DOCSLIB.ORG

Gypsum Resources of New Mexico

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gypsum Resources of New Mexico BULLETIN 68 Gypsum Resources of New Mexico by ROBERT H. WEBER and FRANK E. KOTTLOWSKI 1959 STATE BUREAU OF MINES AND MINERAL RESOURCES NEW MEXICO INSTITUTE OF MINING & TECHNOLOGY CAMPUS STATION SOCORRO, NEW MEXICO NEW MEXICO INSTITUTE OF MINING & TECHNOLOGY E. J. Workman, President STATE BUREAU OF MINES AND MINERAL RESOURCES Alvin J. Thompson, Director THE REGENTS MEMBERS Ex OFFICIO The Honorable John Burroughs .......................... Governor of New Mexico Tom Wiley ......................................... Superintendent of Public Instruction APPOINTED MEMBERS Holm 0. Bursum, Jr. ....................................................................... Socorro Thomas M. Cramer ........................................................................ Carlsbad Frank C. DiLuzio .................................................................... Albuquerque John N. Mathews, Jr. ...................................................................... Socorro Richard A. Matuszeski ........................................................... Albuquerque For sale by the New Mexico Bureau of Mines & Mineral Resources Campus Station, Socorro, N. Mex.—Price $1.00 Contents Page INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 Purpose and nature of report ....................................................................... 1 Procedure ........................................................................................................ 1 Previous investigations ................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgments ......................................................................................... 4 PROPERTIES AND ORIGIN OF GYPSUM ........................................... 5 GYPSUM DEPOSITS IN NEW MEXICO ............................................... 7 Stratigraphic occurrence ............................................................................... 7 Pennsylvanian Panther Seep formation ................................................. 7 Permian Abo—Hueco formations ......................................................... 7 Permian Epitaph dolomite ....................................................................... 8 Permian Yeso formation .......................................................................... 9 Permian San Andres formation ............................................................. 10 Permian Whitehorse group .................................................................... 11 Permian Ochoan series ........................................................................... 11 Jurassic Todilto formation ..................................................................... 12 Cretaceous gypsum beds ........................................................................ 13 Tertiary gypsum beds .............................................................................. 13 Quaternary gypsum beds and dunes .................................................... 13 Areal distribution ......................................................................................... 14 Northeastern New Mexico .................................................................... 14 North-central New Mexico .................................................................... 14 San Ysidro—Cuba region ................................................................... 14 Gallina—Rio Chama region ............................................................... 19 Galisteo Creek—Arroyo Tongue region .......................................... 19 Tijeras Basin .......................................................................................... 24 Lamy—Glorieta Mesa region ............................................................. 25 Northwestern New Mexico ................................................................... 25 Mesita—Suwanee region ..................................................................... 25 Mesa Lucero—Rio Salado region ...................................................... 29 Page Central New Mexico ............................................................................... 30 Vaughn—Santa Rosa region ............................................................. 30 Ancho area ........................................................................................... 32 Mesa del Yeso area ............................................................................. 33 Northern Chupadera Mesa—Mesa Jumanes region ..................... 34 Estancia, Encino, and Piños Wells Basins ...................................... 35 West-central New Mexico ..................................................................... 38 South-central New Mexico .................................................................... 38 White Sands ......................................................................................... 38 Caballo Mountains .............................................................................. 41 Nogal Canyon ..................................................................................... 41 Sierra Cuchillo ..................................................................................... 42 San Andres Mountains ....................................................................... 42 Southern Chupadera Mesa ................................................................ 43 Phillips Hills ......................................................................................... 43 Sacramento Mountains ...................................................................... 44 Otero Mesa .......................................................................................... 45 Rio Hondo and Rio Ruidoso valleys ............................................... 46 Southern Robledo Mountains .......................................................... 46 Northern Franklin Mountains .......................................................... 47 Southwesternmost New Mexico ........................................................... 49 Southeastern New Mexico ..................................................................... 50 Pecos Valley ......................................................................................... 51 Yeso Hills ............................................................................................. 52 CHEMICAL ANALYSES ............................................................................. 53 USES AND INDUSTRIAL PREPARATION ........................................... 54 Uncalcined gypsum ..................................................................................... 54 Calcined gypsum .......................................................................................... 56 Chemical uses ............................................................................................... 57 REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 58 INDEX .............................................................................................................. 63 iv Illustrations TABLES Page 1. Chemical analyses ................................................................. Following 52 2. Gypsum products in the United States, 1955 ..................................... 55 FIGURES 1. Surface distribution of Todilto formation, San Ysidro area . 17 2. Surface distribution of Jurassic rocks, Galisteo—Tonque region 20 3. Sketch map of Todilto formation adjoining Arroyo Tongue . 23 4. Surface distribution of Todilto formation, Suwanee area ................. 28 5. Apache Canyon area, Robledo Mountains .......................................... 48 PLATES 1. Index map of gypsum deposits in New Mexico .................... In pocket 2. A. Northern face of White Mesa ........................................ Following 18 B. Eroded surface of massive gypsum in Todilto forma- tion, White Mesa ................................................................................. 18 3. A. Mesita deposit ..................................................................................... 18 B. Gypsum from San Andres formation, Vaughn quarry .................................................................................................... 18 4. A. Crystalline gypsite, Mesa del Yeso ................................................... 18 B. Stabilized gypsum dune sands, Piños Wells Basin . ...................... 18 5. A. Gypsum sand dunes, White Sands National Monu- ment ...................................................................................................... 18 B. Laminated gypsum from Castile formation, Yeso Hills ....................................................................................................... 18 6. Map of White Sands ................................................................... In pocket Introduction PURPOSE AND NATURE OF REPORT This bulletin is designed to satisfy the growing demand for informa- tion concerning gypsum deposits in New Mexico and the possible utilization of known deposits of this mineral. An earlier study by Darton (1920), listing and summarily describing most of the large deposits in the State, is now out of print. Moreover, some smaller deposits of pos- sible local value, not listed by Darton, have been located recently. The utilization of gypsum depends on many factors, which must be con- sidered for each deposit and each locality individually. This report is chiefly a reconnaissance survey of gypsum deposits
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Interpretation of the Structural Geology of the Franklin Mountains, Texas Earl M
    New Mexico Geological Society Downloaded from: http://nmgs.nmt.edu/publications/guidebooks/26 An interpretation of the structural geology of the Franklin Mountains, Texas Earl M. P. Lovejoy, 1975, pp. 261-268 in: Las Cruces Country, Seager, W. R.; Clemons, R. E.; Callender, J. F.; [eds.], New Mexico Geological Society 26th Annual Fall Field Conference Guidebook, 376 p. This is one of many related papers that were included in the 1975 NMGS Fall Field Conference Guidebook. Annual NMGS Fall Field Conference Guidebooks Every fall since 1950, the New Mexico Geological Society (NMGS) has held an annual Fall Field Conference that explores some region of New Mexico (or surrounding states). Always well attended, these conferences provide a guidebook to participants. Besides detailed road logs, the guidebooks contain many well written, edited, and peer-reviewed geoscience papers. These books have set the national standard for geologic guidebooks and are an essential geologic reference for anyone working in or around New Mexico. Free Downloads NMGS has decided to make peer-reviewed papers from our Fall Field Conference guidebooks available for free download. Non-members will have access to guidebook papers two years after publication. Members have access to all papers. This is in keeping with our mission of promoting interest, research, and cooperation regarding geology in New Mexico. However, guidebook sales represent a significant proportion of our operating budget. Therefore, only research papers are available for download. Road logs, mini-papers, maps, stratigraphic charts, and other selected content are available only in the printed guidebooks. Copyright Information Publications of the New Mexico Geological Society, printed and electronic, are protected by the copyright laws of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • An Environmental History of the Middle Rio Grande Basin
    United States Department of From the Rio to the Sierra: Agriculture Forest Service An Environmental History of Rocky Mountain Research Station the Middle Rio Grande Basin Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-5 Dan Scurlock i Scurlock, Dan. 1998. From the rio to the sierra: An environmental history of the Middle Rio Grande Basin. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-5. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 440 p. Abstract Various human groups have greatly affected the processes and evolution of Middle Rio Grande Basin ecosystems, especially riparian zones, from A.D. 1540 to the present. Overgrazing, clear-cutting, irrigation farming, fire suppression, intensive hunting, and introduction of exotic plants have combined with droughts and floods to bring about environmental and associated cultural changes in the Basin. As a result of these changes, public laws were passed and agencies created to rectify or mitigate various environmental problems in the region. Although restoration and remedial programs have improved the overall “health” of Basin ecosystems, most old and new environmental problems persist. Keywords: environmental impact, environmental history, historic climate, historic fauna, historic flora, Rio Grande Publisher’s Note The opinions and recommendations expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the USDA Forest Service. Mention of trade names does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the Federal Government. The author withheld diacritical marks from the Spanish words in text for consistency with English punctuation. Publisher Rocky Mountain Research Station Fort Collins, Colorado May 1998 You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your mailing information in label form through one of the following media.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF About Minerals Sorted by Mineral Name
    MINERALS SORTED BY NAME Here is an alphabetical list of minerals discussed on this site. More information on and photographs of these minerals in Kentucky is available in the book “Rocks and Minerals of Kentucky” (Anderson, 1994). APATITE Crystal system: hexagonal. Fracture: conchoidal. Color: red, brown, white. Hardness: 5.0. Luster: opaque or semitransparent. Specific gravity: 3.1. Apatite, also called cellophane, occurs in peridotites in eastern and western Kentucky. A microcrystalline variety of collophane found in northern Woodford County is dark reddish brown, porous, and occurs in phosphatic beds, lenses, and nodules in the Tanglewood Member of the Lexington Limestone. Some fossils in the Tanglewood Member are coated with phosphate. Beds are generally very thin, but occasionally several feet thick. The Woodford County phosphate beds were mined during the early 1900s near Wallace, Ky. BARITE Crystal system: orthorhombic. Cleavage: often in groups of platy or tabular crystals. Color: usually white, but may be light shades of blue, brown, yellow, or red. Hardness: 3.0 to 3.5. Streak: white. Luster: vitreous to pearly. Specific gravity: 4.5. Tenacity: brittle. Uses: in heavy muds in oil-well drilling, to increase brilliance in the glass-making industry, as filler for paper, cosmetics, textiles, linoleum, rubber goods, paints. Barite generally occurs in a white massive variety (often appearing earthy when weathered), although some clear to bluish, bladed barite crystals have been observed in several vein deposits in central Kentucky, and commonly occurs as a solid solution series with celestite where barium and strontium can substitute for each other. Various nodular zones have been observed in Silurian–Devonian rocks in east-central Kentucky.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Paleozoic Tectonic and Sedimentologic History of the Penasco Uplift, North-Central New Mexico
    RICE UNIVERSITY LATE PALEOZOIC TECTONIC AND SEDIMENTOLOGIC HISTORY OF THE PENASCO UPLIFT, NORTH-CENTRAL NEW MEXICO by ROY DONALD ADAMS A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF ARTS APPROVED, THESIS COMMITTEE: 0^ (3- /jtd&i obfe B. Anderson, Chairman Assistant Professor pf Geology KT Rudy R. Schwarzer, Adjunct Assistant Professor of GSology John /E. Warme Professor of Geology Donald R. Baker Professor of Geology Houston, Texas May, 1980 ABSTRACT LATE PALEOZOIC TECTONIC AND SEDIMENTOLOGIC HISTORY OF THE PENASCO UPLIFT, NORTH-CENTRAL NEW MEXICO Roy Donald Adams The Paleozoic Peiiasco Uplift, located on the site of the present Nacimiento Mountains of north-central New Mexico, acted as a sediment source and modifier of regional sedimentation patterns from Middle Pennsylvanian to Early Permian time. The earliest history of the uplift is still poorly defined. Orogenic activity may have started as early as the Late Mississippian, or there may have been quiescence until after deposition of the Morrow-age Osha Canyon Formation and prior to deposition of the Atoka-age Sandia Formation. Coarse, arkosic siliciclastic sediments inter- bedded with fossilferious carbonates in the Madera Formation indicate that by early Desmoinesian time the Peiiasco Uplift had risen sufficiently to expose and erode Precambrian rocks. Paleotransport indicators in the arkosic sediments show transport away from the uplift. Throughout the remainder of the Pennsylvanian, the Peiiasco Uplift was a sediment source. The siliciclastic sediments derived from the Peiiasco Uplift formed a wedge that prograded out onto and interfingered with carbonate sediments of a shallow normal marine shelf. A change in paleotransport directions from northeasterly to southwesterly occurs on the east side of the Peiiasco Uplift and is due to the arrival of a flood of siliciclastic sediments derived from the Uncompahgre-San Luis Uplift to the northeast.
    [Show full text]
  • Materials & Process
    Sculpture: Materials & Process Teaching Resource Developed by Molly Kysar 2001 Flora Street Dallas, TX 75201 Tel 214.242.5100 Fax 214.242.5155 NasherSculptureCenter.org INDEX INTRODUCTION 3 WORKS OF ART 4 BRONZE Material & Process 5-8 Auguste Rodin, Eve, 1881 9-10 George Segal, Rush Hour, 1983 11-13 PLASTER Material & Process 14-16 Henri Matisse, Madeleine I, 1901 17-18 Pablo Picasso, Head of a Woman (Fernande), 1909 19-20 STEEL Material & Process 21-22 Antony Gormley, Quantum Cloud XX (tornado), 2000 23-24 Mark di Suvero, Eviva Amore, 2001 24-25 GLOSSARY 26 RESOURCES 27 ALL IMAGES OF WORKS OF ART ARE PROTECTED UNDER COPYRIGHT. ANY USES OTHER THAN FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ARE STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. 2 Introduction This resource is designed to introduce students in 4th-12th grades to the materials and processes used in modern and traditional sculpture, specifically bronze, plaster, and steel. The featured sculptures, drawn from the collection of the Nasher Sculpture Center, range from 1881 to 2001 and represent only some of the many materials and processes used by artists whose works of art are in the collection. Images from this packet are also available in a PowerPoint presentation for use in the classroom, available at nashersculpturecenter.org. DISCUSS WITH YOUR STUDENTS Artists can use almost any material to create a work of art. When an artist is deciding which material to use, he or she may consider how that particular material will help express his or her ideas. Where have students seen bronze before? Olympic medals, statues… Plaster? Casts for broken bones, texture or decoration on walls..
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Mineral Resources of Sierra Nacimiento and Vicinity, New
    iv Contents ABSTRACT 7 TERTIARY-QUATERNARY 47 INTRODUCTION 7 QUATERNARY 48 LOCATION 7 Bandelier Tuff 48 PHYSIOGRAPHY 9 Surficial deposits 48 PREVIOUS WORK 9 PALEOTECTONIC SETTING 48 ROCKS AND FORMATIONS 9 REGIONAL TECTONIC SETTING 49 PRECAMBRIAN 9 STRUCTURE 49 Northern Nacimiento area 9 NACIMIENTO UPLIFT 49 Southern Nacimiento area 15 Nacimiento fault 51 CAMBRIAN-ORDOVICIAN (?) 20 Pajarito fault 52 MISSISSIPPIAN 20 Synthetic reverse faults 52 Arroyo Peñasco Formation 20 Eastward-trending faults 53 Log Springs Formation 21 Trail Creek fault 53 PENNSYLVANIAN 21 Antithetic reverse faults 53 Osha Canyon Formation 23 Normal faults 53 Sandia Formation 23 Folds 54 Madera Formation 23 SAN JUAN BASIN 55 Paleotectonic interpretation 25 En echelon folds 55 PERMIAN 25 Northeast-trending faults 55 Abo Formation 25 Synclinal bend 56 Yeso Formation 27 Northerly trending normal faults 56 Glorieta Sandstone 30 Antithetic reverse faults 56 Bernal Formation 30 GALLINA-ARCHULETA ARCH 56 TRIASSIC 30 CHAMA BASIN 57 Chinle Formation 30 RIΟ GRANDE RIFT 57 JURASSIC 34 JEMEZ VOLCANIC FIELD 59 Entrada Sandstone 34 TECTONIC EVOLUTION 60 Todilto Formation 34 MINERAL AND ENERGY RESOURCES 63 Morrison Formation 34 COPPER 63 Depositional environments 37 Mineralization 63 CRETACEOUS 37 Origin 67 Dakota Formation 37 AGGREGATE 69 Mancos Shale 39 TRAVERTINE 70 Mesaverde Group 40 GYPSUM 70 Lewis Shale 41 COAL 70 Pictured Cliffs Sandstone 41 ΗUMΑTE 70 Fruitland Formation and Kirtland Shale URANIUM 70 undivided 42 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY 72 TERTIARY 42 OIL AND GAS 72 Ojo Alamo Sandstone
    [Show full text]
  • ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT for GYPSUM TELLS POSITIVE STORY by Karen Bernick
    CCPs in Agriculture ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR GYPSUM TELLS POSITIVE STORY By Karen Bernick mending soils with !ue “…the risk assessment has shown that FGD gypsum gas desulfurization (FGD) contains extremely low concentrations of most trace gypsum o"ers a host of promising bene#ts to elements, about the same as found in mined gypsum agriculture, and this bene#cial use and, in most cases, lower than background soils.” providesA an opportunity for power plants to reduce disposal costs. lead and arsenic trouble spots; and other Chaney says the only risk he has iden- But is it safe? contaminant risks in plant uptake and food. tified occurs if livestock producers He is the lead USDA researcher on the FGD allow ruminants to eat large quanti- $e answer appears to be a resounding gypsum risk assessment. ties of stockpiled gypsum. “If livestock “yes” according to early reports from a producers prevent ruminants from eat- comprehensive risk assessment by the $e USDA-EPA assessment exam- ing gypsum by fencing in stockpiles, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) ines what Chaney calls “new” FGD and limit grazing until after a rainfall to and U.S. Environmental Protection gypsum, a high quality form of syn- wash adhering FGD gypsum from for- Agency (EPA). $e assessment, likely thetic gypsum sought by agricultural age leaves, the sulfate risk is prevented,” to be concluded in 2013, addresses crop producers for its soil improvement he says. potential risks that land applications of bene#ts, calcium and sulfur supplies, FGD gypsum could pose to human health purity and relative low cost versus mined RISK ASSESSMENT or the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Gypsum and Carbon Amendment's
    GYPSUM AND CARBON AMENDMENT’S INFLUENCE ON SOIL PROPERTIES, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, GROWTH AND NUTRIENT UPTAKE OF RYEGRASS (Lolium perenne) DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Maninder Kaur Walia, M.S. Environment and Natural Resources Graduate Program The Ohio State University 2015 Dissertation Committee: Warren A. Dick, Advisor Rattan Lal Brian K. Slater Frederick C. Michel,Jr. Copyrighted by Maninder Kaur Walia 2015 Abstract Gypsum is a source of calcium and sulfur that improves the physical and chemical properties of the soil. With the benefits associated with gypsum use and the increased availability of synthetic gypsum, its application to soil in Ohio and the Midwest is increasing. Several studies have focused on the effect of gypsum on soil properties. However, little is known about how gypsum affects C stocks in soils. In this study, in addition to gypsum, we also treated the soil with glucose to create a high level of CO2 in the soil profile, and contrasted that with the more slowly released C from plant residues. The overall goal of this dissertation research was to evaluate the effect of plant residues, glucose and gypsum on the growth and nutrient uptake of ryegrass, chemical properties (including total and inorganic C stock) and physical properties of two contrasting soils in Ohio (Wooster silt loam and Hoytville clay loam). Specific objectives of this research were to quantify the effect of (1) gypsum and plant residues on greenhouse gas emissions, (2) gypsum and C amendments on quality of leachate water, (3) gypsum and C amendments addition on C fractions in soils, (4) gypsum, plant residues and glucose addition on soil fertility, growth and nutrients concentrations of ryegrass and (5) gypsum, glucose and plant residues on selected soil physical properties and aggregate-associated C and N.
    [Show full text]
  • “Mining” Water Ice on Mars an Assessment of ISRU Options in Support of Future Human Missions
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration “Mining” Water Ice on Mars An Assessment of ISRU Options in Support of Future Human Missions Stephen Hoffman, Alida Andrews, Kevin Watts July 2016 Agenda • Introduction • What kind of water ice are we talking about • Options for accessing the water ice • Drilling Options • “Mining” Options • EMC scenario and requirements • Recommendations and future work Acknowledgement • The authors of this report learned much during the process of researching the technologies and operations associated with drilling into icy deposits and extract water from those deposits. We would like to acknowledge the support and advice provided by the following individuals and their organizations: – Brian Glass, PhD, NASA Ames Research Center – Robert Haehnel, PhD, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory – Patrick Haggerty, National Science Foundation/Geosciences/Polar Programs – Jennifer Mercer, PhD, National Science Foundation/Geosciences/Polar Programs – Frank Rack, PhD, University of Nebraska-Lincoln – Jason Weale, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory Mining Water Ice on Mars INTRODUCTION Background • Addendum to M-WIP study, addressing one of the areas not fully covered in this report: accessing and mining water ice if it is present in certain glacier-like forms – The M-WIP report is available at http://mepag.nasa.gov/reports.cfm • The First Landing Site/Exploration Zone Workshop for Human Missions to Mars (October 2015) set the target
    [Show full text]
  • Section 092400
    SPEC MIX, Inc. – Guide Specification Note to User: This section contains macros to aid the editing process. By default Microsoft Word disables macros for virus security reasons. When you open a file that has macros, the yellow message bar appears with a shield icon and the enable content button. To enable these macros, click the Enable Content button. SECTION 09 24 00 PORTLAND CEMENT STUCCO (To View Hidden Text, Type CTRL-H) PART 1 – GENERAL 1.1 SECTION INCLUDES A. Portland Cement, Pre-blended Scratch and Brown Coat Stucco. B. Portland Cement, Pre-blended Fiber Base Coat Stucco. C. Portland Cement, Pre-blended Colored Finish Coat Stucco. 1.2 RELATED SECTIONS A. Section 03 30 00 - Cast-in-Place Concrete. B. Section 04 20 00 - Unit Masonry. C. Section 05 40 00 - Cold-Formed Metal Framing: Light gauge load-bearing metal framing. D. Section 06 10 00 - Rough Carpentry: Wood framing. E. Section 07 21 13 - Board Insulation. F. Section 07 92 00 - Joint Sealants. G. Section 09 22 16 - Non-Structural Metal Framing: Non-load-bearing metal framing systems. H. Section 09 22 36 - Metal Lath. I. Section 09 29 00 - Gypsum Board: Exterior gypsum sheathing. 1.3 REFERENCES A. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) / American Hardboard Association (AHA): 1. ANSI/AHA A 194 - Cellulosic Fiber Board. B. ASTM International (ASTM): 1. ASTM A 641/A 641M - Standard Specification for Zinc-Coated (Galvanized) Carbon Steel Wire. 2. ASTM A 653/A 653M - Standard Specification for Steel Sheet, Zinc-Coated (Galvanized) or Zinc- Iron Alloy-Coated (Galvannealed) by the Hot-Dip Process.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.13 Paleontological Resources
    Gateway West Transmission Line Draft EIS 3.13 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section addresses the potential impacts from the Proposed Route and Route Alternatives on the known paleontological resources during construction, operation, and decommissioning. The Proposed Route and Route Alternatives pass through areas where paleontological resources are known to exist. The routes, their potential impacts, and mitigation methods to minimize or eliminate impacts are discussed in this section. 3.13.1 Affected Environment This section describes the mapped geology and known paleontological resources near the Proposed Action. It also describes and compares potential impacts of the Proposed Action and Action Alternatives to paleontological resources. Fossils are important scientific and educational resources because of their use in: 1) documenting the presence and evolutionary history of particular groups of now extinct organisms, 2) reconstructing the environments in which these organisms lived, and 3) determining the relative ages of the strata in which they occur. Fossils are also important in determining the geologic events that resulted in the deposition of the sediments in which they were buried. 3.13.1.1 Analysis Area The Project area in Wyoming and Idaho consists of predominantly north-south trending mountain ranges separated by structural basins. The eastern portion of the Project (Segments 1 and 2) would be located within the Laramie Mountains and the Shirley Mountains, which consist predominantly of Precambrian granite and gneisses. Moving west in Wyoming, the Project would cross major structural basins created during the Laramide Orogeny, including the Hanna Basin in Carbon County (Segment 2), and the Greater Green River Basin in Sweetwater County (Segments 3 and 4).
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Stratigraphy Column
    Capitol Reef National Park National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Geology “Geology knows no such word as forever.” —Wallace Stegner Capitol Reef National Park’s geologic story reveals a nearly complete set of Mesozoic-era sedimentary layers. For 200 million years, rock layers formed at or near sea level. About 75-35 million years ago tectonic forces uplifted them, forming the Waterpocket Fold. Forces of erosion have been sculpting this spectacular landscape ever since. Deposition If you could travel in time and visit Capitol Visiting Capitol Reef 180 million years ago, Reef 245 million years ago, you would not when the Navajo Sandstone was deposited, recognize the landscape. Imagine a coastal you would have been surrounded by a giant park, with beaches and tidal flats; the water sand sea, the largest in Earth’s history. In this moves in and out gently, shaping ripple marks hot, dry climate, wind blew over sand dunes, in the wet sand. This is the environment creating large, sweeping crossbeds now in which the sediments of the Moenkopi preserved in the sandstone of Capitol Dome Formation were deposited. and Fern’s Nipple. Now jump ahead 20 million years, to 225 All the sedimentary rock layers were laid million years ago. The tidal flats are gone and down at or near sea level. Younger layers were the climate supports a tropical jungle, filled deposited on top of older layers. The Moenkopi with swamps, primitive trees, and giant ferns. is the oldest layer visible from the visitor center, The water is stagnant and a humid breeze with the younger Chinle Formation above it.
    [Show full text]