DOCSLIB.ORG

Geology and Mineral Deposits of the James River-Roanoke River Manganese District Virginia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Geology and Mineral Deposits of the James River-Roanoke River Manganese District Virginia Geology and Mineral Deposits of the James River-Roanoke River Manganese District Virginia GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1008 Geology and Mineral ·Deposits oftheJatnes River-Roanoke River Manganese District Virginia By GILBERT H. ESPENSHADE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1008 A description of the geology anq mineral deposits, particularly manganese, of the James River-Roanoke River district UNITED STAT.ES GOVERNMENT, PRINTING. OFFICE• WASHINGTON : 1954 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Douglas McKay, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. CONTENTS· Page Abstract---------------------------------------------------------- 1 Introduction______________________________________________________ 4 Location, accessibility, and culture_______________________________ 4 Topography, climate, and vegetation _______________ .,.. _______ ---___ 6 Field work and acknowledgments________________________________ 6 Previouswork_________________________________________________ 8 GeneralgeologY--------------------------------------------------- 9 Principal features ____________________________ -- __________ ---___ 9 Metamorphic rocks____________________________________________ 11 Generalstatement_________________________________________ 11 Lynchburg gneiss and associated igneous rocks________________ 12 Evington groUP------------------------------------------- 14 Candler formation_____________________________________ 14 Archer Creek formation________________________________ 1& Mount Athos formation________________________________ 17 Greenstone___________________________________________ 19 Distribution of formations of the Evington group__________ 20 Biotite-garnet schist_______________________________________ 21 Age relationships of the metamorphic rocks within the district__ 22 Age of Lynchburg gneiss and associated greenstone and soap- stone_______________________________________________ 22 Stratigraphic sequence and age of Evington group_________ 22 Age of biotite-garnet schists_____________________________ 24 Regional correlation problems of the metamorphic rocks________ 24 U nmetamorphosed rocks______ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ 27 Alluvial deposits_______________________________________________ 28 Structuralgeology_____________________________________________ 29 Generalstatement------------------------------~---------- 29 Bedding, cleavage, and joints_______________________________ 29 Lineation_________________________________________________ 31 Folds and faults___________________________________________ 32 Regional structure_________________________________________ 37 Metamorphism________________________________________________ 38 Characteristics of regional metamorphism_____________________ 38 Progressive metamorphism or retrogressive metamorphism______ 41 Contact metamorphism____________________________________ 42 PhysiographY------------------------------------------------- 43 Description of physiographic features _________________ ------- 43 Physiographic history______________________________________ 45 Mineral deposits______ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ 50 Types and distribution ____________________________ -----________ 50 Manganese deposits _______________________________________ --_-- 51 MineralogY----------------------------------------------- 51 Manganeseoxides_____________________________________ 51 General statement ________________________ --------- 51 Psilomelane type ________________________________ -- 52 Wad _________________________ ·-___________________ 53 Distinct mineral species __ -----_·---------- __ -------- 53 Gangue minerals __________________ -------------------- 54 m IV CONTENTS Mineral deposits-Continued Manganese deposits-Continued Paee Distribution ______ _,_______________________________________ 55 Structuralfeatures_________________________________________ 55 Grade of ore_ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ __ 58 Origin____________________________________________________ 59 Generalstatement_____________________________________ 59 Occurrence of manganese oxide minerals in rock residuum__ 59 Association of manganese deposits with the Mount Athos formation___________________________________________ 62 Conditions of ground-water circulation___________________ 65 Relations of the outcrops of the manganese deposits to the upland surface and persistence of the deposits in depth__ 67 Resume of factors involved in origin of deposits___________ 72 Iron deposits___ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ 72 Barite deposits________________________________________________ 75 Copper deposits__ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ 78 Quartz veins__________________________________________________ 79 Manganese mines and prospects_____________________________________ 81 History and production________________________________________ 81 Prospecting, mining, and milling methods_________________________ 84 Descriptions of mines and prospects_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ 86 l'relson County____________________________________________ 86 Piedmont _____________________________ ._~______________ 86 Cabell________________________________________________ 87 Bugley_______________________________________________ 89 Simpson______________________________________________ 90 Other prospects_______________________ __ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ 92 Amherst County__________________________________________ 92 Christian prospect and vicinity__________________________ 92 Prospect near Gaits Mills_______________________________ 92 Stapleton area________________________________________ 92 Buckingham County_______________________________________ 93 Appomattox County_______________________________________ 93 Moore_______________________________________________ 93 Manganese deposits in the vicinity of Beckham and Gowans Hill_______ __ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ 94 Schoolhouse mine and nearby prospects_ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ 95 StonewalL___ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ _ 96 Prospects southwest of the Stonewall_ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ __ __ __ _ 100 Prospects in and southwest of Stonewall Creek valley______ 100 Hancock-Ferguson_____________________________________ 101 Chestnut Mountain____________________________________ 101 Bill Ferguson_ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ 102 G. Cabell property_____________________________________ 102 Campbell County__________________________________________ 102 Joshua Creek_________________________________________ 103 MountAthos_________________________________________ 103 Prospects between Joshua Creek mine and Old Tavern pros- pect_______________________________________________ 103 Old Tavern___________________________________________ 104 Ryan________________________________________________ 104 Leets ______________________________________ ·_________ . 104 CONTENTS v Manganese mines and prospects-Continued Descriptions of mines and prospects-Continued Campbell County-Continued Pare Drinkard and nearby prospects _________________________ _ 108 Piedmont ____________________________________________ _ 109 Ilarvey ______________________________________________ _ 114 Lindsay _____________________________________________ _ 114 ~eighbours--~---------------------------------------- 115 Green _______________________________________________ _ 116 Bethel ______ ~---------------------------------------- 116 Dodson _____ i _______________________________________ _ 116 Jack ~ountall1_~-------------------------------------- 116 Bell _________ ~---------------------------------------- 117 Prospect soutij. of the Bell _____________________________ _ 118 ~addoX-----1---------------------------------------- 118 McGehee ____ .._ ____________________________________ ·- __ _ 118 Mortirner ____ +---------------------------------------- 119 Pribble ______ +---------------------------------------- 121 Phillips ______ ~ ______ .., ________________________________ _ 123 Ilall ________ +---------------------------------------- 123 Troublesome Creek ___________________________________ _ 124 Iladen------~---------------------------------------- 124 Prospects nortjheast of Evington ________________________ _ 124 Russell Den Hollow ___________________________________ _ 124 Saunders ____ ~---------------------------------------- 125 Wood _______ ~ ____________________ .___________________ _ 129. Burton ______ L---------------------------------------- 130 Langhorne ___ ~---------------------------------------- 131 Teates------~---------------------------------------- 131 AnthonY----~---------------------------------------­ 131 Theresa-----~---------------------------------------~ 131 Tardy and Frazier ____________________________________ _ 132 GrastY------~---------------------------------------- 132 134 134 ~:~:;~~~~~.=~erritt ______ [~ =_______________________________________ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =_ 135 Dews _______ ~---------------------------------------- 135 Arthur ______ ~---------------------------------------- 137 Bragg _______ L_______________________________________ _ 137 Lucas _______ L_______________________________________ _ 137 Perrow
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Nature of Waste Associated with Closed Mines in England and Wales
    The nature of waste associated with closed mines in England and Wales Minerals & Waste Programme Open Report OR/10/14 BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS & WASTE PROGRAMME OPEN REPORT OR/10/14 The National Grid and other Ordnance Survey data are used with the permission of the The nature of waste associated Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. OS Topography © Crown with closed mines in England and Copyright. All rights reserved. BGS 100017897/2010 Wales Keywords Abandoned mine waste facilities; Palumbo-Roe, B and Colman, T England and Wales; mineral deposits; environmental impact; Contributor/editor European Mine Waste Directive. Cameron, D G, Linley, K and Gunn, A G Front cover Graiggoch Mine (SN 7040 7410), Ceredigion, Wales. Bibliographical reference Palumbo-Roe, B and Colman, T with contributions from Cameron, D G, Linley, K and Gunn, A G. 2010. The nature of waste associated with closed mines in England and Wales. British Geological Survey Open Report, OR/10/14. 98pp. Copyright in materials derived from the British Geological Survey’s work is owned by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) and the Environment Agency that commissioned the work. You may not copy or adapt this publication without first obtaining permission. Contact the BGS Intellectual Property Rights Section, British Geological Survey, Keyworth, e-mail [email protected]. You may quote extracts of a reasonable length without prior permission, provided a full acknowledgement is given of the source of the extract. The views and statements expressed in this report are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the views of the Environment Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Nelson County, Virginia
    At Risk Nelson County, Virginia FERC Presentation Dec. 15, 2014 REF: Atlantic Coast Natural Gas Pipeline proposed by Dominion/Duke Energy DOCKET NUMBER: PF 15-6 Route of Proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline in Virginia Nelson County At Risk: Nelson’s Rural Character & Heritage ▪ Proud, longstanding and protected rural heritage dating to late 1600’s ▪ Pipeline Route Threatens Agricultural and Tourism Enterprises ▪ Pipeline Disrupts Low Impact Tourism- Based Economy (resort, inns, wineries, breweries) reliant on unspoiled view sheds ▪ Pipeline Threatens Native American Archaeological Sites, African-American Slave Cemeteries ▪ Pipeline Route Introduces Industrial Usage in Agricultural Zones At Risk: Nelson’s Economy ▪ Agricultural and tourist-based economy relies on Nelson “brand” being maintained ▪ Brand dependent on reputation of Nelson’s unscarred mountain vistas, non-fragmented forests, fertile fields and clear mountain streams ▪ Pipeline crosses and blights the fastest growing tourist- related business area in the County ▪ Pipeline construction havoc will clog County’s main traffic arteries, most of which are narrow two-lane roads, and discourage tourism ▪ Once brand tarnished, almost impossible to restore with presence of invasive infrastructure ACP ROUTE-- NELSON COUNTY o Thirty-five miles, 531 acres for ROWs o Devalues 225 private properties o Harms small locally owned businesses o Does not take advantage of existing Rights of Way (ROW) o Traverses unique physiography— o Steep mountainous slopes o Unstable soils o Susceptible to significant
    [Show full text]
  • Washington State Minerals Checklist
    Division of Geology and Earth Resources MS 47007; Olympia, WA 98504-7007 Washington State 360-902-1450; 360-902-1785 fax E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.dnr.wa.gov/geology Minerals Checklist Note: Mineral names in parentheses are the preferred species names. Compiled by Raymond Lasmanis o Acanthite o Arsenopalladinite o Bustamite o Clinohumite o Enstatite o Harmotome o Actinolite o Arsenopyrite o Bytownite o Clinoptilolite o Epidesmine (Stilbite) o Hastingsite o Adularia o Arsenosulvanite (Plagioclase) o Clinozoisite o Epidote o Hausmannite (Orthoclase) o Arsenpolybasite o Cairngorm (Quartz) o Cobaltite o Epistilbite o Hedenbergite o Aegirine o Astrophyllite o Calamine o Cochromite o Epsomite o Hedleyite o Aenigmatite o Atacamite (Hemimorphite) o Coffinite o Erionite o Hematite o Aeschynite o Atokite o Calaverite o Columbite o Erythrite o Hemimorphite o Agardite-Y o Augite o Calciohilairite (Ferrocolumbite) o Euchroite o Hercynite o Agate (Quartz) o Aurostibite o Calcite, see also o Conichalcite o Euxenite o Hessite o Aguilarite o Austinite Manganocalcite o Connellite o Euxenite-Y o Heulandite o Aktashite o Onyx o Copiapite o o Autunite o Fairchildite Hexahydrite o Alabandite o Caledonite o Copper o o Awaruite o Famatinite Hibschite o Albite o Cancrinite o Copper-zinc o o Axinite group o Fayalite Hillebrandite o Algodonite o Carnelian (Quartz) o Coquandite o o Azurite o Feldspar group Hisingerite o Allanite o Cassiterite o Cordierite o o Barite o Ferberite Hongshiite o Allanite-Ce o Catapleiite o Corrensite o o Bastnäsite
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Processing
    Mineral Processing Foundations of theory and practice of minerallurgy 1st English edition JAN DRZYMALA, C. Eng., Ph.D., D.Sc. Member of the Polish Mineral Processing Society Wroclaw University of Technology 2007 Translation: J. Drzymala, A. Swatek Reviewer: A. Luszczkiewicz Published as supplied by the author ©Copyright by Jan Drzymala, Wroclaw 2007 Computer typesetting: Danuta Szyszka Cover design: Danuta Szyszka Cover photo: Sebastian Bożek Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej Wybrzeze Wyspianskiego 27 50-370 Wroclaw Any part of this publication can be used in any form by any means provided that the usage is acknowledged by the citation: Drzymala, J., Mineral Processing, Foundations of theory and practice of minerallurgy, Oficyna Wydawnicza PWr., 2007, www.ig.pwr.wroc.pl/minproc ISBN 978-83-7493-362-9 Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................9 Part I Introduction to mineral processing .....................................................................13 1. From the Big Bang to mineral processing................................................................14 1.1. The formation of matter ...................................................................................14 1.2. Elementary particles.........................................................................................16 1.3. Molecules .........................................................................................................18 1.4. Solids................................................................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • Reflectance Spectral Features and Significant Minerals in Kaishantun
    minerals Article Reflectance Spectral Features and Significant Minerals in Kaishantun Ophiolite Suite, Jilin Province, NE China Chenglong Shi 1 ID , Xiaozhong Ding 1,*, Yanxue Liu 1 and Xiaodong Zhou 2 1 Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, No. 26 Baiwanzhuang Street, Beijing 100037, China; [email protected] (C.S.); [email protected] (Y.L.) 2 Survey of Regional Geological and Mineral Resource of Jilin Province, No.4177 Chaoda Road, Changchun 130022, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-10-6899-9675 Received: 28 January 2018; Accepted: 28 February 2018; Published: 5 March 2018 Abstract: This study used spectrometry to determine the spectral absorption of five types of mafic-ultramafic rocks from the Kaishantun ophiolite suite in Northeast China. Absorption peak wavelengths were determined for peridotite, diabase, basalt, pyroxenite, and gabbro. Glaucophane, actinolite, zoisite, and epidote absorption peaks were also measured, and these were used to distinguish such minerals from other associated minerals in ophiolite suite samples. Combined with their chemical compositions, the blueschist facies (glaucophane + epidote + chlorite) and greenschist facies (actinolite + epidote + chlorite) mineral assemblage was distinct based on its spectral signature. Based on the regional tectonic setting, the Kaishantun ophiolite suite probably experienced the blueschist facies metamorphic peak during subduction and greenschist facies retrograde metamorphism during later slab rollback. Keywords: reflectance spectrum; ophiolite suite; mineral classification; Kaishantun; NE China 1. Introduction Ophiolites are segments of oceanic crust that have been residually accreted in convergent boundaries [1–3]. The principal focus of recent studies related to ophiolites has been on the spatial and temporal patterns of felsic to mafic-ultramafic rock suites.
    [Show full text]
  • International Ocean Discovery Program Expedition 355
    International Ocean Discovery Program Expedition 355 Preliminary Report Arabian Sea Monsoon Deep sea drilling in the Arabian Sea: constraining tectonic-monsoon interactions in South Asia 31 March–31 May 2015 D.K. Pandey, P.D. Clift, D.K. Kulhanek, S. Andò, J.A.P. Bendle, S. Bratenkov, E.M. Griffith, G.P. Gurumurthy, A. Hahn, M. Iwai, B.-K. Khim, A. Kumar, A.G. Kumar, H.M. Liddy, H. Lu., M.W. Lyle, R. Mishra, T. Radhakrishna, C.M. Routledge, R. Saraswat, R. Saxena, G. Scardia, G.K. Sharma, A.D. Singh, S. Steinke, K. Suzuki, L. Tauxe, M. Tiwari, Z. Xu, and Z. Yu Publisher’s notes Core samples and the wider set of data from the science program covered in this report are under moratorium and accessible only to Science Party members until 29 August 2016. This publication was prepared by the International Ocean Discovery Program JOIDES Resolution Science Operator (IODP JRSO) as an account of work performed under the International Ocean Dis- covery Program. Funding for the program is provided by the following implementing organizations and international partners: National Science Foundation (NSF), United States Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), Japan European Consortium for Ocean Research Drilling (ECORD) Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), People’s Republic of China Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM) Australia-New Zealand IODP Consortium (ANZIC) Ministry of Earth Sciences (MoES), India Coordination for Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), Brazil Disclaimer Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the participating agencies, Texas A&M University, or Texas A&M Research Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Revision 1 1 the High-Pressure Phase of Lawsonite
    1 Revision 1 2 The high-pressure phase of lawsonite: A single crystal study of a key mantle hydrous phase 3 4 Earl O’Bannon III,1* Christine M. Beavers1,2, Martin Kunz2, and Quentin Williams1 5 1Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, 1156 High 6 Street, Santa Cruz, California 95064, U.S.A. 7 2Advanced Light Source, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, 94720, 8 U.S.A. 9 *Corresponding Author 10 1 11 Abstract 12 Lawsonite CaAl2Si2O7(OH)2·H2O is an important water carrier in subducting oceanic 13 crusts, and the primary hydrous phase in basalt at depths greater than ~80 km. We have 14 conducted high-pressure synchrotron single-crystal x-ray diffraction experiments on natural 15 lawsonite at room temperature up to ~10.0 GPa to study its high-pressure polymorphism. We 16 find that lawsonite remains orthorhombic with Cmcm symmetry up to ~9.3 GPa, and shows 17 nearly isotropic compression. Above ~9.3 GPa, lawsonite becomes monoclinic with P21/m 18 symmetry. Across the phase transition, the Ca polyhedron becomes markedly distorted, and 19 the average positions of the H2O molecules and hydroxyls change. The changes observed in the 20 H-atom positions under compression are different than the low temperature changes in this 21 material. We resolve for the first time the H-bonding configuration of the high-pressure 22 monoclinic phase of lawsonite. A bond valence approach is deployed to determine that the 23 phase transition from orthorhombic to monoclinic is primarily driven by the Si2O7 groups, and in 24 particular it's bridging oxygen atom (O1).
    [Show full text]
  • Benthic TMDL Development for the Roanoke River, Virginia
    Benthic TMDL Development for the Roanoke River, Virginia Submitted to Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Prepared by 2300 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 March 2006 Benthic TMDL Development for Roanoke River Executive Summary Introduction As required by Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and current EPA regulations, states are required to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for waterbodies that exceed water quality standards. The Roanoke River was included on Virginia’s 1996 Section 303(d) TMDL Priority List and Report (DEQ, 1996) because of violations of the General Standard (benthic impairment). The headwaters of the Roanoke River originate in southwest Virginia. The Roanoke River flows through southcentral Virginia before crossing the North Carolina state line and discharging into the Albemarle Sound in North Carolina. Impairment Listing The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) uses biological monitoring of benthic macroinvertebrates as one method to assess support of the aquatic life use for a waterbody. Bioassessments of the benthic macroinvertebrate community of the Roanoke River were performed by DEQ using modified Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (EPA, 1999). Results of bioassessments indicated a moderately impaired benthic community at three monitoring stations on the river (4AROA202.20, 4AROA206.03, and 4AROA206.95). Therefore, since the river only partially supports the designated aquatic life use, the General Standard is being violated. As a result, the Roanoke River was included on the Section 303(d) list. Although biological assessments indicated the creek is impaired, additional analyses described in this report were required to identify the causal pollutant (stressor) and sources within the watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Manganese Deposits of Western Utah
    Manganese Deposits of Western Utah GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 979-A Manganese Deposits of Western Utah By MAX D. CRITTENDEN, JR. , MANGANESE DEPOSITS OF UTAH, PART 1 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 979-A A report on known deposits west of the lllth meridian * UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 19S1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 50 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Fag* Abstract.__________________________________________________________ 1 Introduction._._____.__________----_______-______-_--_------.__-__ 1 History of mining and production__.._______.______.___.__-___-_____ 2 Occurrence and age of the deposits_________-_____-_.-__-__-_-__--_- 6 Mineralogy _--____._____---_--_---_------------------------------- 7 Descriptions of the manganese minerals....____.__--_____-__-..__ 8 Oxides...___-__.--_--------___-_-_.-- . _ 8 Carbonates.___-____.__-____________-_-___-----_--------__ 9 Silicate.,_ _____-----_____--__-_______-_---___-__--___._--. 9 Relative stability and manganese content______--_----------_----_ 10 Oxidation and enrichment._____________________________________ 10 Classification and origin of the deposits....______.__._____---.___.-_-_ 11 General discussion_____________________________________________ 11 Syngenetic deposits_-_--____-----_--------------_-------__-_-.- 13 Bedded depositS-__________-_____._____..__________________ 13 Spring
    [Show full text]
  • Bacteria Tmdls for Wilson Creek, Ore Branch and Roanoke River Watersheds, Virginia
    Bacteria TMDLs for Wilson Creek, Ore Branch and Roanoke River Watersheds, Virginia Submitted by Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Prepared by and 2300 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 February 2006 Bacteria TMDLs for Wilson Creek, Ore Branch and Roanoke River Watersheds Executive Summary This report presents the development of Bacteria TMDLs for the Wilson Creek, Ore Branch and Roanoke River watersheds, located in the Upper Roanoke River Basin. Segments of Wilson Creek, Ore Branch and the Roanoke River were listed as impaired on Virginia’s 1998 303(d) Total Maximum Daily Load Priority List and Report (DEQ, 1998) because of violations of the state’s water quality standard for fecal coliform bacteria. These segments were also included on Virginia’s 2002 303(d) Report on Impaired Waters and 2004 305(b)/303(d) Water Quality Assessment Integrated Report. The impaired segments are located in the Upper Roanoke River Basin in southwestern Virginia. Description of the Study Area Wilson Creek is a tributary to the North Fork Roanoke River and is located in Montgomery County, while Ore Branch is a tributary to the Roanoke River and flows from Roanoke County into Roanoke City. The impaired segment of the Roanoke River begins in Salem City and flows through Roanoke City into Roanoke County. All three streams are located in the Upper Roanoke River Basin (USGS Cataloging Unit 03010101). The watershed is approximately 371,658 acres (580 square miles) and drains portions of Floyd, Montgomery, Roanoke, Botetourt, Bedford and Franklin Counties and all of Salem and Roanoke Cities. Bacteria TMDLs have already been approved for five impaired streams in the watershed: Carvin Creek, Glade Creek, Laymantown Creek, Lick Run and Tinker Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • A Deposit of Manganese Ore in Wyoming
    A DEPOSIT OF MANGANESE ORE IN WYOMING. By EDWARD L. JONES, Jr. INTRODUCTION. Few manganese deposits are known in Wyoming, but one deposit in the Laramie Mountains that was reported to the United States Geological Survey was visited by the writer on October 5, 1917. At that time the deposit was being exploited by the Poverty Mining Co., of Laramie, and 200 tons of ore containing about 40 per cent of manganese was on the dumps, although no ore had been shipped. The deposit is opened by a tunnel and a drift 190 feet in total length, which connect with a shaft 25 feet deep. Six claims constitute the group, which was located April 11,1916. GEOGRAPHY. The deposit of the Poverty Mining Co. lies on a gently sloping mesa on the western flank of the Laramie Mountains, near the head of Sheep Creek, at an altitude of approximately 8,000 feet above sea level. It is accessible from Medicine Bow, on the Union Pacific Railroad, by a fair wagon road 38 miles long. Near the deposit Sheep Creek has eroded in the mesa a channel 250 feet deep, which 'affords a measure of the relief. The rainfall is moderate, and the vegetation consists principally of grasses and small shrubs. Water level has not been reached in the workings. GEOLOGY. The core of the Laramie Mountains is a coarse-grained red granite of pre-Cambrian age, but flanking it on the west side is a series of limestones and sandstones which range in age from Carboniferous to Cretaceous. These rocks underlie the mesa toward Medicine Bow.
    [Show full text]
  • Blue-Ridge-Parkway-Map.Pdf
    20 To Richmond 340 29 250 0 1 5 Km 10 Loft Mountain Information Center 33 CHARLOTTESVILLE 0 1 5 Miles 10 h HARRISONBURG a o d n r a e n v i e R North h S Shenandoah 250 276 National Park S (Entrance Fee) D k u y d l l 11 i e n 64 y e M 20 D t r n 256 S i o ve u Milepost along t h 20 98 Blue Ridge Parkway R iv er 340 Overlook 81 s Ch n rist i ia 29 a n t Tunnel under 13 feet s n u (located near southern o end of parkway) Rockfish Gap M C r 1900ft No direct access e 254 n e a 6 to parkway k 3 F 3 Northern End of Food service WAYNESBORO Blue Ridge Parkway 3 275 11 Picnic area 6 er 250 624 iv R 42 64 631 151 STAUNTON Lodging 15 sh fi 6 ck 250 Ro Humpback Rocks Campground 664 Visitor Center 81 340 Greenstone Trail 42 10 Wintergreen 254 Ravens Roost 11 Humpback 13 Mtn 252 664 n Sherando Lake t M 814 Woods 56 y Mountain a l d To Richmond 151 n i G L 701 F I Bald 20 R T J T Mountain am E L e A E Twenty s 24 T N Minute O Cliff R i R Crabtree v T e The r H Falls T N ye Priest O M R Tye River i R v O 56 er T Gap U 56 H N T 5 A Whetstone Ridge I N Steeles 30 29 60 M Tavern O 42 151 Wigwam U 11 The Friar Falls N 26 T Yankee Horse Ridge A The Cardinal S 81 o I u N t Irish Gap h GEORGE R i 252 v Amherst e 40 r WASHINGTON NATIONAL 23 Whites Gap T 39 Overlook FOREST 60 o b 2567ft a c 29 42 c 39 o BUENA Indian Gap R Forge 5 o Monroe VISTA w To Petersburg Mountain M 50 o er u iv n R t 460 39 ury 60 a 60 Ma in 6 130 64 20 Little R r House LEXINGTON Otter Creek James ive Mountain 10 Bluff 42 Mtn 60 Big House 501 Lowest Elevation 501 Mountain on Parkway 649ft
    [Show full text]