DOCSLIB.ORG

PROCEEDINGS of the 6TH FOSSIL RESOURCE CONFERENCE Edited by Vincent L

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PROCEEDINGS of the 6TH FOSSIL RESOURCE CONFERENCE Edited by Vincent L 217 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 6TH FOSSIL RESOURCE CONFERENCE Edited by Vincent L. Santucci and Lindsay McClelland Edited by Vincent L. Santucci and Lindsay McClelland Technical Report NPS/NRGRD/GRDTR-01/01 Technical Report NPS/NRGRD/GRDTR-01/01 United States Department of the Interior•National Park Service•Geological Resource Division 218 Copies of this report are available from the editors. Geological Resources Division 12795 West Alameda Parkway Academy Place, Room 480 Lakewood, CO 80227 Please refer to: National Park Service D-2228 (September 2001). Cover Illustration Photo of Red Gulch Dinosaur Tracksite footprint (upper left); digital contour of track (upper right); Digital Terrain Model of track, planar view (lower left); and Digital Terrain Model of track, oblique view (lower right). 219 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 6TH FOSSIL RESOURCE CONFERENCE EDITED BY Vincent L. Santucci National Park Service PO Box 592 Kemmerer, WY 83101 AND Lindsay McClelland National Park Service Room 3223 - Main Interior 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20240-0001 Geologic Resources Division Technical Report NPS/NRGRD/GRDTR-01/01 September 2001 123 ESTABLISHING BASELINE PALEONTOLOGICAL DATA FOR RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE NPS ALASKA REGION ANTHONY R. FIORILLO1, VINCENT L. SANTUCCI2, ROLAND A. GANGLOFF3, PETER J. ARMATO4, AND RUSSELL KUCINSKI5 1Dallas Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 150349, Dallas, TX 75315 2Fossil Butte National Monument, P.O. Box 592, Kemmerer, WY 83101 3University of Alaska Museum, 907 Yukon Dr., Fairbanks, AK 99775 4Kenai Fjords National Park, P.O. Box 1727, Seward, AK 99664 5National Park Service - Alaska Support Office, 2525 Gambell St., Anchorage, AK 99503 ____________________ ABSTRACT—As part of a mandated inventory and monitoring program within the National Park Service, a large-scale study of paleontological resources has been initiated within the parks and monuments of the Alaska Region. This paper will discuss the complexities of working within the Alaska Region, and the preliminary data recorded. Within the Alaska Region, the scope of a paleontological survey is enormous, even for one park. A small team prospected accessible localities within six park units, targeted because the park management could provide either direct funding or in-kind support for the field inventories. The crew size was based on budget and logistics. The attention each park received was based on a combination of geology, weather conditions, personnel and other logistical parameters. Ground inspection revealed many inconsistencies or errors in the published geologic maps for each region. In one particular example, a region mapped as Early Jurassic in age has produced fossil evidence to suggest a Paleogene age for at least part of the region. This is particularly significant in this Park as there are no such rocks of Paleogene age previously identified throughout the western part of the park. Preliminary results from these surveys show great potential for future work. The scale of current mapping is insufficient to address both detailed paleontological questions and current resource management issues. More complete survey data will provide the needed baseline information for paleoecological questions within the Alaska Region, and throughout western North America for similarly aged rock sequences. ____________________ INTRODUCTION Partly as a function of funding, and partly as a function of s part of a mandated inventory and monitoring pro- scheduling, we have focused field activities in two park units, gram within the National Park Service (NPS), a large- Aniakchak and Katmai. Therefore, we will discuss the pre- Ascale study of paleontological resources has been liminary data recorded from these parks that highlight the initiated within the parks of the Alaska Region. A prelimi- scale of paleontological issues, with respect to research and nary survey of paleontological resources within NPS areas management needs, that face parks within this region. in Alaska was conducted in 1995 (Santucci, et al., 1995). These preliminary results show the potential wealth of The purpose of this report is to discuss the complexities of paleontological information still to be gathered in each of working within the Alaska Region, an enormous geographic these six parks. Further, as discussed elsewhere (Fiorillo et area that contains many park units encompassing tens of mil- al., 1996) these discoveries illustrate the point that important lions of acres of land. In addition to the paleontological management issues may include resources not traditionally research challenges, these parks provide numerous logisti- recognized within individual parks. cal challenges that include extensive roadless areas, wildlife interactions, and extreme weather conditions. Of these many park units, we initiated paleontological investigations in six WHY FOSSILS ARE IMPORTANT units, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve (ANIA), It has been suggested elsewhere (Fiorillo, 2000) that Denali National Park and Preserve (DENA), Katmai National perhaps no other subdiscipline of the earth sciences can make Park and Preserve (KATM), Kenai Fjords National Park and the singular claim of having the attention and enthusiasm of Preserve (KEFJ), Lake Clark National Park and Preserve the general public, as can paleontology. Public fascination (LACL), and Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve (YUCH). with fossils is historical, at least dating back to the earliest 231123 124 6TH FOSSIL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS VOLUME public displays of dinosaurs in the mid- and late 19th century. seum partnerships is particularly helpful to Alaska parks where That this fascination with paleontology continues today is visitation, compared to similar parks in the lower 48 states, is clear from the vast number of stories in the news regarding minimal. fossils. Similarly, college-level dinosaur courses are one of The basic field design used in this study incorporated the two most popular earth science courses offered accord- standard paleontological mapping and collecting methods. ing to one survey, the other course being an offering on the Extensive field notes and photographs were taken during the geology of the national parks (Lessem 1994). surveys and hand specimens were collected at key locations. Federal land and resource managers concerned with the Key sites were recorded using a hand-held GPS unit. Mov- valuable paleontological resources under their care ask who ing from one geographic area to another within a park re- should be allowed access to these resources? This question quired the use either of trucks, planes or boats, or a combina- stems, in part, from increased public use of federal lands. It tion of these three. Use of these vehicles was often coordi- also is derived from the increasing tendency by some non- nated with other activities by park staff. scientists to view fossils as commercial commodities, as evi- In some areas, such as within parts of Katmai National dent in the recent announcements of scientifically significant Park, survey activity was coordinated with the seasonal ac- fossils that have been sold at substantial prices (Reed and tivities of the brown bear population to reduce the probabil- Wright, 2000). ity of bear-human conflicts. Also, given the remoteness of Increased attention to fossils by federal land and resource other areas, and thereby the high cost of accessing these ar- managers is not only timely – it is imperative given the fol- eas, some aspects of work were intimately coordinated with lowing: the broad range of public interest in fossils, the pas- ongoing biological surveys (i.e. salmon runs). Once an area sionate advocacy of opposed special interest groups, the ap- was accessed, detailed surveys were performed on foot. peal that such controversy has among the media, and the eco- nomic and legal impacts of an expanded array of special uses ANIAKCHAK NATIONAL MONUMENT AND PRESERVE of fossil resources across the federal estate. Given the eco- nomic and legislative issues at stake, a greater awareness of Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve consists fossil resources on public lands is now mandatory. of approximately 600,000 acres, and is one of the least vis- ited parks within the National Park Service (Fig. 1). The park METHODS was established in 1978 to preserve the the immense volcanic A team of resource managers and researchers was as- features in the region. The most notable of these features is sembled to compile baseline paleontological resource data the 6-mile wide Aniakchak Caldera, a 2,000 foot deep circu- in the National Park Service units in the Alaska Region us- lar feature produced by the collapse of its subsurface magma ing the following criteria. First, resource managers needed chamber after an eruption about 3,400 years ago (Miller, 1990). to have a basic appreciation and understanding of paleonto- The recognized resources of the park include this volcanic logical issues. A team of such managers was identified and feature and elements of the modern flora and fauna. assembled. Second, NPS Alaska Region managers needed The area discussed here is along the Gulf of Alaska coast- to establish partnerships with paleontologists familiar with line in Aniakchak Bay, which currently has geologic map the local fossils and the associated management issues. coverage (Detterman et al., 1981; Wilson et al. 1999). How- Though these initial surveys are research driven, develop- ever, based on these previous published reports, differentia- ment of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Or Early Callovian) Ammonites from Alaska and Montana
    Jurassic (Bathonian or Early Callovian) Ammonites From Alaska and Montana By RALPH W. IMLAY SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 374-C Descr$tions and illustrations of ctphalopods of possible late Middle Jurasric (Bathonian) age UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1962 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C. CONTENTS Page Page C- 1 Age of the faunas-Continued C- 1 Callovian versus Bathonian in Greenland- - - - _ - - _ - - C-2 Callovian versus Bathonian in Alaska and Montana- -- - Stratigraphic summary- __ --______ _ - - - -- - ---.- -- -.- - - C-2 Paleogeographic considerations- - -_-- -- ---- ---- Cook Inlet region, Alaska -______--------.-.--..--c-2 Summation of the evidence- - - _._ _ - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - Iniskin Peninsula-_-_______----.--------~.--C-2 Comparisons with other faunas---------___----------- Peninsula north of Chinitna Bay----- __._ _ _._ - C-3 \Vestern interior of Canada- - - -- -- -____------- --- Talkeetna Mountains ----___-_ - - -- ---- - - -- - -- C-3 Arctic region-_-_---___-_----------------------- Western Montana- - -----__-----------------.---C-5 other regions--__-__-____----------------------- Rocky Mountain front north of the Sun River- (2-5 Geographic distribution ___-___ --- - ---------- ------ -- - Drummond area--- ---_____ _--- -- -.-- ---- -- - C-10 Summary of results- --_-____-_----_---_-_----------- Age ofthe faunas-----------_----------------------- GI0 Systematic descriptions--_ _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Evidence from Alaska---____________--------------C-10 Literature cited _-_-_---______----------------------- Evidence from Montana --_-_____ --- - - -- .--- --- - - C-12 Index---__--___-_-_------------------------------- ILLUSTRATIONS [Plates 1-3 follow index] PLATE 1. Holcophylloceras, Oecotraustes (Paroecotraustes) ?, and Arctocephalites (Cranocephalites). 2.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Paleobotanical Proxies for Early Eocene Climates and Ecosystems in Northern North 2 America from Mid to High Latitudes 3 4 Christopher K
    https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-2020-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 24 March 2020 c Author(s) 2020. CC BY 4.0 License. 1 Paleobotanical proxies for early Eocene climates and ecosystems in northern North 2 America from mid to high latitudes 3 4 Christopher K. West1, David R. Greenwood2, Tammo Reichgelt3, Alexander J. Lowe4, Janelle M. 5 Vachon2, and James F. Basinger1. 6 1 Dept. of Geological Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, 114 Science Place, Saskatoon, 7 Saskatchewan, S7N 5E2, Canada. 8 2 Dept. of Biology, Brandon University, 270-18th Street, Brandon, Manitoba R7A 6A9, Canada. 9 3 Department of Geosciences, University of Connecticut, Beach Hall, 354 Mansfield Rd #207, 10 Storrs, CT 06269, U.S.A. 11 4 Dept. of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-1800, U.S.A. 12 13 Correspondence to: C.K West ([email protected]) 14 15 Abstract. Early Eocene climates were globally warm, with ice-free conditions at both poles. Early 16 Eocene polar landmasses supported extensive forest ecosystems of a primarily temperate biota, 17 but also with abundant thermophilic elements such as crocodilians, and mesothermic taxodioid 18 conifers and angiosperms. The globally warm early Eocene was punctuated by geologically brief 19 hyperthermals such as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), culminating in the 20 Early Eocene Climatic Optimum (EECO), during which the range of thermophilic plants such as 21 palms extended into the Arctic. Climate models have struggled to reproduce early Eocene Arctic 22 warm winters and high precipitation, with models invoking a variety of mechanisms, from 23 atmospheric CO2 levels that are unsupported by proxy evidence, to the role of an enhanced 24 hydrological cycle to reproduce winters that experienced no direct solar energy input yet remained 25 wet and above freezing.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Mosses: What Do They Tell Us About Moss Evolution?
    Bry. Div. Evo. 043 (1): 072–097 ISSN 2381-9677 (print edition) DIVERSITY & https://www.mapress.com/j/bde BRYOPHYTEEVOLUTION Copyright © 2021 Magnolia Press Article ISSN 2381-9685 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/bde.43.1.7 Fossil mosses: What do they tell us about moss evolution? MicHAEL S. IGNATOV1,2 & ELENA V. MASLOVA3 1 Tsitsin Main Botanical Garden of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia 2 Faculty of Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia 3 Belgorod State University, Pobedy Square, 85, Belgorod, 308015 Russia �[email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1520-042X * author for correspondence: �[email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6096-6315 Abstract The moss fossil records from the Paleozoic age to the Eocene epoch are reviewed and their putative relationships to extant moss groups discussed. The incomplete preservation and lack of key characters that could define the position of an ancient moss in modern classification remain the problem. Carboniferous records are still impossible to refer to any of the modern moss taxa. Numerous Permian protosphagnalean mosses possess traits that are absent in any extant group and they are therefore treated here as an extinct lineage, whose descendants, if any remain, cannot be recognized among contemporary taxa. Non-protosphagnalean Permian mosses were also fairly diverse, representing morphotypes comparable with Dicranidae and acrocarpous Bryidae, although unequivocal representatives of these subclasses are known only since Cretaceous and Jurassic. Even though Sphagnales is one of two oldest lineages separated from the main trunk of moss phylogenetic tree, it appears in fossil state regularly only since Late Cretaceous, ca.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermochronology of the Talkeetna Intraoceanic Arc of Alaska: Ar/Ar, U‐Th/He, Sm‐Nd, and Lu‐Hf Dating
    TECTONICS, VOL. 30, TC1011, doi:10.1029/2010TC002798, 2011 Thermochronology of the Talkeetna intraoceanic arc of Alaska: Ar/Ar, U‐Th/He, Sm‐Nd, and Lu‐Hf dating B. R. Hacker,1 Peter B. Kelemen,2 Matthew Rioux,1,3 Michael O. McWilliams,4 Philip B. Gans,1 Peter W. Reiners,5 Paul W. Layer,6 Ulf Söderlund,7 and Jeffrey D. Vervoort8 Received 17 September 2010; revised 8 December 2010; accepted 27 December 2010; published 26 February 2011. [1] As one of two well‐exposed intraoceanic arcs, the of the Talkeetna arc was spatially variable. One‐ Talkeetna arc of Alaska affords an opportunity to under- dimensional finite difference thermal models show that stand processes deep within arcs. This study reports new this kind of spatial variability is inherent to intraoceanic Lu‐Hf and Sm‐Nd garnet ages, 40Ar/39Ar hornblende, arcs with simple construction histories. Citation: Hacker, mica and whole‐rock ages, and U‐Th/He zircon and B. R., P. B. Kelemen, M. Rioux, M. O. McWilliams, P. B. Gans, apatite ages from the Chugach Mountains, Talkeetna P. W. Reiners, P. W. Layer, U. Söderlund, and J. D. Vervoort Mountains, and Alaska Peninsula, which, in conjunc- (2011), Thermochronology of the Talkeetna intraoceanic arc of tion with existing geochronology, constrain the thermal Alaska: Ar/Ar, U‐Th/He, Sm‐Nd, and Lu‐Hf dating, Tectonics, history of the arc. Zircon U‐Pb ages establish the 30, TC1011, doi:10.1029/2010TC002798. main period of arc magmatism as 202–181 Ma in the Chugach Mountains and 183–153 Ma in the 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposal 78 – 5 Aac 01.320
    PROPOSAL 78 – 5 AAC 01.320. Lawful gear and gear specifications. Change the boundaries, methods of harvest, and seasons for subsistence harvests of sockeye salmon in the Naknek River drainage, as follows: 5 AAC 01.320 is amended to read: From August 30 through DECEMBER 31 by spear, dipnet, gillnet, AND BEACH SEINE. Along a 100 yard length of shoreline near the outlet of Naknek River as marked by ADF&G regulatory markers; at Johnny’s Lake on the Northwestern side of Naknek Lake; at the outlet of Idavians Creek on the North side of Naknek Lake; at the mouth of Brooks River from September 18 through December 31. What is the issue you would like the board to address and why? Allow for beach seining to release non-targeted finfish species. Idavians Creek is a traditional location used by local residents. (At the mouth of Brooks River by spear, dipnet, gillnet, and beach seine from September 18 through December 31.) Separate season for Brooks River. Extend season to Dec 31 for said descriptions and include beach seine as additional method to harvest spawned out sockeye. The proposed seasons and methods will be in line with traditionally practiced subsistence practices of local residents. The 2014 forecast for Bristol Bay sockeye for the Naknek River portion is estimated to be 3.35 million and escapement at 1.10 million into the Naknek River drainage. Forecast for harvest is estimated at 2.25 million. The Naknek River portion estimate does not account for the South Peninsula. Spawned out sockeye have traditionally been harvested for personal (subsistence) use by the Katmai descendants.
    [Show full text]
  • The Geology, Paleontology and Paleoecology of the Cerro Fortaleza Formation
    The Geology, Paleontology and Paleoecology of the Cerro Fortaleza Formation, Patagonia (Argentina) A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Drexel University by Victoria Margaret Egerton in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy November 2011 © Copyright 2011 Victoria M. Egerton. All Rights Reserved. ii Dedications To my mother and father iii Acknowledgments The knowledge, guidance and commitment of a great number of people have led to my success while at Drexel University. I would first like to thank Drexel University and the College of Arts and Sciences for providing world-class facilities while I pursued my PhD. I would also like to thank the Department of Biology for its support and dedication. I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Kenneth Lacovara, for his guidance and patience. Additionally, I would like to thank him for including me in his pursuit of knowledge of Argentine dinosaurs and their environments. I am also indebted to my committee members, Dr. Gail Hearn, Dr. Jake Russell, Dr. Mike O‘Connor, Dr. Matthew Lamanna, Dr. Christopher Williams and Professor Hermann Pfefferkorn for their valuable comments and time. The support of Argentine scientists has been essential for allowing me to pursue my research. I am thankful that I had the opportunity to work with such kind and knowledgeable people. I would like to thank Dr. Fernando Novas (Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales) for helping me obtain specimens that allowed this research to happen. I would also like to thank Dr. Viviana Barreda (Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales) for her allowing me use of her lab space while I was visiting Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales.
    [Show full text]
  • Field-Trip Guide to Volcanic and Volcaniclastic Deposits of the Lower Jurassic Talkeetna Formation, Sheep Mountain, South-Central Alaska
    Field-Trip Guide to Volcanic and Volcaniclastic Deposits of the Lower Jurassic Talkeetna Formation, Sheep Mountain, South-Central Alaska U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1124 Field-Trip Guide to Volcanic and Volcaniclastic Deposits of the Lower Jurassic Talkeetna Formation, Sheep Mountain, South-Central Alaska Amy E. Draut U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Science Center, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Peter D. Clift School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, AB24 3UE, U.K. Robert B. Blodgett U.S. Geological Survey–Contractor, Anchorage, AK 99508 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 2006-1124 2006 U.S. Department of the Interior P. Lynn Scarlett, Acting Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2006 Revised and reprinted: 2006 Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government To download a copy of this report from the World Wide Web: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1124/ 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 Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. Regional map of the field-trip area. FIGURE 2. Geologic cross section through Sheep Mountain. FIGURE 3. Stratigraphic sections on the south side of Sheep Mountain.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Fish and Wildlife Resources by Residents of the Bristol Bay Borough, Alaska
    THE USE OF FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES BY RESIDENTS OF THE BRISTOL BAY BOROUGH, ALASKA BY Judith M. Morris Technical Paper Number 123 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence December 1985 ABSTRACT This report describes contemporary harvest and use patterns of wild fish and game resources of Bristol Bay Borough residents. Located on the Alaska Peninsula, the three borough communities of King Salmon, Naknek, and South Naknek are situated on the banks of the Naknek River. In 1980 the population of the borough was 879, excluding 375 active duty military personnel stationed at the King Salmon Air Force Station. Approximately half of the borough residents were Alaska Natives, most whom consider themselves Aleut. The extent of particpation and level of resource harvest and other socioeconomic data were collected by Division of Subsistence personnel. Data collection was conducted from May 1982 through April 1984. Research methods included participant-observation, mapping, literature review, and two systematic households surveys. Particular attention was focused on the local subsistence salmon fishery. Elements of the fishery, such as targarted species, harvest sites, processing and preservation methods, the composition of work groups and distribution networks were documented. Survey data collected for 1983 showed that sampled borough residents reported a mean per capita harvest of 215 pounds. Caribou and salmon made up 84 percent of the total harvest. It was found that salmon were obtained through harvests with set gill net subsistence gear, sport fishing with rod and reel gear, and fish retained from commercial catches. Many harvesting activities occurred within the Naknek River drainage.
    [Show full text]
  • Retallack 2021 Coal Balls
    Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 564 (2021) 110185 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/palaeo Modern analogs reveal the origin of Carboniferous coal balls Gregory Retallack * Department of Earth Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403-1272, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Coal balls are calcareous peats with cellular permineralization invaluable for understanding the anatomy of Coal ball Pennsylvanian and Permian fossil plants. Two distinct kinds of coal balls are here recognized in both Holocene Histosol and Pennsylvanian calcareous Histosols. Respirogenic calcite coal balls have arrays of calcite δ18O and δ13C like Carbon isotopes those of desert soil calcic horizons reflecting isotopic composition of CO2 gas from an aerobic microbiome. Permineralization Methanogenic calcite coal balls in contrast have invariant δ18O for a range of δ13C, and formed with anaerobic microbiomes in soil solutions with bicarbonate formed by methane oxidation and sugar fermentation. Respiro­ genic coal balls are described from Holocene peats in Eight Mile Creek South Australia, and noted from Carboniferous coals near Penistone, Yorkshire. Methanogenic coal balls are described from Carboniferous coals at Berryville (Illinois) and Steubenville (Ohio), Paleocene lignites of Sutton (Alaska), Eocene lignites of Axel Heiberg Island (Nunavut), Pleistocene peats of Konya (Turkey), and Holocene peats of Gramigne di Bando (Italy). Soils and paleosols with coal balls are neither common nor extinct, but were formed by two distinct soil microbiomes. 1. Introduction and Royer, 2019). Although best known from Euramerican coal mea­ sures of Pennsylvanian age (Greb et al., 1999; Raymond et al., 2012, Coal balls were best defined by Seward (1895, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineralogy of Non-Silicified Fossil Wood
    Article Mineralogy of Non-Silicified Fossil Wood George E. Mustoe Geology Department, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA 98225, USA; [email protected]; Tel: +1-360-650-3582 Received: 21 December 2017; Accepted: 27 February 2018; Published: 3 March 2018 Abstract: The best-known and most-studied petrified wood specimens are those that are mineralized with polymorphs of silica: opal-A, opal-C, chalcedony, and quartz. Less familiar are fossil woods preserved with non-silica minerals. This report reviews discoveries of woods mineralized with calcium carbonate, calcium phosphate, various iron and copper minerals, manganese oxide, fluorite, barite, natrolite, and smectite clay. Regardless of composition, the processes of mineralization involve the same factors: availability of dissolved elements, pH, Eh, and burial temperature. Permeability of the wood and anatomical features also plays important roles in determining mineralization. When precipitation occurs in several episodes, fossil wood may have complex mineralogy. Keywords: fossil wood; mineralogy; paleobotany; permineralization 1. Introduction Non-silica minerals that cause wood petrifaction include calcite, apatite, iron pyrites, siderite, hematite, manganese oxide, various copper minerals, fluorite, barite, natrolite, and the chromium- rich smectite clay mineral, volkonskoite. This report provides a broad overview of woods fossilized with these minerals, describing specimens from world-wide locations comprising a diverse variety of mineral assemblages. Data from previously-undescribed fossil woods are also presented. The result is a paper that has a somewhat unconventional format, being a combination of literature review and original research. In an attempt for clarity, the information is organized based on mineral composition, rather than in the format of a hypothesis-driven research report.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Prince William Sound and Kenai Peninsula Region, Alaska
    Geology of the Prince William Sound and Kenai Peninsula Region, Alaska Including the Kenai, Seldovia, Seward, Blying Sound, Cordova, and Middleton Island 1:250,000-scale quadrangles By Frederic H. Wilson and Chad P. Hults Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3110 View looking east down Harriman Fiord at Serpentine Glacier and Mount Gilbert. (photograph by M.L. Miller) 2012 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................1 Geographic, Physiographic, and Geologic Framework ..........................................................................1 Description of Map Units .............................................................................................................................3 Unconsolidated deposits ....................................................................................................................3 Surficial deposits ........................................................................................................................3 Rock Units West of the Border Ranges Fault System ....................................................................5 Bedded rocks ...............................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Exploration Permit Application for Mental Health Land Coal Lease Mht 9200375 Chickaloon Coal Project
    COAL EXPLORATION PERMIT APPLICATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH LAND COAL LEASE MHT 9200375 CHICKALOON COAL PROJECT Prepared For: Riversdale Alaska LLC A subsidiary of RIVERSDALE RESOURCES PTY LTD Level 2, Chifley Tower 2 Chifley Square Sydney NSW 2000 +61 2 9324 4499 US Cell 907 3016031 [email protected] Prepared By: Michael A. Belowich Alaska Earth Sciences, Inc. 1075 Check Street, Suite 210 Wasilla, Alaska 99654 March 23, 2012 Revised on May 04, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Contents i List of Figures , Tables, and Plates ii PART A – GENERAL INFORMATION 1.0 Applicant Information iv 2.0 Location of the Exploration v 3.0 Period of Exploration vi 4.0 Ownership of Surface/Subsurface Mineral Estate vi 5.0 Chickaloon Land Owners vii PART B – EXPLORATION AREA DESCRIPTION 1.0 Location, Access and Physiography 1 2.0 Geology-General 4 3.0 Previous Mine History and Exploration Drilling 8 3.1 Chickaloon, Kings River, and Coal Creek Mines 8 3.2 Castle Mountain Mine 11 4.0 Coal Resources and Quality 13 5.0 Land Use 15 6.0 Climate 18 7.0 Hydrology – General 20 7.1 Surface Water 20 7.2 Ground Water 22 8.0 Soils 26 9.0 Vegetation 29 10.0 Birds and Other Terrestrial Wildlife 31 10.1 Birds 31 10.2 Terrestrial Wildlife 33 11.0 Aquatic Wildlife 34 12.0 Cultural and Historical Resources 36 PART C – EXPLORATION AND RECLAMATION PLAN 1.0 Introduction 39 2.0 2012 Surface Drilling Program 40 3.0 Trenching and Test Pits 47 4.0 Geophysical Exploration Methods 49 5.0 Equipment Types/Uses 50 6.0 Environmental Baseline Data Gathering 52 7.0 Borehole Plugging and Reclamation 54 8.0 Revegetation Procedures 57 9.0 Hydrologic Balance Control Measures 58 10.0 Transportation and Facilities 60 11.0 Reclamation Bond 62 i 12.0 Time Table 66 13.0 References 67 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1.
    [Show full text]