display significant com- positional variation in both major and trace elements (light rare earth and large-ion lithophile elements). These differences may have been caused by differences in their magma source, variable degrees of crustal contamination and post-magmatic altera- tion, as well as crystal accumulation and fractionation processes. The volcanic units are interpreted to represent extensional phase(s) in the development of the sedimentary basin(s) where the protoliths of the paragneisses were deposited. The eruption age of the volcanic units is interpreted to be 1.91–1.90 Ga. Appendix 1 is available at: http://tupa.gtk.fi/julkaisu/liiteaineisto/bt_407_appendix_1.
    [Show full text]