DOCSLIB.ORG

Sell-0243 , Western AZ Project, AGS- Applied Geologic Studies, Inc. 1985

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CONTACT INFORMATION Mining Records Curator Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress St., Suite 100 Tucson, Arizona 85701 520-770-3500 http://www.azgs.az.gov [email protected] The following file is part of the James Doyle Sell Mining Collection ACCESS STATEMENT These digitized collections are accessible for purposes of education and research. We have indicated what we know about copyright and rights of privacy, publicity, or trademark. Due to the nature of archival collections, we are not always able to identify this information. We are eager to hear from any rights owners, so that we may obtain accurate information. Upon request, we will remove material from public view while we address a rights issue. CONSTRAINTS STATEMENT The Arizona Geological Survey does not claim to control all rights for all materials in its collection. These rights include, but are not limited to: copyright, privacy rights, and cultural protection rights. The User hereby assumes all responsibility for obtaining any rights to use the material in excess of “fair use.” The Survey makes no intellectual property claims to the products created by individual authors in the manuscript collections, except when the author deeded those rights to the Survey or when those authors were employed by the State of Arizona and created intellectual products as a function of their official duties. The Survey does maintain property rights to the physical and digital representations of the works. QUALITY STATEMENT The Arizona Geological Survey is not responsible for the accuracy of the records, information, or opinions that may be contained in the files. The Survey collects, catalogs, and archives data on mineral properties regardless of its views of the veracity or accuracy of those data. I WESTERN ARIZONA PROJECT I A regional geologic-metallogenic-target delineation I study for precious metals in the Ajo, Phoenix and parts of Lukeville, Salton Sea, El Centro, Prescott, I Needles, Kingman and Williams 1° X 2° Sheets I I Prepared by Z~ I William A. Rehrigi~and Robert T. Wilson | : & APPLIED GEOLOGIC STUDIES INC. I with Section on Tectono-S~ratigraphic Units I by I James J. Hardy, Jr. I February, 1985 I I I I L WESTERN ARIZONA PROJECT A regional geologic-metallogenic-target delineation study for precious metals in the Ajo, Phoenix and parts of Lukeville,.Salton Sea, El Centro, Prescott, Needles, Kingman and Williams I ° X 2° Sheets Prepared by William A. Rehrig and RobertT. Wilson APPLIED GEOLOGIC STUDIES INC. with Section on Tectono-Stratigraphic Units by James J. Hardy, Jr. February, 1985 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................... 1 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 5 LITHOTECTONIC UNITS.......................................................... 6 TECTONIC OVERVIEW ............................................................ 31 METALLIZATION ................................................................ 50 Overview and Regional Distribution ........................................ 51 District Focus ............................................................ 60 Alamo District ....................................................... 62 Alamo Springs District ............................................... 64 Big Horn District .................................................... 67 Black Canyon District ................................................ 71 Black Rock District .................................................. 74 Black Rock Hills District ............................................ 79 Bouse District ....................................................... 80 Bullard Peak District ................................................ 81 Castle Creek District ................................................ 85 Castle Dome District ................................................. 88 Cienega District ..................................................... 92 Cimarron Hills District .............................................. 96 Cottonwood District ....................... ... ........................ 99 Crosby District ...................................................... 101 Cunningham Pass District ............................................. 103 Diamond Joe District ................................................. 105 Dome Rock District ................................................... 107 Eagle Tail District .................................................. 111 El Dorado Pass-Gold Bug District ..................................... 114 Ellsworth District ................................................... 116 Eureka (Bagdad) District ............................................. 120 Eureka District ...................................................... 126 Fortuna District ..................................................... 128 French Gulch District ................................................ 130 Gila Bend Mountains District ......................................... 132 Gila City District ................................................... 134 Gold Basin District .................................................. 136 Greenwood District ................................................... 143 Gunsight District .................................................... 145 Hackberry District ................................................... 148 Harquahala District .................................................. 149 Humbug District ....................................................... 155 Kofa District ......................................................... 157 Laguna District .......................................................... La Posa District ........................................................ I62 I Little Harquahala District .......... "..................................... 164 Lost Basin District .................................................. 168 1 Martinez District ~4, O ~Om ~l~e Iwm~e 8e~ n e ee. OB~ ml .6~ e~ ~a4 o4 ~O~O~ ~oIo~4 8~I 171 • Maynard District ............ •......................................... 174 1 McConnico District .................................................... 177 McCracken District ..................................................... 179 1 Midway-Corona Districts ......................... ....................... 180 1 FIinnehaha-Silver Mountain District ................................... 182 Minnesota District ................................................... 184 1 Mojave Mountains District .................................... , ....... 186 1 ?4Don MouNtains District ............................................... 191 Muggi ns Di strict ...................................................... 193 1 Music Mountains District-. .............................................. 195 [] New Water and Bear Hills Area ........................................... 197 1 Northern Plomosa District .............................................. 199 Northern Trigo District il lilt 1tlll41a~lilitll !11 IIJlitlell III tli I110 ! 204 1 0atman District ........................................................ 206 1 Osborne District ...................................................... 211 Pikes Peak District ...................................................... 215 1 Pil grim Di strict 220 1 Pine Grove-Tiger District ............................................. 224 Pine Peak District .... ... ...... ...,..,....... ,....,.........,..... .. .... 230 ll .~0rtland District 231 1 Quijotoa Di strict " 233 1 Rawhide District ....................................................... 238 Relief District 242 1 Salt River Mountains District ........................................ 244 [] Santa Maria District ................................................. 247 Sheep Tanks District .................................................. 253 1 Sil ver District ....................................................... 256 1 Sout~ern Plomosa District .............................................. 26! Tank Mountai ns .......................................................... 264 1 Tip Top District ............... , ..................................... 266 • Union Pass District ................................................... 268 1 Ve~o~ District ........................................................ 274 Virginia-Mocking Bird District ........................................ 278. 1 V~Iture District ....................................................... 281 [] Wallapai District ..................................................... 289 Weaver District ........................................................... 296 1 Webb Di strict ........................................................ 301 1 White Hills District ................................................... 303 White Picacho District ............................................... 308 l Winifred District ........................................................ 315 1 Types of Precious Metals Related Deposits .................................... 317 I. DetachmeRt Fault Type .............................................. 318 1 2. Lower Plate Microdiorite Dike Type................................. 329 [] 3. Thrust Fault Type ................................................. 334 I Page I 4. Mesozoic Stratiform Type........................................... 339 5. Hotspring Deposits of Volcanic Related Origin ..................... 344 6. Vincent-Chocolate Mountains Allochthon Model ...................... 349 i 7. Precambrian Lode Gold Mineralization .............................
Recommended publications
  • CENTRAL ARIZONA SALINITY STUDY --- PHASE I Technical Appendix C HYDROLOGIC REPORT on the PHOENIX

    CENTRAL ARIZONA SALINITY STUDY --- PHASE I Technical Appendix C HYDROLOGIC REPORT on the PHOENIX

    CENTRAL ARIZONA SALINITY STUDY --- PHASE I Technical Appendix C HYDROLOGIC REPORT ON THE PHOENIX AMA Prepared for: United States Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation Prepared by: Brown and Caldwell 201 East Washington Street, Suite 500 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Brown and Caldwell Project No. 23481.001 C-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 2 LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 4 2.0 PHYSICAL SETTING ....................................................................................................... 5 3.0 GENERALIZED GEOLOGY ............................................................................................ 6 3.1 BEDROCK GEOLOGY ......................................................................................... 6 3.2 BASIN GEOLOGY ................................................................................................ 6 4.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................ 9 4.1 GROUNDWATER OCCURRENCE ....................................................................
  • Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona

    Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona

    2.SOB nH in ntoiOGIGM. JAN 3 1 1989 Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1701-C Chapter C Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona By ED DE WITT, S.M. RICHARD, J.R. HASSEMER, and W.F. HANNA U.S. Geological Survey J.R. THOMPSON U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1701 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS- WEST-CENTRAL ARIZONA AND PART OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publlcatlon Data Mineral resources of the Harquahala Mountains wilderness study area, La Paz and Maricopa counties, Arizona. (Mineral resources of wilderness study areas west-central Arizona and part of San Bernardino County, California ; ch. C) (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1701-C) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.3:1701-C 1. Mines and mineral resources Arizona Harquahala Mountains Wilderness. 2. Harquahala Mountains (Ariz.) I. DeWitt, Ed. II. Series. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1701. QE75.B9 no. 1701-C 557.3 s [553'.09791'72] 88-600012 [TN24.A6] STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S.
  • Chapter 2 Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon

    Chapter 2 Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon

    CHAPTER 2 PALEOZOIC STRATIGRAPHY OF THE GRAND CANYON PAIGE KERCHER INTRODUCTION The Paleozoic Era of the Phanerozoic Eon is defined as the time between 542 and 251 million years before the present (ICS 2010). The Paleozoic Era began with the evolution of most major animal phyla present today, sparked by the novel adaptation of skeletal hard parts. Organisms continued to diversify throughout the Paleozoic into increasingly adaptive and complex life forms, including the first vertebrates, terrestrial plants and animals, forests and seed plants, reptiles, and flying insects. Vast coal swamps covered much of mid- to low-latitude continental environments in the late Paleozoic as the supercontinent Pangaea began to amalgamate. The hardiest taxa survived the multiple global glaciations and mass extinctions that have come to define major time boundaries of this era. Paleozoic North America existed primarily at mid to low latitudes and experienced multiple major orogenies and continental collisions. For much of the Paleozoic, North America’s southwestern margin ran through Nevada and Arizona – California did not yet exist (Appendix B). The flat-lying Paleozoic rocks of the Grand Canyon, though incomplete, form a record of a continental margin repeatedly inundated and vacated by shallow seas (Appendix A). IMPORTANT STRATIGRAPHIC PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS • Principle of Original Horizontality – In most cases, depositional processes produce flat-lying sedimentary layers. Notable exceptions include blanketing ash sheets, and cross-stratification developed on sloped surfaces. • Principle of Superposition – In an undisturbed sequence, older strata lie below younger strata; a package of sedimentary layers youngs upward. • Principle of Lateral Continuity – A layer of sediment extends laterally in all directions until it naturally pinches out or abuts the walls of its confining basin.
  • The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012

    The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012

    The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012 (Photographs: Arizona Game and Fish Department) Arizona Game and Fish Department In partnership with the Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ i RECOMMENDED CITATION ........................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ iii DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................ iv BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 1 THE MARICOPA COUNTY WILDLIFE CONNECTIVITY ASSESSMENT ................................... 8 HOW TO USE THIS REPORT AND ASSOCIATED GIS DATA ................................................... 10 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 12 MASTER LIST OF WILDLIFE LINKAGES AND HABITAT BLOCKSAND BARRIERS ................ 16 REFERENCE MAPS .......................................................................................................................
  • Characterization and Hydraulic Behaviour of the Complex Karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA

    Characterization and Hydraulic Behaviour of the Complex Karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA

    Characterization and hydraulic behaviour of the complex karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA CASEY J. R. JONES1, ABRAHAM E. SPRINGER1*, BENJAMIN W. TOBIN2, SARAH J. ZAPPITELLO2 & NATALIE A. JONES2 1School of Earth Sciences and Environmental Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, NAU Box 4099, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA 2Grand Canyon National Park, National Park Service, 1824 South Thompson Street, Flagstaff, AZ, 86001, USA *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park in the USA contain both shallow and deep karst systems, which interact in ways that are not well known, although recent studies have allowed better interpretations of this unique system. Detailed characterization of sinkholes and their distribution on the surface using geographical information system and LiDAR data can be used to relate the infiltration points to the overall hydrogeological system. Flow paths through the deep regional geological structure were delineated using non-toxic fluorescent dyes. The flow character- istics of the coupled aquifer system were evaluated using hydrograph recession curve analysis via discharge data from Roaring Springs, the sole source of the water supply for the Grand Canyon National Park. The interactions between these coupled surface and deep karst systems are complex and challenging to understand. Although the surface karst behaves in much the same way as karst in other similar regions, the deep karst has a base flow recession coefficient an order of magnitude lower than many other karst aquifers throughout the world. Dye trace analysis reveals rapid, con- duit-dominated flow that demonstrates fracture connectivity along faults between the surface and deep karst.
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for the USA (W7A

    Summits on the Air – ARM for the USA (W7A

    Summits on the Air – ARM for the U.S.A (W7A - Arizona) Summits on the Air U.S.A. (W7A - Arizona) Association Reference Manual Document Reference S53.1 Issue number 5.0 Date of issue 31-October 2020 Participation start date 01-Aug 2010 Authorized Date: 31-October 2020 Association Manager Pete Scola, WA7JTM Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged. Document S53.1 Page 1 of 15 Summits on the Air – ARM for the U.S.A (W7A - Arizona) TABLE OF CONTENTS CHANGE CONTROL....................................................................................................................................... 3 DISCLAIMER................................................................................................................................................. 4 1 ASSOCIATION REFERENCE DATA ........................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Program Derivation ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 General Information ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Final Ascent
  • Geochronology, Geology, and Listric Normal Faulting of the Vulture Mountains, Maricopa County, Arizona

    Geochronology, Geology, and Listric Normal Faulting of the Vulture Mountains, Maricopa County, Arizona

    Arizona Geological Society Digest, Volume XII, 1980 89 Geochronology, Geology, and Listric Normal Faulting of the Vulture Mountains, Maricopa County, Arizona by WA. Rehrigi, M. Shafiqullah2, and P.E. Damon2 Abstract Geologic mapping and geochronologic studies in the Vulture Mountains near Wickenburg, Arizona, have led to the recognition of a large, northeast-trending batholith of 68.4-m.y. age that intrudes complex gneissic and granitic rocks of probably Precambrian age. Over- lying the denuded crystalline terrane is a sequence of late Oligocene to Miocene ( .'26 to 16 m.y.) volcanic rocks (vitrophyres, ash-flow tuffs, welded tuffs, breccias, agglomerates, and lava flows) that vary locally. Nearby source areas are suggested. A swarm of north- to north-northwest-trending porphyritic dikes intrudes the volcanics and crystalline basement. Overlying this volcanic sequence in angular unconformity is a thin section of basal conglom- erate and basalt lava flows dated at 13.5 m.y. B.P. The older, tuffaceous sequence is generally calc-alkalic but with a high proportion of rhyolites that are exceptionally rich in potassium and silica. These silicic units are peral- kaline or nearly so, and those with K20/Na2O >3 are ultrapotassic. Initial strontium ratios average 0.7081, whereas an initial ratio for the younger basalt sequence is significantly lower at 0.7054. The silicic volcanics have been severely tilted on multiple, low-angle listric normal faults. The youngest basalt flows are relatively flat lying and postdate this deformation. By geo- logic and radiometric criteria, the transition from tilted silicic volcanics to untilted basalts occurred between about 16 and 14 m.y.
  • Detailed Geologic Map and Cross Sections of the Big Horn And

    Detailed Geologic Map and Cross Sections of the Big Horn And

    GEOLOGIC MAP AND CROSS SECTIONS OF THE BIG HORN AND BELMONT MOUNTAINS, WEST-CENTRAL ARIZONA James A. Stin1ac, Stephen M. Richard, Stephen J. Reynolds, Richard C. Capps, Curtis P. Kortel11eier, Michael J. Grubensky, George B. Allen, Floyd Gray, and Robert J. Miller Open-File Report 94-15 ARIZONA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TUCSON, ARIZONA NOVEIVIBER, 1994 This report is preliminary and lias not been edited or reviewed for conformity with Arizona Geological Survey standards INTRODUCTION The principal geologic feature of the Big Hom and Belmont Mountains is a complexly faulted and tilted series of mostly Miocene volcanic rock that record a period of Middle Tertiary magmatism and extension. These volcanic rocks vary widely in composition, but basaltic and rhyolitic rocks are most abundant (Figure 1). Intrusive equivalents of these volcanics exposed in the Belmont Mountains are dominantly granitic. Despite the large volume of rhyolite erupted, small, coalescing flow and dome complexes were formed in preference to large- MIocene and Oligocene sandstone and conglomerate Hot Rock basalt Burnt Mountain volcanics Big Horn volcanics Intrusive rocks pre-Tertiary rocks I~ ,:- ; ~ _I Big Horn granodiorite (Cretaceous) ~ Igneous and metamorpchic rocks ~ (Proterozoic through Mesozoic) Figure 1. Generalized lithologic map of the Big Hom and Belmont Mountains volume ash-flow tuffs, and no collapse calderas were formed. These rocks lie in the upper plate ofthe regional Whipple-Buckskin-Bullard detachment fault [Rehrig and Reynolds, 1980], at its southeastern tip [Richard et aI, 1990a]. A regional boundary between major tilts domains in Tertiary strata follows an irregular course from northwest to southeast through the range [Rehrig et aI., 1980].
  • Distribution and Trans-Highway Movements of Desert Bighorn Sheep in Northwestern Arizona

    Distribution and Trans-Highway Movements of Desert Bighorn Sheep in Northwestern Arizona

    US93 Bighorn Sheep Study: Distribution and Trans-Highway Movements of Desert Bighorn Sheep in Northwestern Arizona Final Report 576 Prepared by: Ted McKinney and Thorry Smith Arizona Game and Fish Department Research Branch 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, AZ 85023 January 2007 Prepared for: Arizona Department of Transportation 206 South 17th Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85007 In cooperation with U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration The Arizona Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration provided funding for this research. The research team thanks AGFD personnel J. Ng for field assistance in monitoring track beds and conducting ground surveys, and K. Bristow and M. Crabb for assistance in collecting radiocollars following drop-off. The research team also thanks J. Barnes, D. Fletcher, and C. Velez (National Park Service) for field assistance. N. Dodd, J. Gagnon, and S. Boe (AGFD) provided analytical assistance. Helicopter pilots M. Brinkworth and N. Lopez (Papillon Helicopters) and S. Sprague (AGFD) assisted with captures. AGFD pilots E. Cash, B. Coffman, B. David, S. Sunde, and D. Hunt assisted with aerial telemetry. D. Conrad and L. Phoenix (AGFD) were net- gunners during captures, and J. Wills and K. Morgan (AGFD) assisted with captures and recovery of bighorn mortalities. G. Erickson (AGFD) and C. Largent (National Park Service) also provided valuable information during the study. C. O’Brien and R. Schweinsburg (AGFD) provided valuable editorial review of this report. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Arizona Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration.
  • New K-Ar Dates for Late Miocene to Early Pliocene Mafic Volcanic Rocks in the Lake Mead Area, Nevada and Arizona D.L

    New K-Ar Dates for Late Miocene to Early Pliocene Mafic Volcanic Rocks in the Lake Mead Area, Nevada and Arizona D.L

    New K-Ar dates for late Miocene to early Pliocene mafic volcanic rocks in the Lake Mead area, Nevada and Arizona D.L. Feuerbach, E.I. Smith, M. Shafiqullah, and P.E. Damon Isochron/West, Bulletin of Isotopic Geochronology, v. 57, pp. 17-20 Downloaded from: https://geoinfo.nmt.edu/publications/periodicals/isochronwest/home.cfml?Issue=57 Isochron/West was published at irregular intervals from 1971 to 1996. The journal was patterned after the journal Radiocarbon and covered isotopic age-dating (except carbon-14) on rocks and minerals from the Western Hemisphere. Initially, the geographic scope of papers was restricted to the western half of the United States, but was later expanded. The journal was sponsored and staffed by the New Mexico Bureau of Mines (now Geology) & Mineral Resources and the Nevada Bureau of Mines & Geology. All back-issue papers are available for free: https://geoinfo.nmt.edu/publications/periodicals/isochronwest This page is intentionally left blank to maintain order of facing pages. 17 NEW K-Ar DATES FOR LATE MIOCENE TO EARLY PLIOCENE MAFIC VOLCANIC ROCKS IN THE LAKE MEAD AREA, NEVADA AND ARIZONA DANIEL L. FEUERBACH1 Center for Volcanic and Tectonic Studies, EUGENE I. SMITH J Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154 MUHAMMAD SHAFIQULLAHj Laboratory of isotope Geochemistry, PAUL E. DAMON J Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 We report the results of 1 3 new K-Ar radiometric ages Mesa and in West End Wash between 10.46 to 8.49 Ma. for basaltic andesites from the Callville Mesa volcanic field These dates are slightly younger than the whole rock K-Ar on the north shore of Lake Mead, Nevada, and basalts from dates of 11.3 ± 0.3 Ma and 11.1 ± 0.5 reported by the Fortification Hill volcanic field, Arizona and Nevada Anderson and others (1972) for basaltic andesite of (fig.
  • Utah Geological Association Publication 30.Pub

    Utah Geological Association Publication 30.Pub

    Utah Geological Association Publication 30 - Pacific Section American Association of Petroleum Geologists Publication GB78 239 CENOZOIC EVOLUTION OF THE NORTHERN COLORADO RIVER EXTEN- SIONAL CORRIDOR, SOUTHERN NEVADA AND NORTHWEST ARIZONA JAMES E. FAULDS1, DANIEL L. FEUERBACH2*, CALVIN F. MILLER3, 4 AND EUGENE I. SMITH 1Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Mail Stop 178, Reno, NV 89557 2Department of Geology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 *Now at Exxon Mobil Development Company, 16825 Northchase Drive, Houston, TX 77060 3Department of Geology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235 4Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154 ABSTRACT The northern Colorado River extensional corridor is a 70- to 100-km-wide region of moderately to highly extended crust along the eastern margin of the Basin and Range province in southern Nevada and northwestern Arizona. It has occupied a criti- cal structural position in the western Cordillera since Mesozoic time. In the Cretaceous through early Tertiary, it stood just east and north of major fold and thrust belts and also marked the northern end of a broad, gently (~15o) north-plunging uplift (Kingman arch) that extended southeastward through much of central Arizona. Mesozoic and Paleozoic strata were stripped from the arch by northeast-flowing streams. Peraluminous 65 to 73 Ma granites were emplaced at depths of at least 10 km and exposed in the core of the arch by earliest Miocene time. Calc-alkaline magmatism swept northward through the northern Colorado River extensional corridor during early to middle Miocene time, beginning at ~22 Ma in the south and ~12 Ma in the north.
  • Riparian Ecosystems and Their Management: Reconciling

    Riparian Ecosystems and Their Management: Reconciling

    This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. Xeroriparian Systems Used by Desert Mule Deer in Texas And Arizona1 Paul R. Krausman2 , Kurt R. Rautenstrauch3 and Bruce D. Leopold4 Abstract.--We examined desert mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus crooki) occurrance in xeroriparian systems in Arizona and Texas. Most deer in Arizona were located in washes. Most deer in Texas were located between washes. Xeroriparian areas are important habitat components for desert mule deer when they provide forage, thermal cover and travel lanes. INTRODUCTION STUDY AREAS Desert mule deer inhabit the Sonoran and Desert mule deer use of xeroriparian systems Chihuahuan Deserts of North America. Their range was evaluated on the northeastern edge of their extends from southwest Texas to western Arizona range in Big Bend National Park (BBNP), southwest and south into central Mexico (Wallmo 1981). Texas; in the westcentral part of their range in the Belmont Mountains, central Arizona; and on the Desert mule deer are a popular and important northwestern edge of their range in King Valley, game animal, but have received limited attention southwest Arizona. by the scientific community. Clark (1953) examined desert mule deer behavior and movement BBNP, Brewster Co., is representative of the patterns, Truett (1972) studied their general rugged Chihuahuan Desert and is included in the ecology, Krausman (1978) and Leopold (1984) Chisos biotic district (Dice 1943). Elevations evaluated their forage preferences, and Krausman extend from 573 m along the Rio Grande to 2384 m (1984) and Rautenstrauch and Krausman (unpublished at Mt.