DOCSLIB.ORG

Geology of Fairfield County, Ohio

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Geology of Fairfield County, Ohio This dissertation has been 61—5134 microfilmed exactly as received WOLFE, Edward Winslow, 1936- GEOLOGY OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1961 Geology University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan GEOLOGY OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Edward Winslow Wolfe, B. A. The Ohio State University 1961 Approved by Department of Geology ! ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks are due Mr. R. J. Bernhagen, State Geologist, who suggest­ ed the need for an investigation of the geology of Fairfield County. The writer is particularly indebted to Dr. Aurele La Rooque who di­ rected the investigation and guided the writer throughout the prepara­ tion of this report. Many others gave freely of their time in dis­ cussing with the writer the geology of Fairfield County. Among these, special thanks are due Dr. Jane L. Forsyth of the Ohio Division of Geological Survey, Mr. George J. Franklin, who is presently completing a report on the geology of Licking County, and the writer's colleagues in the Department of Geology at the College of Wooster. The writer thanks several members of the Ohio Division of Geological Survey, in­ cluding Miss Pauline Smyth, Mr. Karl V. Hoover, and Mr. Harold J. Flint, for their valuable assistance. Most helpful, too, was the as­ sistance of Mr. Jon S. Galehouse during the summer of i960. The field work was sponsored and financed by the Ohio Division of Geological Survey. Additional financial aid, in the form of a William H. Wilson award, granted by the College of Wooster, is deeply appreci­ ated. Free access was granted to the files of the Ohio Division of Geo­ logical Survey, as well as to those of the Ohio Division of Water. The two organizations participated, during the summer of 1959, in map­ ping the locations of most of the water wells drilled in Fairfield County. Finally, the writer is greatly indebted to his wife, Ruth Wolfe, ii ill who typed the manuscript and expedited the completion of the report hy her constant encouragement throughout its preparation. CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION......................................... 1 Purpose and Scope of Investigation. ..... .......... 1 Location and Extent of A r e a ............. 1 Method of Investigation ............................. 2 Previous Investigations ............................. 5 STRATIGRAPHY......................................... 8 General Statement.................................. 8 Devonian System .................................... 10 Ohio shale.................................... 10 Definition................................. 10 Distribution ............................... 10 Lithology.................................. 11 Thickness........ II Stratigraphic relations...................... 12 Age....................................... 13 Mississippian System. 15 General Statement................................ 15 Kinderhook Series.............................. 16 Bedford shale ................................ 16 Definition .................... ....... 16 Distribution................. 16 Lithology.................................. 17 Thickness.............................. 19 Stratigraphic relations...................... 21 iv Page Age....................................... 23 Berea sandstone............................... 2li Definition................................. 2U Distribution . ........................... 2U Lithology.................................. 2£ Thickness............ ^ .................... 2f> Stratigraphic relations. ............. 27 Age....................................... 30 Sunbury shale ................................ 30 Definition...................... 30 Distribution......................... 30 Lithology................. 31 Thickness............ 31 Stratigraphic relations. ....... 32 Age....................................... 33 Kinderhook and Osage Series..................... 3k Cuyahoga formation............................. 3k Definition................................. 3k Distribution............. 3k Lithology.................................. Thickness. ... ..... 3$ Stratigraphic relations...................... 35 Age....................................... 1(2 Subdivisions............................... Id* General statement........................ l(ll v Page Raccoon member........................... U8 Definition........................... U8 Distribution......................... 50 Lithology............................. 52 Thickness............... 65 Stratigraphic relations................. 69 Age.................................. 72 Black Hand m e m b e r ........................ 73 Definition....................... 73 Distribution......................... 7U Lithology............................. 76 Thickness............................. 9h Stratigraphic relations................. 91 Age..................... 112 Cuyahoga formation, undifferentiated........ 112 Definition ......... 112 Distribution ....................... 113 Lithology............................. 113 Thickness............................. 115 Stratigraphic relations................. 116 Age.................................. 118 Osage Series .................................... 119 Logan formation................ 119 Definition................................ 119 F a c i e s .............................. 120 vi Page Age....................................... 122 Subdivisions............................... 122 Berne member............................. 122 Definition........................... 122 Distribution .......................... 12U Lithology............................. 125 Thickness........ 129 Stratigraphic relations................. 132 Age.................................. 139 Byer member ....... ................. 139 Definition........................... 139 Distribution .................. lliO Lithology............................. IliO Thickness...................... liil Stratigraphic relations................. llUi Age.................................. llUi Allensville member........................ ll|5 Definition........................... lU5 Distribution .......... ll±5 Lithology............................. Iii6 Thickness................. lU9 Stratigraphic relations.......... lU9 Age.................................. 190 Vinton member ........ 150 Definition........................... 1J>0 vii Page Distribution.......................... 150 Lithology. • ........................ l5l Thickness............................. 15U Stratigraphic relations................. 155 Age.................................. 157 "Rushville" member........................ 157 Meramec Series ...................... 158 Maxville limestone............................. 158 Pennsylvanian System................................. 159 Pottsville group............................... 159 Definition ..................... ....... 159 Distribution .................. l6l Lithology.......... l6l Thickness........ 162 Stratigraphic relations...................... 163 Quaternary System .................................. 16U STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY.................................... 167 General Statement.................................. 167 Structure Contour Maps. .......................... 167 Top of Black Hand Member .......................... 167 Top of Byer Member .......... 173 GEOMORPHOLOGY........................ 176 Drainage........ 176 Relief............................................. 178 Physiographic Subdivisions........................... 178 viii Page General Statement................................ 178 Unglaciated Allegheny Plateau.......... 179 Till Plains..................................... 180 Glaciated Allegheny Plateau........................ l8l Erosion Surfaces.................................... 181 Pre-Illinoian Drainage............................... 187 Drainage Reversals.................................. 188 Hocking River Reversal........................... 188 Clear Creek Reversal............................. 190 Rush Creek Reversals............................. 191 Amey Run Reversal......................... 192 Constructional Landforms.......... 192 Original Extent of the Black Hand ..................... 192 GEOLOGIC HISTORY ...................................... 196 Precambrian Time.................................... 196 Cambrian to Devonian Periods.......... 197 Mississippian Period. .............. ....... 201 Bedford Time .................................... 201 Berea T i m e ...................................... 202 Sunbury Time .................................... 203 Cuyahoga Time................................... 20li Raccoon deposition......................... 20U Black Hand deposition............. 205 Logan T i m e ...................... 218 Berne deposition............................... 218 ix Page Eyer, Allensville, and Vinton deposition.......... 220 Post-Logan Events........................ 221 Post-Mississippian Time ............................. 222 Pottsville Deposition............................. 222 Later Pennsylvanian and Early Permian Times.......... 222 Later Permian, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic Times.......... 222 ECONOMIC GEOLOGY ...................................... 22l* Building Stone...................................... 2 2it Raccoon Member ................... ............. 221; Black Hand Member................................. 22it S h a l e ............... ............................. 226 Bedford Shale...................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FISHING for DUNKLEOSTEUS You’Re Definitely Gonna Need a Bigger Boat by Mark Peter
    OOhhiioo GGeeoollooggyy EEXXTTRRAA July 31, 2019 FISHING FOR DUNKLEOSTEUS You’re definitely gonna need a bigger boat by Mark Peter At an estimated maximum length of 6 to 8.8 meters (20–29 sediments that eroded from the Acadian Mountains, combined feet), Dunkleosteus terrelli (Fig. 1) would have been a match for with abundant organic matter from newly evolved land plants even the Hollywood-sized great white shark from the and marine plankton, settled in the basin as dark organic movie Jaws. Surfers, scuba divers, and swimmers can relax, muds. Over millions of years, accumulation of additional however, because Dunkleosteus has been extinct for nearly 360 overlying sediments compacted the muds into black shale rock. million years. Dunkleosteus was a placoderm, a type of armored The rocks that formed from the Late Devonian seafloor fish, that lived during the Late Devonian Period from about sediments (along with fossils of Dunkleosteus) arrived at their 375–359 million years ago. Fossil remains of the large present location of 41 degrees north latitude after several species Dunkleosteus terrelli are present in the Cleveland hundred million years of slow plate tectonic movement as the Member of the Ohio Shale, which contains rocks that are North American Plate moved northward. approximately 360–359 million years old. Figure 1. A reconstruction of a fully-grown Dunkleosteus terrelli, assuming a length of 29 feet, with angler for scale. Modified from illustration by Hugo Salais of Metazoa Studio. Dunkleosteus cruised Late Devonian seas and oceans as an Figure 2. Paleogeographic reconstruction of eastern North America during apex predator, much like the great white shark of today.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambrian Ordovician
    Open File Report LXXVI the shale is also variously colored. Glauconite is generally abundant in the formation. The Eau Claire A Summary of the Stratigraphy of the increases in thickness southward in the Southern Peninsula of Michigan where it becomes much more Southern Peninsula of Michigan * dolomitic. by: The Dresbach sandstone is a fine to medium grained E. J. Baltrusaites, C. K. Clark, G. V. Cohee, R. P. Grant sandstone with well rounded and angular quartz grains. W. A. Kelly, K. K. Landes, G. D. Lindberg and R. B. Thin beds of argillaceous dolomite may occur locally in Newcombe of the Michigan Geological Society * the sandstone. It is about 100 feet thick in the Southern Peninsula of Michigan but is absent in Northern Indiana. The Franconia sandstone is a fine to medium grained Cambrian glauconitic and dolomitic sandstone. It is from 10 to 20 Cambrian rocks in the Southern Peninsula of Michigan feet thick where present in the Southern Peninsula. consist of sandstone, dolomite, and some shale. These * See last page rocks, Lake Superior sandstone, which are of Upper Cambrian age overlie pre-Cambrian rocks and are The Trempealeau is predominantly a buff to light brown divided into the Jacobsville sandstone overlain by the dolomite with a minor amount of sandy, glauconitic Munising. The Munising sandstone at the north is dolomite and dolomitic shale in the basal part. Zones of divided southward into the following formations in sandy dolomite are in the Trempealeau in addition to the ascending order: Mount Simon, Eau Claire, Dresbach basal part. A small amount of chert may be found in and Franconia sandstones overlain by the Trampealeau various places in the formation.
    [Show full text]
  • Stratigraphic Succession in Lower Peninsula of Michigan
    STRATIGRAPHIC DOMINANT LITHOLOGY ERA PERIOD EPOCHNORTHSTAGES AMERICANBasin Margin Basin Center MEMBER FORMATIONGROUP SUCCESSION IN LOWER Quaternary Pleistocene Glacial Drift PENINSULA Cenozoic Pleistocene OF MICHIGAN Mesozoic Jurassic ?Kimmeridgian? Ionia Sandstone Late Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality Conemaugh Grand River Formation Geological Survey Division Late Harold Fitch, State Geologist Pennsylvanian and Saginaw Formation ?Pottsville? Michigan Basin Geological Society Early GEOL IN OG S IC A A B L N Parma Sandstone S A O G C I I H E C T I Y Bayport Limestone M Meramecian Grand Rapids Group 1936 Late Michigan Formation Stratigraphic Nomenclature Project Committee: Mississippian Dr. Paul A. Catacosinos, Co-chairman Mark S. Wollensak, Co-chairman Osagian Marshall Sandstone Principal Authors: Dr. Paul A. Catacosinos Early Kinderhookian Coldwater Shale Dr. William Harrison III Robert Reynolds Sunbury Shale Dr. Dave B.Westjohn Mark S. Wollensak Berea Sandstone Chautauquan Bedford Shale 2000 Late Antrim Shale Senecan Traverse Formation Traverse Limestone Traverse Group Erian Devonian Bell Shale Dundee Limestone Middle Lucas Formation Detroit River Group Amherstburg Form. Ulsterian Sylvania Sandstone Bois Blanc Formation Garden Island Formation Early Bass Islands Dolomite Sand Salina G Unit Paleozoic Glacial Clay or Silt Late Cayugan Salina F Unit Till/Gravel Salina E Unit Salina D Unit Limestone Salina C Shale Salina Group Salina B Unit Sandy Limestone Salina A-2 Carbonate Silurian Salina A-2 Evaporite Shaley Limestone Ruff Formation
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Investigations in Ohio
    INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 21 GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN OHIO 1956 By Carolyn Farnsworth STATE OF OHIO C. William O'Neill, Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES A. W. Marion, Director NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Milton Ronsheim, Chairman John A. Slipher, Bryce Browning, Vice Chairman Secretary C. D. Blubaugh Dean L. L. Rummell Forrest G. Hall Dr. Myron T. Sturgeon A. W. Marion George Wenger DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Ralph J. Bernhagen, Chief STATI OF OHIO DIPAlTMIMT 011 NATUlAL llSOUlCH DIVISION OF &EOLO&ICAL SURVEY INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 21 'GEOLOG·ICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN OHIO 1956 by CAROLYN FARNSWORTH COLUMBUS 1957 Blank Page CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Project listing by author 2 Project listing by subject . 22 Economic geology 22 Aggregates . 22 Coal . • 22 Ground water 22 Iron .. 22 Oil and gas 22 Salt . 22 Sand and gravel 23 General .. 23 Geomorphology 23 Geophysics 23 Glacial geology 23 Mineralogy and petrology . 24 Clay .. 24 Coal . 24 Dolomite 24 Limestone. 24 Sandstone •• 24 Shale. 24 Till 25 Others 25 Paleontology. 25 Stratigraphy and sedimentation 26 Structural geology . 27 Miscellaneous . 27 Geographic distribution. 27 Statewide 27 Areal. \\ 28 County 29 Miscellaneous . 33 iii Blank Page I INTRODUCTION In September 1956, letters of inquiry and questionnaires were sent to all Ohio geologists on the mailing list of the Ohio Geological Survey, and to other persons who might be working on geological problems in Ohio. This publication has been compiled from the information contained on the returned forms. In most eases it is assumed that the projects listed herein will culminate in reports which will be available to the profession through scientific journals, government publications, or grad- uate school theses.
    [Show full text]
  • Subsurface Facies Analysis of the Devonian Berea Sandstone in Southeastern Ohio
    SUBSURFACE FACIES ANALYSIS OF THE DEVONIAN BEREA SANDSTONE IN SOUTHEASTERN OHIO William T. Garnes A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE December 2014 Committee: James Evans, Advisor Jeffrey Snyder Charles Onasch ii ABSTRACT James Evans, Advisor The Devonian Berea Sandstone is an internally complex, heterogeneous unit that appears prominently both in outcrop and subsurface in Ohio. While the unit is clearly deltaic in outcrops in northeastern Ohio, its depositional setting is more problematic in southeastern Ohio where it is only found in the subsurface. The goal of this project was to search for evidence of a barrier island/inlet channel depositional environment for the Berea Sandstone to assess whether the Berea Sandstone was deposited under conditions in southeastern Ohio unique from northeastern Ohio. This project involved looking at cores from 5 wells: 3426 (Athens Co.), 3425 (Meigs Co.), 3253 (Athens Co.), 3252 (Athens Co.), and 3251 (Athens Co.) In cores, the Berea Sandstone ranges from 2 to 10 m (8-32 ft) thick, with an average thickness of 6.3 m (20.7 ft). Core descriptions involved hand specimens, thin section descriptions, and core photography. In addition to these 5 wells, the gamma ray logs from 13 wells were used to interpret the architecture and lithologies of the Berea Sandstone in Athens Co. and Meigs Co. as well as surrounding Vinton, Washington, and Morgan counties. Analysis from this study shows evidence of deltaic lobe progradation, abandonment, and re-working. Evidence of interdistributary bays with shallow sub-tidal environments, as well as large sand bodies, is also present.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Geology of Northeastern Ohio
    SDMS US EPA REGION V -1 SOME IMAGES WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE ILLEGIBLE DUE TO BAD SOURCE DOCUMENTS. GUIDE TO THE GEOLOGY of NORTHEASTERN OHIO Edited by P. O. BANKS & RODNEY M. FELDMANN 1970 Northern Ohio Geological Society ELYP.i.A PU&UC LIBRARt as, BEDROCK GEOLOGY OF NORTHEASTERN OHIO PENNSYLVANIAN SYSTEM MISSISSIPPIAN SYSTEM DEVONIAN SYSTEM \V&fe'£:i£:VS:#: CANTON viSlSWSSWM FIGURr I Geologic map of northeastern Ohio. Individual formations within each time unit are not dis- -guished, and glacial deposits have been omitted. Because the bedding planes are nearly ••.crizontal, the map patterns of the contacts closely resemble the topographic contours at those z evations. The older and deeper units are most extensively exposed where the major rivers rave cut into them, while the younger units are preserved in the intervening higher areas. CO «< in Dev. Mississippian r-c Penn. a> 3 CO CD BRADF. KINOERHOOK MERAMEC —1 OSAGE CHESTER POTTSVIUE ro to r-» c-> e-> e= e-i GO n « -n V) CO V* o ^_ ^ 0. = -^ eo CO 3 c= « ^> <C3 at ta B> ^ °» eu ra to a O9 eo ^ a* s 1= ca \ *** CO ^ CO to CM v» o' CO to CO 3 =3 13- *•» \ ¥\ A. FIGURE 1. Columnar section ol the major stratigraphic units in northeastern Ohio showing their relative positions in the standard geologic time scale. The Devonian-Mississippian boundary is not known with certainty to lie within the Cleveland Shale. The base of the Mississippian in the northern part of the state is transitional with the Bradford Series of the Devonian System and may lie within the Cleveland Shale (Weller er a/., 1948).
    [Show full text]
  • Geoloaic District. Subsequent Stratigraphic Studies in This Area
    DEVONIAN STRATA AND PALEOENVIRONMENTS: CHAUTAUQUA COUNTY REGION: NEW YORK STATE GORDON C. BAIRD and GARY G. LASH Department of Geosciences State University of New York College at Fredonia Fredonia, New York 14063 INTRODUCTION The history of the study of the Paleozoic stratigraphic divisions in New York State spans, at least, two centuries, and it records the early development of important concepts centrally germane to the study of sedimentary basins worldwide (see Tesmer, 1989). The works of James Hall, John Clarke, HenryS. Williams, Joseph Barrell, and George Chadwick are well known to most sedimentary workers, as are those of numerous subsequent workers. In particular, the sedimentary sequences of the Allegheny Plateau Region (••southern Tier" region) served as important sources of information for refinement of the fac ies concept ar.d for the widespread recognition of the westwardly prograding Catskill Delta Complex which is the primary Paleozoic story recorded in Southern Tier bedrock deposits (see Chadwick, 1924, 1933; Cooper, et al., 1942; Caster, 1934; Woodrow, 1985). ---- The first significant geologic work relating to the Chautauqua County region was presented in James Hall's (1843) Survey of the Fourth Geoloaic District. Subsequent stratigraphic studies in this area inclu e Clarke (1903), Chadwick (1923, 1924), Caster (1934), Pepper and de Witt (1950, 1951) and de Witt and Colton (1953). In northwest Pennsylvania, significant synthetic contributions include I.C. White (1881), Butts (1906-1908), Chadwick (1925), Caster ·(1934), Pepper et al. (1954). In Ohio, deposits equivalent to parts of the New York and -­ Pennsylvania Upper Devonian section (Chagrin Shale) have been the subject of recent paleoenvironmental studies (see Weidner and Feldmann, 1983; Schwimmer and Feldmann, 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana
    Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 348 Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana By W. H. EASTON GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 348 A study of the stratigraphic and ecologic associa­ tions and significance offossils from the Big Snowy group of Mississippian and Pennsylvanian rocks UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1962 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library has cataloged this publication as follows : Eastern, William Heyden, 1916- Carboniferous formations and faunas of central Montana. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1961. iv, 126 p. illus., diagrs., tables. 29 cm. (U.S. Geological Survey. Professional paper 348) Part of illustrative matter folded in pocket. Bibliography: p. 101-108. 1. Paleontology Montana. 2. Paleontology Carboniferous. 3. Geology, Stratigraphic Carboniferous. I. Title. (Series) For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, B.C. CONTENTS Page Page Abstract-__________________________________________ 1 Faunal analysis Continued Introduction _______________________________________ 1 Faunal relations ______________________________ 22 Purposes of the study_ __________________________ 1 Long-ranging elements...__________________ 22 Organization of present work___ __________________ 3 Elements of Mississippian affinity.._________ 22 Acknowledgments--.-------.- ___________________
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Cross Section C–C' Through the Appalachian Basin from Erie
    Geologic Cross Section C–C’ Through the Appalachian Basin From Erie County, North-Central Ohio, to the Valley and Ridge Province, Bedford County, South-Central Pennsylvania By Robert T. Ryder, Michael H. Trippi, Christopher S. Swezey, Robert D. Crangle, Jr., Rebecca S. Hope, Elisabeth L. Rowan, and Erika E. Lentz Scientific Investigations Map 3172 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov 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. Suggested citation: Ryder, R.T., Trippi, M.H., Swezey, C.S. Crangle, R.D., Jr., Hope, R.S., Rowan, E.L., and Lentz, E.E., 2012, Geologic cross section C–C’ through the Appalachian basin from Erie County, north-central Ohio, to the Valley and Ridge province, Bedford County, south-central Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3172, 2 sheets, 70-p.
    [Show full text]
  • Outcrop Lithostratigraphy and Petrophysics of the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale in West Virginia and Adjacent States
    Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports 2011 Outcrop Lithostratigraphy and Petrophysics of the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale in West Virginia and Adjacent States Margaret E. Walker-Milani West Virginia University Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd Recommended Citation Walker-Milani, Margaret E., "Outcrop Lithostratigraphy and Petrophysics of the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale in West Virginia and Adjacent States" (2011). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 3327. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/3327 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by the The Research Repository @ WVU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you must obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in WVU Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports collection by an authorized administrator of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Outcrop Lithostratigraphy and Petrophysics of the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale in West Virginia and Adjacent States Margaret E. Walker-Milani THESIS submitted to the College of Arts and Sciences at West Virginia University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology Richard Smosna, Ph.D., Chair Timothy Carr, Ph.D. John Renton, Ph.D. Kathy Bruner, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Information Maxville Lime.Stone
    .·-~ . f GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF OHIO WILBER STOUT, State Geologist Fourth Series Information Circular No. 3 RECENT INFORMATION ON THE MAXVILLE LIME.STONE by RAYMONDE. LAMBORN COLUMBUS 1945 Reprinted 1961 HOOK I\(..• OHIO GEOL. SURVEY. LAKE ERIE SECTION LIBRARY CARD NO. ·7 STATE CF OHIO Michael V. DiSalle Governor DEPARTMENT CF NATURAL RESOURCES Herbert B. Eagon Director NATURAL RESOURCES CCMMISSION C. D. Blubaugh Joseph E. Hunt Herbert B. Eagon Roy M. Kottman Byron Frederick DemClB L. Sean Forrest G. Hl1ll Myron T. Sturgeon Willian• Hoyne DIVISION OF GEQ.OGICAL SURVEY Ralph j. Bernhagen Chief COLUMBUS 1945 Reprinted 1961 Heer ptg. Co., Cols., O. INTRODUCTION The Maxville has been an important source of limestone for more than 100 years in southern and east central Ohio where it was first utilized for mortar and for furnace flux. Probably for this rea~on outcrops of a limestone later shown to be Maxville in age were described by Briggs in 1838 who noted occurrences near Maxville, Perry County; on Three Mile Run near Logan in Hocking County; near Reeds Mills near Wellston, Jackson County; and at the Canter Quarry in Hamilton Township, Jack- son County.1 Further obser.vations of this limestone were made by E. B. Andrews of the Second Geological Survey of Ohio and his report was published in the Report of Progress in 1869. Andrews named the lime- stone the Maxville for its occurrence near Maxville, Hocking County, noted its patchy distribution on the outcrop, described its stratigraphic position as immediately overlying the Logan sandstones ana shales, and declared the limestone to be of sub-Carboniferous (Mississippian) age.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Devonian and Early Mississippian Distal Basin-Margin Sedimentation of Northern Ohio1
    Late Devonian and Early Mississippian Distal Basin-Margin Sedimentation of Northern Ohio1 THOMAS L. LEWIS, Department of Geological Sciences, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH 44115 ABSTRACT. Clastic sediments, derived from southeastern, eastern and northeastern sources, prograded west- ward into a shallow basin at the northwestern margin of the Appalachian Basin in Late Devonian and Early Mississippian time. The western and northwestern boundary of the basin was the submerged Cincinnati Arch. The marine clastic wedges provided a northwest paleoslope and a distal, gentle shelf-edge margin that controlled directional emplacement of coarse elastics. Rising sea levels coupled with differences in sedimen- tation rates and localized soft-sediment deformation within the basin help explain some features of the Bedford and Berea Formations. The presence of sand-filled mudcracks and flat-topped symmetrical ripple marks in the Berea Formation attest to very shallow water deposition and local subaerial exposure at the time of emplacement of part of the formation. Absence of thick, channel-form deposits eastward suggests loss of section during emergence. OHIO J. SCI. 88 (1): 23-39, 1988 INTRODUCTION The Bedford Formation (Newberry 1870) is the most The Ohio Shale, Bedford, and Berea Formations of lithologically varied formation of the group. It is com- northern Ohio are clastic units which record prograda- prised of gray and red mudshales, siltstone, and very tional and transgressional events during Late Devonian fine-grained sandstone. The Bedford Formation thins and Early Mississippian time. The sequence of sediments both to the east and west and reaches its maximum is characterized by (1) gray mudshale, clayshale, siltstone, thickness in the Cleveland area.
    [Show full text]