GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 133 September 1951 DETROIT RIVER GROUP IN THE MICHIGAN BASIN By Kenneth K. Landes UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director Washington, D. C. Free on application to the Geological Survey, Washington 25, D. C. CONTENTS Page Page Introduction............................ ^ Amherstburg formation................. 7 Nomenclature of the Detroit River Structural geology...................... 14 group................................ i Geologic history ....................... ^4 Detroit River group..................... 3 Economic geology...................... 19 Lucas formation....................... 3 Reference cited........................ 21 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Location of wells and cross sections used in the study .......................... ii 2. Correlation chart . ..................................... 2 3. Cross sections A-«kf to 3-G1 inclusive . ......................;.............. 4 4. Facies map of basal part of Dundee formation. ................................. 5 5. Aggregate thickness of salt beds in the Lucas formation. ........................ 8 6. Thickness map of Lucas formation. ........................................... 10 7. Thickness map of Amherstburg formation (including Sylvania sandstone member. 11 8. Lime stone/dolomite facies map of Amherstburg formation ...................... 13 9. Thickness of Sylvania sandstone member of Amherstburg formation.............. 15 10. Boundary of the Bois Blanc formation in southwestern Michigan. ................. 17 11. Structure contour map of Southern Peninsula of Michigan. ....................... 18 12. Oil producing fields ......................................................... 20 Table 1. Wells used in cross sections ................................................. 2? OTSE60 MONTMORENOY ALPEN Figure 1. Index map showing location of cross sections and location of wells used in the study. ii DETROIT RIVER GROUP IN THE MICHIGAN BASIN By Kenneth K. Landes INTRODUCTION This report attempts to correlate the outcrop­ classification of the Detroit River group is that ping rocks in the type locality of the Detroit Riv­ proposed by Lane, Prosser, Sherzer, and er group with the thick sequence of rocks that Grabau (1909). They divided the Detroit River has been explored by many drilled wells in the ("Upper Monroe") group into the Lucas, Michigan Basin during the last twenty years. The Amherstburg, Anderdon, and Flat Rock for­ surface nomenclature as recently revised (Ehlers, mations in descending order. Subsequent ex­ 1950) is suggested for the subsurface section in perience and observation have verified the place of the heterogeneous collection of names validity of the Lucas and Amherstburg now used. The present work revises earlier re­ formations. The Flat Rock, however, does not ports by the writer (1945, a, b, c). merit formation status. At its type locality in the town of Flat Rock a bed of carbonate rock During the preparation of this report the sam­ two or three feet in thickness is poorly exposed ples have been examined from more than 300 in the channel of the Huron River. This section wells and cores from 9 wells. The writer has has not been identified with certainty anywhere also drawn upon the work of Enyert (1949) who else; furthermore it is the opinion of G. M. wrote a Doctoral thesis on the sandstones of the Ehlers and the writer, based on geographic Detroit River group, and upon Master's theses and structural position of the outcropping strata on various phases of Detroit River stratigraphy at Flat Rock that these strata actually belong written by Cooley (1947), Saunders .(1948), and within the Lucas formation. The Anderdon Tharp (1944). Finally the writer has had the ad­ limestone as described by Lane and others was vantage of many consultations in office and field likewise misplaced in the stratigraphic section with George V. Cohee of the U. S. Geological in the opinion of Ehlers (1950). This formation, Survey, Professors G. M. Ehlers and E. C. which has a distinctive fauna, actually lies Stumm of the University of Michigan, and with above the Lucas at the top of the Detroit River other geologists of Michigan and Ontario, espe­ group in the type area. cially George D. Lindberg (Sun Oil Company, Toledo), E. J. Baltrusaitis and K. A. Gravelle The writer places the Sylvania sandstone (Gulf Refining Company, Saginaw), Willard A. within the Detroit River group, and considers Sanger (Pure Oil Company, Clare), Joseph it to be a member of the Amherstburg forma­ Lindsay and George WinSton (Carter Oil Co. , tion because of the general transition between Grand Rapids), and Charles S. Evans (Union the sandstone an'd the overlying limestone or Gas Co. , Chatham, Ontario). It is a pleasure to dolomite of the Amherstburg formation in the acknowledge the help received from these geolo­ outcrop and in well samples. Carman (1936) gists and to thank them for it. believes that the Sylvania was deposited in a transgressing sea so that the sandstone extends The surface and subsurface sections through across age boundaries within the Detroit River the Detroit River group in Canada are not includ­ group and is therefore of variable age. ed in this report. Although many geologists have studied the NOMENCLATURE OF THE Detroit River group in the subsurface, few DETROIT RIVER GROUP have published the results of their work. Local descriptions are included in various oil field The lengthy and somewhat complicated history reports. Newcombe (1933) appears to have been of Detroit River group (fig.2) will not be repeated the first to publish a description of the Detroit here. The Detroit River group which formerly River of the Michigan Basin on a regional scale. was considered as Lower Devonian is now placed He had recognized earlier the existence of salt in the Middle Devonian on the basis of recent pa- beds in the Detroit River group as well as in leontologic studies. The principal outcrop area the Salina (1929). The Detroit River of northern of Detroit River is in and near the type locality Michigan was described by Landes (1945, pp. between Detroit and Monroe, Michigan, and in 168-174). A committee of the Michigan Geolog­ the vicinity of Sylvania, Ohio. The most quoted ical Society (George V. Cohee and Helen M. Thickness Name of unit in feet Description | Remarks -t- Limestone 1 Traverse group 100475 and shale Bell shale nt base -EROSIONAL UNCONFORMITY Rogers City 0-125 Brown Absent in southern and southwestern Michigan. Usually included in the Dundee formntion limestone formation in oil field nomenclature Dundee formation 0400 Mostly Absent in southwestern corner of Michigan limestone .coneuvuAt titUft/vucWM//y Anderon limestone, which overlies Luces formation in noutheastern Michigan, not recognizable in subsurface. Lower part of the Lncas of subsurface is Mostly light - equivalent to the Lucas of type locality. Upper part of the Lucas may be |- 68-1124 colored dolomite time equivalent of the Columbus limestone across Findlny arch in Ohio. nnd anhydrite, Evaporite sequence of rocks of Lucns in subsurface is ordinarily referred some nalt to in oil field nomenclature as "Detroit River*. The Detroit River group in also referred to as the upper Monroe by some geologists 1 =3V j DEVONIAN 0. i Subsurface only, and mainly in central and western Michigan. Dolomite of the Richfield 0-80 Dolomite with member snndstone locally Richfield member is principal Detroit River oil resevoir. "Freer sand* is a sandstone in the Richfield I -EROSIONAL UNCONFORMITY ____ - - 8 Mostly dark-brown Absent in southwestern Michigan. Usually referred to in oil field as "Sylvania & 0-150 to black limestone formntion* or "Black Lime* | or dolomite Id 1 Filer sandstone 0-100 Sandstone Erratic distribution; greatest thickness in Western Michigan lentil 0200 Mostly dark to black 2 limestone or dolomite 1 < Sylvnnia sandstone 0-300 Sandstone with Minor Absent in southwestern, western, northern, and northenstern Michigan member dolomite and chert -EROSIONAL UNCONFORMITY - Bois blanc 0-1000 Entirely cherty lime­ 'Absent in southwestern and southeastern comers of Michigan formation stone or dolomitn Garden Island 0-30 Dolomite Otiskany sandstone equivalent. Very patcby distribution j formation -EROSIONAL UNCONFORMITY 1SILURIAN Bass Island Dolomite, shale dolomite and 84-5000 anhydrite, and Bass Island dolomite is referred to as the "Lower Monroe" by some geologists Salina formntion salt Figure 2. Proposed nomenclature for a part of the subsurface section of the Michigan basin. 2 Martin, editors) issued a multigraphed report in Dundee-Detroit River contact. In Michigan the 1948 on a "A Summary of the Stratigraphy of the Lucas formation crops out only in the south­ Southern Peninsula of Michigan" in which the sub­ eastern part of the State, along the Detroit surface Detroit River rocks are discussed. River a short distance south and southwest of The general practice of geologists in describing the city of Detroit. It crops out across the the subsurface stratigraphic section in the Michigan river in southwestern Ontario, and is also Basin between the Dundee formation and the Bass exposed in Lucas County and other parts of Island and Salina formations is to refer to the evap- northern Ohio. The lower part of the Lucas orite sequence of rocks within the Detroit River in the central basin area appears to correlate group as the "Detroit River" and the underlying with the Anderdon and Lucas sequence of rocks carbonate rocks as the