DOCSLIB.ORG

Middle Salt Creek Canyon Access Plan Canyonlands National Park, Utah

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU Canyonlands Research Bibliography Canyonlands Research Center 2002 Environmental Assessment : Middle Salt Creek Canyon Access Plan Canyonlands National Park, Utah National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior Canyonlands National Park Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/crc_research Part of the Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons Recommended Citation National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior and Canyonlands National Park, "Environmental Assessment : Middle Salt Creek Canyon Access Plan Canyonlands National Park, Utah" (2002). Canyonlands Research Bibliography. Paper 226. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/crc_research/226 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Canyonlands Research Center at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canyonlands Research Bibliography by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MIDDLE SALT CREEK CANYON ACCESS PLAN CANYONLANDS NATIONAL PARK, UTAH _______________________________________________________________________ Summary Salt Creek is the largest drainage in the Needles district of Canyonlands National Park. The creek supports one of the most important riparian ecosystems in the park. It is also the heart of the Salt Creek National Register Archeological District, the area with the highest recorded density of archeological sites in the park. A tributary canyon contains the spectacular Angel Arch, a well-known geologic formation that for many years has been a destination point for park visitors. In 1998 the U.S. District Court for the State of Utah ruled, in a lawsuit filed by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, that the National Park Service violated the NPS Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) by failing to close the upper 8.2 miles (above Peekaboo campsite) of the Salt Creek four-wheel drive road in the 1995 Canyonlands Backcountry Management Plan. The jeep road weaves in and out of the creek, sometimes remaining in the streambed for extended lengths. The court found that vehicles upstream of Peekaboo Spring caused permanent impairment of park resources, and enjoined the NPS from continuing to allow limited use of the area by motorized vehicles. Four-wheel-drive groups appealed the decision, and in 2000 the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the case to the district court. The remand included instructions to re-examine the administrative record and consider the new NPS Management Policies in regard to the question of “impairment of park resources or values,” the central issue in the case. With the concurrence of the U.S. District Court of Utah, the NPS has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) to analyze the impacts of a range of alternatives for recreational access to the portion of Salt Creek Canyon from Peekaboo Camp to Angel Arch Canyon (“Middle Salt Creek Canyon”), and to apply the new NPS Management Policies on impairment to the alternatives. The management objective, toward which the EA alternatives are directed, is based on the NPS Organic Act, the act establishing Canyonlands National Park, and the issues on remand to the district court: To provide recreational access to Middle Salt Creek Canyon without major adverse impacts or impairment of the natural and cultural resources. The list of possible management alternatives includes limited year-around vehicle access under the permit system established in the 1995 Backcountry Management Plan (BMP), part-year vehicle access under the permit system, realignment of the existing four-wheel-drive road, year-round prohibitions on motorized vehicles, or a combination of these actions. The three vehicle-access alternatives, each of which would permit vehicle travel through substantial portions of the streambed and riparian area, have been found to cause impairment of park resources or values, which is prohibited by the National Park Service Organic Act. Consequently, an alternative prohibiting motorized vehicles year-round, but permitting access by hiking or pack stock, is identified as the preferred alternative. 1 Note to Reviewers and Respondents If you wish to comment on the environmental assessment, you may mail comments to the name and address below. Our practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address from the record, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. Please address written comments to: Alford J. Banta Superintendent, Canyonlands National Park 2282 South West Resource Blvd. Moab, UT 84532 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Purpose and Need..............................................................................................................................7 1.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................7 1.2 Purpose and Need.................................................................................................................... 10 1.3 Scope ........................................................................................................................................ 11 1.4 Public Involvement.................................................................................................................... 11 1.5 Impairment of Park Resources or Values ................................................................................ 12 1.6 Issues and Impact Topics......................................................................................................... 12 1.6.1 Issues and Derivation of Impact Topics....................................................................... 12 1.6.2 Impact Topics Selected for Detailed Analysis.............................................................. 13 1.5.2 Impact Topics Dismissed from Detailed Analysis ........................................................ 13 2. Alternatives....................................................................................................................................... 16 2.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................ 16 2.2 Alternative Comparison ............................................................................................................ 18 2.2.1 Alternative A (No Action). Vehicle access all year as weather permits; permit system........................................................................................................................... 19 2.2.2 Alternative B. Vehicle access part year; permit system ............................................. 20 2.2.3 Alternative C. Road realignment; vehicle access all year as weather permits; permit system .......................................................................................................................... 20 2.2.4 Alternative D (Preferred Alternative). Vehicles prohibited all year ............................. 20 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Study ................................................... 21 2.4 Environmentally Preferred Alternative...................................................................................... 21 3. Affected Environment ...................................................................................................................... 24 3.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................ 24 3.2 Impact Topics............................................................................................................................ 26 3.2.1 Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species........................................................ 26 3.2.1.1 Mexican Spotted Owl ............................................................................................ 26 3.2.1.2 Peregrine Falcon ................................................................................................... 27 3.2.1.3 Other State-listed Birds ......................................................................................... 27 3.2.2 Wildlife........................................................................................................................... 28 3.2.2.1 Birds........................................................................................................................ 28 3.2.2.2 Amphibians and Reptiles ....................................................................................... 28 3.2.2.3 Large Mammals..................................................................................................... 29 3.2.2.4 Other Mammals...................................................................................................... 29 3.2.3 Natural Soundscape ..................................................................................................... 29 3.2.4 Recreational Experience .............................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR

    Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR

    Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR Colorado River at Mile 50. Cover: Salt River. Letter from the President ivers are the great treasury of noted scientists and other experts reviewed the survey design, and biological diversity in the western state-specific experts reviewed the results for each state. RUnited States. As evidence mounts The result is a state-by-state list of more than 250 of the West’s that climate is changing even faster than we outstanding streams, some protected, some still vulnerable. The feared, it becomes essential that we create Great Rivers of the West is a new type of inventory to serve the sanctuaries on our best, most natural rivers modern needs of river conservation—a list that Western Rivers that will harbor viable populations of at-risk Conservancy can use to strategically inform its work. species—not only charismatic species like salmon, but a broad range of aquatic and This is one of 11 state chapters in the report. Also available are a terrestrial species. summary of the entire report, as well as the full report text. That is what we do at Western Rivers Conservancy. We buy land With the right tools in hand, Western Rivers Conservancy is to create sanctuaries along the most outstanding rivers in the West seizing once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to acquire and protect – places where fish, wildlife and people can flourish. precious streamside lands on some of America’s finest rivers. With a talented team in place, combining more than 150 years This is a time when investment in conservation can yield huge of land acquisition experience and offices in Oregon, Colorado, dividends for the future.
  • Lab 7: Relative Dating and Geological Time

    Lab 7: Relative Dating and Geological Time

    LAB 7: RELATIVE DATING AND GEOLOGICAL TIME Lab Structure Synchronous lab work Yes – virtual office hours available Asynchronous lab work Yes Lab group meeting No Quiz None – Test 2 this week Recommended additional work None Required materials Pencil Learning Objectives After carefully reading this chapter, completing the exercises within it, and answering the questions at the end, you should be able to: • Apply basic geological principles to the determination of the relative ages of rocks. • Explain the difference between relative and absolute age-dating techniques. • Summarize the history of the geological time scale and the relationships between eons, eras, periods, and epochs. • Understand the importance and significance of unconformities. • Explain why an understanding of geological time is critical to both geologists and the general public. Key Terms • Eon • Original horizontality • Era • Cross-cutting • Period • Inclusions • Relative dating • Faunal succession • Absolute dating • Unconformity • Isotopic dating • Angular unconformity • Stratigraphy • Disconformity • Strata • Nonconformity • Superposition • Paraconformity Time is the dimension that sets geology apart from most other sciences. Geological time is vast, and Earth has changed enough over that time that some of the rock types that formed in the past could not form Lab 7: Relative Dating and Geological Time | 181 today. Furthermore, as we’ve discussed, even though most geological processes are very, very slow, the vast amount of time that has passed has allowed for the formation of extraordinary geological features, as shown in Figure 7.0.1. Figure 7.0.1: Arizona’s Grand Canyon is an icon for geological time; 1,450 million years are represented by this photo.
  • Scoping Report: Grand Staircase-Escalante National

    Scoping Report: Grand Staircase-Escalante National

    CONTENTS 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 2 Scoping Process ....................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Purpose of Scoping ........................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Scoping Outreach .............................................................................................................................. 3 2.2.1 Publication of the Notice of Intent ....................................................................................... 3 2.2.2 Other Outreach Methods ....................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Opportunities for Public Comment ................................................................................................ 3 2.4 Public Scoping Meetings .................................................................................................................. 4 2.5 Cooperating Agency Involvement ................................................................................................... 4 2.6 National Historic Preservation Act and Tribal Consultation ....................................................... 5 3 Submission Processing and Comment Coding .................................................................................... 5
  • Geomorphology, Stratigraphy, and Paleohydrology of the Aeolis Dorsa Region, Mars, with Insights from Modern and Ancient Terrestrial Analogs

    Geomorphology, Stratigraphy, and Paleohydrology of the Aeolis Dorsa Region, Mars, with Insights from Modern and Ancient Terrestrial Analogs

    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 12-2016 Geomorphology, Stratigraphy, and Paleohydrology of the Aeolis Dorsa region, Mars, with Insights from Modern and Ancient Terrestrial Analogs Robert Eric Jacobsen II University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Geology Commons Recommended Citation Jacobsen, Robert Eric II, "Geomorphology, Stratigraphy, and Paleohydrology of the Aeolis Dorsa region, Mars, with Insights from Modern and Ancient Terrestrial Analogs. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2016. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4098 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Robert Eric Jacobsen II entitled "Geomorphology, Stratigraphy, and Paleohydrology of the Aeolis Dorsa region, Mars, with Insights from Modern and Ancient Terrestrial Analogs." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Geology. Devon M. Burr,
  • A Preliminary Assessment of Archaeological Resources Within the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, Utah

    A Preliminary Assessment of Archaeological Resources Within the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, Utah

    A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE GRAND STAIRCASE-ESCALANTE NATIONAL MONUMENT, UTAH by David B. Madsen Common rock art elements of the Fremont and Anasazi on the Colorado Plateau and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. ,I!! CIRCULAR 95 . 1997 I~\' UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ." if;~~ 6EPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ISBN 1-55791-605-5 STATE OF UTAH Michael O. Leavitt, Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Ted Stewart, Executive Director UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY M. Lee Allison~ Director UGS Board Member Representing Russell C. Babcock, Jr. (chairman) .................................................................................................. Mineral Industry D. Cary Smith ................................................................................................................................... Mineral Industry Richard R. Kennedy ....................................................................................................................... Civil Engineering E.H. Deedee O'Brien ......................................................................................................................... Public-at-Large C. William Berge .............................................................................................................................. Mineral Industry Jerry Golden ..................................................................................................................................... Mineral Industry Milton E. Wadsworth ...............................................................................................
  • Relation of Sediment Load and Flood-Plain Formation to Climatic Variability, Paria River Drainage Basin, Utah and Arizona

    Relation of Sediment Load and Flood-Plain Formation to Climatic Variability, Paria River Drainage Basin, Utah and Arizona

    Relation of sediment load and flood-plain formation to climatic variability, Paria River drainage basin, Utah and Arizona JULIA B. GRAF U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, 375 S. Euclid, Tucson, Arizona 85719 ROBERT H. WEBB U.S. Geological Survey, 1675 W. Anklam Road, Tucson, Arizona 85745 RICHARD HEREFORD U.S. Geological Survey, Geologic Division, 2255 North Gemini Drive, Flagstaff, Arizona 86001 ABSTRACT sediment load for a given discharge declined fill that rises 1-5 m above the modern channel abruptly in the early 1940s in the Colorado bed. Flood-plain deposits are present in all Suspended-sediment load, flow volume, River at Grand Canyon (Daines, 1949; Howard, major tributaries of the Paria River. The area of and flood characteristics of the Paria River 1960; Thomas and others, 1960; Hereford, flood plains is slightly greater than 20 km2, and were analyzed to determine their relation to 1987a). The decline in suspended-sediment sediment volume is estimated to be about 40 climate and flood-plain alluviation between loads has been attributed to improved land use million m3 (Hereford, 1987c). Typically, flood 1923 and 1986. Flood-plain alluviation began and conservation measures initiated in the 1930s plains are not present in first-order drainage ba- about 1940 at a time of decreasing magnitude (Hadley, 1977). A change in sediment-sampler sins but are present in basins of second and and frequency of floods in winter, summer, type and in methods of analysis have been higher order where the stream channel is uncon- and fall. No floods with stages high enough to discounted as causes for the observed decrease fined and crosses nonresistant bedrock forma- inundate the flood plain have occurred since (Daines, 1949; Thomas and others, 1960).
  • Grand Canyon National Park U.S

    Grand Canyon National Park U.S

    National Park Service Grand Canyon National Park U.S. Department of the Interior The official newspaper North Rim 2015 Season The Guide North Rim Information and Maps Roosevelt Point, named for President Theodore Roosevelt who in 1908, declared Grand Canyon a national monument. Grand Canyon was later established as a national park in 1919 by President Woodrow Wilson. Welcome to Grand Canyon S ITTING ATOP THE K AIBAB a meadow, a mother turkey leading her thunderstorms, comes and goes all too flies from the South Rim, the North Plateau, 8,000 to 9,000 feet (2,400– young across the road, or a mountain quickly, only to give way to the colors Rim offers a very different visitor 2,750 m) above sea level with lush lion slinking off into the cover of the of fall. With the yellows and oranges of experience. Solitude, awe-inspiring green meadows surrounded by a mixed forest. Visitors in the spring may see quaking aspen and the reds of Rocky views, a slower pace, and the feeling of conifer forest sprinkled with white- remnants of winter in disappearing Mountain maple, the forest seems to going back in time are only a few of the barked aspen, the North Rim is an oasis snowdrifts or temporary mountain glow. Crispness in the air warns of winter many attributes the North Rim has in the desert. Here you may observe lakes of melted snow. The summer, snowstorms soon to come. Although to offer. Discover the uniqueness of deer feeding, a coyote chasing mice in with colorful wildflowers and intense only 10 miles (16 km) as the raven Grand Canyon’s North Rim.
  • West Colorado River Plan

    West Colorado River Plan

    Section 9 - West Colorado River Basin Water Planning and Development 9.1 Introduction 9-1 9.2 Background 9-1 9.3 Water Resources Problems 9-7 9.4 Water Resources Demands and Needs 9-7 9.5 Water Development and Management Alternatives 9-13 9.6 Projected Water Depletions 9-18 9.7 Policy Issues and Recommendations 9-19 Figures 9-1 Price-San Rafael Salinity Control Project Map 9-6 9-2 Wilderness Lands 9-11 9-3 Potential Reservoir Sites 9-16 9-4 Gunnison Butte Mutual Irrigation Project 9-20 9-5 Bryce Valley 9-22 Tables 9-1 Board of Water Resources Development Projects 9-3 9-2 Salinity Control Project Approved Costs 9-7 9-3 Wilderness Lands 9-8 9-4 Current and Projected Culinary Water Use 9-12 9-5 Current and Projected Secondary Water Use 9-12 9-6 Current and Projected Agricultural Water Use 9-13 9-7 Summary of Current and Projected Water Demands 9-14 9-8 Historical Reservoir Site Investigations 9-17 Section 9 West Colorado River Basin - Utah State Water Plan Water Planning and Development 9.1 Introduction The coordination and cooperation of all This section describes the major existing water development projects and proposed water planning water-related government agencies, and development activities in the West Colorado local organizations and individual River Basin. The existing water supplies are vital to water users will be required as the the existence of the local communities while also basin tries to meet its future water providing aesthetic and environmental values.
  • STATE of UTAH DEPARTMENT of NATURAL RESOURCES Technical

    STATE of UTAH DEPARTMENT of NATURAL RESOURCES Technical

    STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Technical Publication No. 70 GROUND-WATER CONDITIONS IN THE UPPER VIRGIN RIVER AND KANAB CREEK BASINS AREA, UTAH, WITH EMPHASIS ON THE NAVAJO SANDSTONE by R. M. Cordova Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey Prepared by the United States Geological Survey in cooperation with The Utah Department of Natural Resources Division of Water Rights 1981 CONTENTS Page Conversion factors VI Abstract 1 Introduction 2 Purpose and scope of the study.................................... 2 Previous studies and acknowledgments 2 Data-site-numbering system........................................ 3 Location and general features of the study area 3 Physiography and drainage 3 Climate 6 CuI ture and economy 9 Geologic setting 9 General characteristics of the rocks 9 General geologic structure 11 Water resources 11 Precipitation 11 Surface water 13 Runoff 13 Chemical quality 13 Ground water 16 General conditions of occurrence 16 Unconsolidated-rock aquifers 17 Consolidated-rock aquifers 19 Hydrologic properties of aquifers 20 Recharge 27 Movement 28 Discharge 30 Seepage to streams 31 Evapotranspiration 31 Springs 33 Wells 35 Subsurface outflow 36 Storage 37 Chemical quality 41 General characteristics 41 Relation to use 47 Public supply 47 Irrigation supply 47 Temperature 49 Possible hydrologic effects of increased ground-water development 50 Interference with existing wells .......................•.......... 50 Shift of the ground-water divide 55 Reduction of streamflow 56 Effects on chemical quality of water 56 Summary and conclusions 57 References cited 59 Publications of the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights 78 III ILLUSTRATIONS [Plates are in pocket] Plate 1. Map showing selected geohydrologic information in the upper Virgin River basin.
  • Map Showing Location of Selected Surface-Water Sites and Springs, Escalante River Drainage Basin, Garfield and Kane Counties, Utah By

    Map Showing Location of Selected Surface-Water Sites and Springs, Escalante River Drainage Basin, Garfield and Kane Counties, Utah By

    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS REPORT 2004–5223 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, GRAND STAIRCASE-ESCALANTE NATIONAL MONUMENT Location of selected surface-water sites and springs, Escalante River drainage basin—Plate 1 Wilberg, D.E., and Stolp, B.J., 2004, Seepage Investigation and Selected Hydrologic Data for the Escalante River Drainage Basin, Garfield and Kane Counties, Utah, 1909-2002 111°45' 111°05' 114 ° 113 ° 112 ° 111° 42 ° T. 30 S. T. 31 S. Great 15 Salt 110 ° 109 ° B 41 ° Lake ou Salt Lake City lde r M Provo ou 40 ° nt ain 39 ° Utah Study 38 ° area Garfield County Kane County 37 ° E a s t F o T. 31 S. r k T. 32 S. 21 East Fork Boulder Creek near Boulder EXPLANATION B o u Boundary of study area l d u e s Platea r Aquariu C r Boundary of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument e e k Road k e e r C C ir Stream c r e le e C D l 16 38°00' if Surface-water site and number k fs or 22 East Fork Deer Creek near Boulder t F 38°00' as Spring E +35 Mile marker—Labeled every 5 miles T. 32 S. T. 33 S. 12 Dixie National Forest s il n a i Tr a t n p u o Boulder rr o T u B M n i f f i D r e e T. 33 S.
  • Quantifying the Base Flow of the Colorado River: Its Importance in Sustaining Perennial Flow in Northern Arizona And

    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.
  • Paleontology a Curriculum Guide to Mammoth Cave National Park

    Paleontology a Curriculum Guide to Mammoth Cave National Park

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Mammoth Cave National Park Paleontology A Curriculum Guide to Mammoth Cave National Park Gr1-12 Kitchen Geology GRADE LEVEL:..4-6 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Sedimentary.rocks.are.layered.rocks...Chemicals.in. TIME REQUIRED: Two.to.three.class.periods rivers,.lakes,.and.oceans.precipitate.particles.from. water...This.precipitate.then.mixes.with.inorganic. SETTING:..Classroom remains.(such.as.shells.and.skeletons).of.organisms... Wind,.rain,.and.ice.wear.down.surface.rocks.into.bits. of.sand,.soil,.mud,.pebbles,.clay,.and.loose.sediments. GOAL:..To.create.a.layered.edible.dish.that. All.these.various.sediments.eventually.pile.up.layer. demonstrates:..(1).the.layering.of.rock.strata,.and..(2). upon.layer...Over.time,.pressure.exerted.by.the. the.movement.of.rocks.that.expose.fossils. weight.of.the.top.layers.compacts.and.cements.the. lower.sediments.to.form.solid.rock...Younger.rock.is. OUTCOMES: At.the.end.of.the.lesson.the.student.will:. placed.on.older.rock...Each.layer.captures.life.forms. of.that.period.in.time...These.preserved.species.are. •.state.the.defining.characteristic.of.sedimentary.rock called.index.fossils...By.observing.these.index.fossils. •.define.index.fossil. the.geologist.can.determine.the.age.of.the.rock. •.define.uplifting,.overthrust,.faulting Sandstone.is.a.sedimentary.rock.made.of.layers.of. •.state.how.fossils.are.exposed. compressed.and.cemented.sand.grains...Shale.is.a. sedimentary.rock.made.of.layers.of.silt.and.mud... Limestone.is.a.sedimentary.rock.made.of.layers. KERA GOALS: Meets.KERA.goals.1.3,.1.4,.2.1,.2.2,.2.4,.