In Pendleton County, West Virginia (USA), and Implications Regarding the Origin of Maze Caves

OLD G

The Geological Society of America Field Guide 57 OPEN ACCESS

Geology of the Trout Rock caves (Hamilton Cave, Trout Cave, New Trout Cave) in Pendleton County, West Virginia (USA), and implications regarding the origin of maze caves

Christopher S. Swezey Emily L. Brent U.S. Geological Survey, Florence Bascom Geoscience Center, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS 926A, Reston, Virginia 20192, USA

ABSTRACT

The Trout Rock caves (Hamilton Cave, Trout Cave, New Trout Cave) are located in a hill named Cave Knob that overlooks the South Branch of the Potomac River in Pendleton County, West Virginia, USA. The geologic structure of this hill is a northeast-trending anticline, and the caves are located at different elevations, primarily along the contact between the Devonian New Creek Limestone (Helderberg Group) and the overlying Devonian Corriganville Limestone (Helderberg Group). The entrance to New Trout Cave (Stop 1) is located on the east flank of Cave Knob anticline at an elevation of 585 m (1919 ft) above sea level, or 39 m (128 ft) above the modern river. Much of the cave consists of passages that extend to the northeast along strike, and many of these passages have developed along joints that trend ~N40E or ~N40W. Sediments in New Trout Cave include mud and sand (some of which was mined for nitrate during the American Civil War), as well as large boulders in the front part of the cave. Gypsum crusts are present in a maze section of the cave ~213–305 m (799–1001 ft) from the cave entrance. Excavations in New Trout Cave have produced vertebrate fossils of Rancholabrean age, ca. 300–10 thousand years ago (ka). The entrance to Trout Cave (Stop 2) is located on the east flank of Cave Knob anticline ~100 m (328 ft) northwest of the New Trout Cave entrance at an elevation of 622 m (2040 ft) above sea level, or 76 m (249 ft) above the modern river. Much of the cave consists of passages that extend to the northeast along strike, although a small area of network maze passages is present in the western portion of Trout Cave that is closest to Hamilton Cave. Many of the passages of Trout Cave have developed along joints that trend N50E, N40E, or N40W. Sediments in Trout Cave include mud (also mined for nitrate during the American Civil War), as well as large boulders in the front part of the cave. Excavations in the upper levels of Trout Cave have produced vertebrate fossils of Rancholabrean age (ca. 300–10 ka), whereas excavations in the lower levels of the cave have produced vertebrate fossils of Irvingtonian age, ca. 1.81 million years ago (Ma)–300 ka.

Swezey, C.S., and Brent, E.L., 2020, Geology of the Trout Rock Caves (Hamilton Cave, Trout Cave, New Trout Cave) in Pendleton County, West Virginia (USA), and implications regarding the origin of maze caves, in Swezey, C.S., and Carter, M.W., eds., Geology Field Trips in and around the U.S. Capital: Geological Society of America Field Guide 57, p. 43–77, https://doi.org/10.1130/2020.0057(03). © 2020 The Authors. Gold Open Access: This chapter is published under the terms of the CC-BY license and is available open access on www.gsapubs.org.

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 44 Swezey and Brent

The entrance to Hamilton Cave (Stop 3) is located along the axis of Cave Knob anticline ~165 m (541 ft) northwest of the Trout Cave entrance at an elevation of 640 m (2099 ft) above sea level, or 94 m (308 ft) above the modern river. The front (upper) part of Hamilton Cave has a classic network maze pattern that is an angular grid of relatively horizontal passages, most of which follow vertical or near-vertical joints that trend N50E or N40W. This part of the cave lies along the axis of Cave Knob anticline. In contrast, the passages in the back (lower) part of Hamilton Cave lie along the west flank of Cave Knob anticline at ~58–85 m (190–279 ft) above the modern river. These passages do not display a classic maze pattern, and instead they may be divided into the following two categories: (1) longer northeast-trending passages that are relatively horizontal and follow the strike of the beds; and (2) shorter northwest-trending passages that descend steeply to the west and follow the dip of the beds. Sediments in Hamilton Cave include mud (which was apparently not mined for nitrate during the American Civil War), as well as large boulders from the Slab Room to the Rosslyn Escalator. Gyp- sum crusts are present along passage walls of the New Creek Limestone from the Slab Room to the Airblower. Excavations in the front part of Hamilton Cave (maze section) have produced vertebrate fossils of Irvingtonian age (ca. 1.81 Ma–300 ka). The network maze portions of Hamilton Cave are interpreted as having developed at or near the top of the water table, where water did not have a free surface in contact with air and where the following conditions were present: (1) location on or near the anticline axis (the location of the greatest amount of flexure); (2) abundant vertical or near vertical joints, which are favored by location in the area of greatest flexure and by a lithologic unit (limestone with chert lenses) that is more likely to experience brittle rather than ductile deformation; (3) widening of joints to enhance ease of water infiltration, favored by location in area of greatest amount of flexure; and (4) dissolution along nearly all major joints to produce cave passages of approximately the same size (which would most likely occur via water without a free surface in contact with air). The cave passages that are located along anticline axes and along strike at the New Creek–Corriganville contact are interpreted as having formed initially during times of base-level stillstand at or near the top of the water table, where water did not have a free surface in contact with air and where the water flowed along the hydraulic gradient at gentle slopes. Under such conditions, dissolution occurred in all directions to produce cave passages with relatively linear wall morphologies. In the lower portions of some of the along-strike passages, the cave walls have a more sinuous (meandering) morphology, which is interpreted as having formed during subsequent initial base- level fall as cave development continued under vadose conditions where the water had a free surface in contact with air, and where water flow was governed primarily by gravitational processes. Steeply inclined cave passages that are located along dip at the New Creek–Corriganville contact are interpreted as having formed during subsequent true vadose conditions (after base-level fall). This chronology of base-level stasis (with cave development in the phreatic zone a short distance below the top of the water table) followed by base-level fall (with cave development in the vadose or epiphreatic zone) has repeated multiple times at Cave Knob during the past ~4–3 million years (m.y.), resulting in multiple cave passages at different elevations, with different passage morphologies, and at different passage locations with respect to strike and dip.

INTRODUCTION County, West Virginia, USA (Fig. 1). The JGCNP is owned by the National Speleological Society (NSS) and was established The Trout Rock caves are located in the John Guilday Caves in 1983 in order to protect the caves and their resources and to Nature Preserve (JGCNP), which is situated in a hill named ensure access for cavers. The property contains three relatively Cave Knob overlooking the South Branch of the Potomac River, large caves: Hamilton Cave, Trout Cave, and New Trout Cave. ~7.2 km or 4.5 mi southwest of the town of Franklin in Pendleton The property also contains six small caves: NSS Flood Cave,

Turnpike NORV TH 0 400 feet 0 100 meters Triangle

Room e V

Anticlin Axis of Secondary Crisco V Madness 18 Lower Level Bowl Room Square Star Chamber Room 16 Upper Airblower Level Old Room Clinometer 38 Anomaly New Room 24 Rosslyn 05 Upper (maze) level 16 16 Escalator 05 Slab Maze 13 Thrush

Room Hall V 10 30

e V FCC Saltpetre TROUT ROCK CAVES TC Maze (Pendleton County, West Virginia) Axis of AnticlinCave CC ont Passage Fr 19 35 Sugar Grove 7 1/2' quadrangle Knob 11

Entrance to Entrance to NSS Flood FRO Hamilton Cave Cave #1 & #2 35 Entrance to Trout Cave BCC and SC

Entrance to New Trout Cave US 220

Elevation above sea level Hamilton Cave Trout Cave New Trout Cave (Elevation above river) 641.6 m (95.6 m) 0 0 Upper (maze) Square Room level 623.6 m (77.6 m) New Room Front Passage, Maze 616.0 m (70.0 m) 20 Old Room Clinometer, Crisco Madness, Triangle Room 607.8 m (61.8 m) Airblower Coon Track Turnpike 100 601.7 m (55.7 m) Star Chamber Upper Saltpetre Maze 596.2 m (50.2 m) 40 Upper Level beyond Thrush Hall 594.4 m (48.4 m) 587.7 m (41.7 m) Most of New Trout Cave 60 200 574.6 m (28.6 m) m ft Lower Level 564.2 m (18.2 m)

Figure 1. Upper panel: Plan view map of the Trout Rock caves, John Guilday Caves Nature Preserve, Pendleton County, West Virginia (modified from Dasher, 2001; Swezey, 2014). Geological data on this map include strike and dip of beds, and the locations of anticline axes. BCC—Boulder Crawl Cave; CC—Cathy’s Crack; FCC—Film Can Cave; FRO #1 & #2—Trout Rock “For the Record Only” (FRO) Caves #1 and #2; SC—Spider Cave; TC—Trammelton Cave. Lower panel: Schematic cross section of the John Guilday Caves Nature Preserve, showing elevations of the major passages of Hamilton Cave (tan), Trout Cave (blue), and New Trout Cave (green). Right side of lower panel shows elevation in meters above sea level, followed in parentheses by elevation in meters above modern river. Width of the colored blocks denotes the horizontal extent of the cave-bearing interval at a given elevation (using the same horizontal scale as that used in the upper panel).

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 46 Swezey and Brent

Film Can Cave, Trammelton Cave, Cathy’s Crack, Boulder discontinued in central Pennsylvania and further south, and the Crawl Cave, and Spider Cave (West, 2001a,b,c,d,e). In addi- name “New Creek Limestone” is used instead; Bowen, 1967); tion, the property contains two very small “For the Record Only” (3) the Devonian Corriganville Limestone (previously called the (FRO) caves named Trout Rock FRO #1 and Trout Rock FRO “New Scotland Limestone” in some early publications, but this #2 (Ganter, 1984). Most caves on the property are open to gen- name has been discontinued in central Pennsylvania and further eral visitation by cavers. Trout Cave, however, was gated in 2008, south, and the name “Corriganville Limestone” is used instead; and for many years it was closed throughout the year to reduce Head, 1972); and (4) the Devonian Shriver Chert. More detailed disturbance to the federally endangered Indiana bats that roost descriptions of the Helderberg Group in eastern West Virginia within the cave. In 2019, however, Trout Cave was reopened for may be found in Dorobek and Read (1986), Báez Rodríguez limited visitation under strict guidelines during a few weeks of (2005), and Ryder et al. (2008). April and May. Most of the strata exposed along the paths to New Trout The caves of the JGCNP are located at various elevations Cave, Trout Cave, and Hamilton Cave are within the Keyser above the South Branch of the Potomac River (Fig. 2). In this Limestone, and consist of (1) an ~2-m- (7-ft-) thick unit of area, the river is at an elevation of ~546 m or 1791 ft above sea limestone and argillaceous limestone displaying laminations, level. According to Dasher (2001), the Hamilton Cave entrance cross-bedding, and small thrust faults; overlain by (2) an ~8-m- is located at an elevation of 640 m (2099 ft), the Trout Cave (26-ft-) thick unit of limestone consisting of numerous relatively entrance is located at an elevation of 622 m (2040 ft), and the homogenous 0.1–0.3-m- (0.3–1.0-ft-) thick beds of wackestone- New Trout Cave entrance is located at an elevation of 585 m packstone. At Cave Knob, the Keyser Limestone is overlain by an (1919 ft). The entrances to Film Can Cave, Trammelton Cave, ~9-m- (30-ft-) thick unit of gray crinoid-bearing limestone that and Cathy’s Crack are located between Hamilton Cave and Trout is mapped as the New Creek Limestone. The New Creek Lime- Cave at elevations of 617 m (2024 ft), 634 m (2080 ft), and 622 stone is a packstone to grainstone (according to the limestone m (2040 ft), respectively. The entrances to Trout Rock FRO#1 classification of Dunham, 1962) that contains abundant fossil and Trout Rock FRO#2 are located between Trout Cave and New debris. Crinoid columnals (“stems”) are particularly common, Trout Cave at elevations of 579 m (1899 ft) and 582 m (1909 ft), and horn corals and stromatoporoid fragments are also present. respectively. The entrances to Boulder Crawl Cave and Spider Cross-bedding is visible in a few places. Other features of the Cave are located to the east of New Trout Cave at elevations of New Creek Limestone include stylolites, which are irregular 597 m (1959 ft) and 610 m (2001 ft), respectively. The entrance suture-like contacts that form via dissolution under conditions to NSS Flood Cave is located at an elevation of 561 m (1840 ft). of deep burial and high pressure. The New Creek Limestone is The elevations of the entrances to some of the smaller caves overlain by an ~7-m- (23-ft-) thick unit of gray limestone (pack- cluster around the elevations of the entrances to the larger caves. stone to grainstone) that is mapped as the Corriganville Lime- For example, the entrance of Cathy’s Crack is at approximately stone. The Corriganville Limestone contains lenses and nodules the same elevation as the entrance of Trout Cave. Likewise, the of light-gray chert, as well as abundant brachiopod shells and entrances of Trout Rock FRO#1 and Trout Rock FRO#2 are at occasional horn corals and gastropods. Many of the brachiopod approximately the same elevation as the entrance of New Trout fossils are Spirifer macropleurus, which is characteristic of the Cave. This clustering suggests that these caves with entrances at Corriganville Limestone (Butts, 1940). The Corriganville Lime- similar elevations may have developed during approximately the stone is overlain by an ~54-m- (177-ft-) thick unit of dark-gray same time, when the river was at a certain elevation (base level) to black chert and cherty limestone (cherty carbonate mudstone, for a long enough duration for large caves to develop. according to the limestone classification of Dunham, 1962) that is mapped as the Shriver Chert. Beds range from nodular to STRATIGRAPHIC AND STRUCTURAL SETTING irregular with laminations. The unit is not exposed very well in outcrop, but is well exposed in the Square Room of Trout Cave Stratigraphy (Fig. 1). The Shriver Chert is capped by an unconformity, above which lies an >7-m- (>23-ft-) thick unit of yellow to red-brown The Trout Rock caves are located within limestone of the sandstone that is mapped as the Oriskany Sandstone (Butts, Silurian–Devonian Helderberg Group, which extends from New 1940; Woodward, 1943; Dennison, 1985). The sandstone is a York to Virginia (Fig. 3). At Cave Knob, the Helderberg Group quartzarenite composed of coarse to very fine quartz sand. Fos- is a >90-m- (295-ft-) thick unit of limestone, argillaceous lime- sils include common molds of the brachiopod Spirifer arenosus. stone, cherty limestone, and chert that is overlain by a >7-m- At Cave Knob, the Oriskany Sandstone is exposed only at the (>23-ft-) thick unit of sandstone that is mapped as the Devonian top of the hill above the caves. Oriskany Sandstone. At this location, the Helderberg Group is divided from base to top into the following four formations: Structural Geology (1) the Silurian–Devonian Keyser Limestone; (2) the Devo- nian New Creek Limestone (previously called the “Coeymans The major structural feature of Cave Knob is a northeast- Limestone” in some early publications, but this name has been trending anticline named Cave Knob anticline (Fig. 1). As with

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 Geology of the Trout Rock caves in West Virginia and implications regarding maze cave origins 47 Maze Star C. Northeas t Are a Saltpetre 0 10 0 20 0 ft 0 20 40 60 m Airblower m Saltpetre Maze 100 ft Old Room 20 m The “Big” Roo Slab Room 0 0 New Room l Upper (maze) Leve rout Cave T rout Cave New NSS Flood Cave Hamilton Cave T Modern River (South Branch of the Potomac River) Southwes t 640.1 m (2,100 ft ) 621.8 m (2,040 ft ) 585.2 m (1,920 ft ) 545.6 m (1,790 ft ) 560.8 m (1,840 ft ) Figure 2. Profile with elevation data of the Trout Rock caves, Pendleton County, West Virginia (modified from Dasher, 2001; Swezey, 2014). Areas in gray are sketches of passage Areas in gray are 2014). 2001; Swezey, (modified from Dasher, Virginia West Pendleton County, Trout Rock caves, data of the Figure 2. Profile with elevation ) ( Continued on following pages. Trout Cave. green—New Cave; blue—Trout Tan—Hamilton Cave; profiles from Dasher (2001).

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 48 Swezey and Brent Northeas t Respite Roo m Crisco Madness 640.1 m (2,100 ft ) 621.8 m (2,040 ft ) 585.2 m (1,920 ft ) 560.8 m (1,840 ft ) 545.6 m (1,790 ft ) Figure 2 ( Continued ). 0 100 200 ft 0 20 40 60 m Square Room Thrush Hall y 100 ft 20 m 0 0 Three By Sixt Clinometer Anomaly Room l Bowl Room Lower Leve Maze Star Chamber Southwes t

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 Geology of the Trout Rock caves in West Virginia and implications regarding maze cave origins 49 0 10 0 20 0 ft Northeast 0 20 40 60 m 100 ft 640.1 m (2,100 ft ) 621.8 m (2,040 ft ) 585.2 m (1,920 ft ) 560.8 m (1,840 ft ) 545.6 m (1,790 ft ) 20 m 0 0 Camp Misery ack Tr urnpik e Coon T Figure 2 ( Continued ). unne l T nd Wi n iangle Room Tr Union Statio Southwes t

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 50 Swezey and Brent

Approximate West Virginia Virginia Pennsylvania New York Epoch age (millions (Trout Rock (Breathing Cave) (Seawra Cave) (Howe Caverns) of years ago) caves) Marcellus Millboro Marcellus Shale Shale Shale Selinsgrove Onondaga Limestone Limestone Middle Devonian

393.3 Needmore Needmore Needmore Schoharie Shale Shale Shale Formation

Carlisle Center Formation

Esopus Formation

Oriskany Oriskany Ridgeley Oriskany

Early Devonian Sandstone Sandstone Sandstone Sandstone

WU Licking Shriver Shriver Port Ewan Ls. Creek Ls. Chert Chert Alsen Ls. Mandata Shale Becraft Ls. New Scotland Ls. Grou p Corriganville Ls. Corriganville Ls. Corriganville Ls. Kalkberg Ls. rg New Creek Ls. New Creek Ls. New Creek Ls. Coeymans Ls. 419.2 Manlius Keyser Keyser Keyser Limestone

Helderbe Limestone Limestone Limestone Rondout Fm. Cobleskill Ls. Tonoloway Tonoloway Salina Brayman Late Silurian Limestone Limestone Group Shale

= sandstone = chert = gray shale = black shale

= limestone = dolomite = evaporitic strata

= strata not present WU = Wallbridge unconformity

Figure 3. Chart of Silurian–Devonian stratigraphy in selected cave-bearing regions of the eastern United States (modified from Swezey and Garrity, 2011a; Swezey, 2014). The geologic time scale is from Gradstein et al. (2012).

most other anticlines in the Appalachian region, Cave Knob anti- BIOLOGICAL NOTES cline is very steep on its west flank and less steep on its east flank. The axis of the anticline transects Hamilton Cave, and the Both Hamilton Cave and Trout Cave are infected by a ter- strata dip at very low angles near the anticline axis. Some sec- restrial saprophyte (fungus) named Pseudogymnoascus destruc- ondary anticlines, which also trend northeast, are present on the tans that causes white-nose syndrome (WNS) in bats. At pres- southeast limb of Cave Knob anticline. One secondary anticline ent, the disease is not known to affect humans. In order to is visible in the Triangle Room of Trout Cave (Figs. 1 and 4) and minimize the risk of spreading WNS to other karst regions, another is visible at Trout Rock FRO #2 (Fig. 1). field-trip participants are asked to remove sediment/dirt Joints are another prominent structural feature of Cave Knob. from their clothes and gear upon exiting a cave. After this Many of the cave passages follow primary joint sets that trend field trip, participants are advised to wash their clothes and N50E or N40E, and some passages follow secondary joint sets that gear in hot water and to avoid taking the clothing and gear trend N40W. These joint sets are particularly well exposed in the used on this trip into other karst regions. Additional details maze (front) portion of Hamilton Cave, where the cave passages about WNS decontamination protocols are available at www have developed along vertical or near-vertical joints (Fig. 1). .whitenosesyndrome.org/topics/decontamination.

approximate location of anticline axis

stratastrata ddipip stratastrata ddipip toto tthehe NNWW toto tthehe SSEE

Figure 4. Photograph of the Triangle Room in Trout Cave (from Swezey, 2014). This room lies along the axis of a secondary anticline. Photo- graph by C.S. Swezey.

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 52 Swezey and Brent

The WNS-causing fungus came to North America from Hoffman’s springtail (Sinella hofmani) and the Luray Caverns Europe; it first appeared in North America in New York during blind cave millipede. In addition, Landolt et al. (1992) identi- 2006, and since then it has been spreading across North America fied the slime molds Dictyostelium sphaerocephalum and D. and killing millions of bats (Gargas et al., 2009; Lorch et al., rosarium. In New Trout Cave, Garton et al. (1993) identified the 2011; Swezey and Garrity, 2011a, 2011b; Minnis and Lindner, raccoon, and Fong et al. (2007) identified Hoffman’s springtail. 2013; Reeder and Moore, 2013; Forsythe et al., 2018; Verant et In NSS Flood Cave, Garton et al. (1993) identified the Allegh- al., 2018). White-nose syndrome was first detected in Pendleton eny woodrat. In Film Can Cave, West (2001b, p. 142) identified County during January 2009 at both Hamilton Cave and Trout a “cave rat that collects old film cans.” In Spider Cave, West Cave (U.S. Geological Survey National Wildlife Health Center, (2001d) identified many large, black spiders. 2009; Anonymous, 2010a, 2010b; Dasher, 2009; Hoke, 2009a, 2009b; Stihler, 2009; Turner et al., 2011). Interestingly, WNS STOP DESCRIPTIONS has not been reported from New Trout Cave (as of December 2019), despite proximity to Hamilton Cave and Trout Cave. The The following three stops are associated with this field trip: absence of WNS in New Trout Cave might be attributed to dif- (1) entrance to New Trout Cave; (2) entrance to Trout Cave; and ferences in cave meteorology and/or cave soil chemistry. Reli- (3) tour of Hamilton Cave. The coordinates of the cave entrances able data are sparse, but the relative humidity is notably lower are not given in this field guide in order to protect the caves from in New Trout Cave compared to Hamilton Cave and Trout Cave. possible vandalism. Nevertheless, the three stops of this field trip Anecdotal field evidence suggests that the fungus prefers sites of are located on the property of the JGCNP, which is owned by high humidity (68–100%; Swezey and Garrity, 2011a, 2011b), the NSS. The NSS requests that each caver on the property use although laboratory studies on this topic have not been published. a helmet with chin strap and carry at least three sources of light. Hamilton Cave, Trout Cave, and New Trout Cave were In addition, caving groups should consist of at least three people, inhabited by several species of bats prior to the arrival of WNS and there should be someone outside the caves who knows when (Fowler, 1941, 1942, 1943; Garton et al., 1993; Grady, 1993, to call for rescue. 1994; Hoke, 1991, 2003). Hamilton Cave was inhabited by the As stated previously, the Trout Rock caves have developed tri-colored bat (Perimyotis subflavus) [formerly the eastern pip- within limestone of the Silurian–Devonian Helderberg Group istrelle], the little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus), and the northern (Tilton et al., 1927; Haas, 1961; Davies, 1965; Palmer, 1975; long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). Trout Cave was inhab- Dyas, 1977; Medville, 2000a, 2000c; Dasher, 2001). More pre- ited by the big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), the tri-colored bat, cisely, most passages of Hamilton Cave, Trout Cave, and New the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), the little brown bat, the north- Trout Cave are located along the contact between the New Creek ern long-eared bat, and the Virginia big-eared bat (Corynorhi- Limestone and the overlying Corriganville Limestone (Swezey, nus townsendii virginianus). New Trout Cave was inhabited by 2014). Many other caves in Pendleton County have also devel- the big brown bat, the tri-colored bat, the eastern small-footed oped along the New Creek–Corriganville contact, including the bat (Myotis leibii), and the little brown bat. According to Hoke Sinnett-Thorn Mountain Cave System (Swezey et al., 2004a), (2010, 2011), Owens (2012), and Owens and Hoke (2013), the Cave Mountain Cave (Swezey and Dulong, 2010), and Short bat population in Hamilton Cave plummeted from a pre-WNS Cave (Dove, 2012). This stratigraphic contact appears to have average of 450 to only 5 in 2013, and the bat population in Trout been a preferential zone of fluid movement and/or a preferential Cave decreased from a pre-WNS average of 676 to only 135 in zone of soluble minerals throughout Pendleton County. As such, 2013. In contrast, the bats in New Trout Cave do not appear to this contact may be a karst “inception horizon,” which is a feature be afflicted by WNS, and their annual population has fluctuated thought to develop most commonly under phreatic conditions between mostly 30 and 50 (data from 1986 to 2013). Popula- (e.g., Lowe and Gunn, 1997; Filipponi et al., 2009). tion counts during March 2017 reported 9 bats in Hamilton Cave, 90 bats in Trout Cave, and 30 bats in New Trout Cave (Owens, Stop 1: Entrance to New Trout Cave 2017). The bat species in West Virginia that are most affected by WNS are the little brown bat, Indiana bat, northern long-eared The New Creek Limestone and the overlying Corrigan- bat, and the tri-colored bat (Stihler, 2017). ville Limestone are well exposed at the entrance to New Trout The caves of the JGCNP contain a variety of other fauna, in Cave (Fig. 5). New Trout Cave has been known since at least addition to bats. In Hamilton Cave, Garton et al. (1993) identi- the time of the American Civil War of 1861–1865 (Faust, 1964; fied the raccoon (Procyon lotor), Allegheny woodrat (Neotoma Davies, 1965). The first published mention of the name “New magister), slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), and phoebe Trout Cave” in the scientific/caving literature, however, appears (cf. Sayornis phoebe). In Trout Cave, Loomis (1939) identified to have been in a newsletter of the Washington, D.C., chapter of the Luray Caverns blind cave millipede (Zygonopus whitei), the NSS (Emmons, 1951). The cave was subsequently described Holsinger et al. (1976) identified two species of millipede (Pseu- in the book Caverns of West Virginia published by the West Vir- dotremia simulans and Trichopetalum whitei) and one species of ginia Geological and Economic Survey (Davies, 1958). A mod- spider (Islandiana speophila), and Fong et al. (2007) identified ern (1993) map of the cave may be found in the book The Caves

Corriganville C w m i e L Limeston e N New Cr Figure 5. Photograph of entrance to New Trout Cave. The strata here dip to the right (southeast) at an angle of 35°. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. The strata here dip to the right (southeast) at an angle of 35°. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. Cave. Trout Figure 5. Photograph of entrance to New

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 54 Swezey and Brent

and Karst of Pendleton County published by the West Virginia bat, ground sloth, pika, rabbit, chipmunk, woodchuck, squirrel, Speleological Survey (Dasher, 2001). rat, mouse, vole, lemming, muskrat, gopher, beaver, porcupine, The front part of New Trout Cave (near the entrance) con- wolf, coyote, fox, bear, raccoon, marten, fisher, skunk, weasel, sists of a long passage in strata that dip to the southeast at an mink, badger, peccary, caribou, deer, musk ox, and horse, as well angle of 35°. This passage is followed by a series of three rooms, as various birds, fish, hellbender, newt, salamander, frog, toad, beyond which is a complex and multilevel maze of passages that turtle, lizard, skink, and snake (Grady and Garton, 1980, 1981, is ~183 m (600 ft) long. Beyond the maze, there is a long and 1998, 2000, 2001; Grady, 1982, 1983, 1984a, 1984b, 1987b, low passage that trends northeast along a bedding plane that dips 1991a, 2001b, 2001c; Holman and Grady, 1987; Mead and southeast at an angle of ~30°. This passage leads to additional Grady, 1996; Holman, 1999; Grady and Baker, 2007). Fossils northeast-trending passages. Beyond a location named Thrush of invertebrate species include crayfish, terrestrial snails, aquatic Hall (Fig. 1), the northeast-trending passages trend slightly more snails, and bivalves (Bogan and Grady, 1991). At one site within toward the east than in other areas of the cave. the cave, Grady (1987b) described a 2.2-m- (7.2-ft-) thick inter- Most of New Trout Cave has developed along the contact val of fossil-bearing sediment, overlying clay without fossils. He between the New Creek Limestone and the overlying Corrigan- divided the fossil-bearing interval into eight units, which he des- ville Limestone (Davies, 1965), and most of the passages follow ignated from top to bottom as Level A through Level H. Each of joints that trend N50E or N40E. The longer passages in the cave these units was ~0.3 m (1.0 ft) thick except for Level H, which are approximately horizontal and extend northeast along strike. was 10 cm (3.9 in) thick. According to Grady and Garton (1980), Meteorological data have not been reported from New Trout Grady (1987b), and Holman and Grady (1987), bone collagen Cave. Much of the cave, however, is persistently very dry and from Level A yielded an age of 17,060 ± 220 in radiocarbon (14C) dusty, and the cave does not appear to receive appreciable mois- years before present (B.P.) (Smithsonian Institution radiocarbon ture either from groundwater or from air circulation. Further- number 4102), bone collagen from Level B yielded an age of more, the fact that white-nose syndrome has not been detected in 28,250 ± 850 14C yr B.P. (Smithsonian Institution radiocarbon New Trout Cave, whereas it was detected in nearby Trout Cave number 4103), and bone collagen from Level C yielded an age of and Hamilton Cave during January 2009, suggests that New 29,400 ± 1,700 14C yr B.P. (Smithsonian Institution radiocarbon Trout Cave would be an excellent location to study the influences number 4104). In addition, Grady (1987b) reported that a seed of cave air humidity on the distribution of WNS. from Level C yielded an age of 23,270 ± 270 14C yr B.P., and a Sediments in New Trout Cave include sand and mud on the seed from Level D yielded an age of 25,730 ± 380 14C yr B.P. cave floor, and in some places this sediment is >2.2 m (7.2 ft) Lower beds of cave sediment proved to be >30,000 years old, and thick (Holman and Grady, 1987; Grady and Garton, 2000). In thus were too old to date by the radiocarbon methods that were the front (southwest) part of the cave, large boulders are common available at that time (Grady, 1986b; Holman and Grady, 1987). (classified as “breakdown blocks” and “breakdown slabs,” using A subsequent study by Semken et al. (2010) reported that one terminology of White and White, 1969). The northeast end of the accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) date from the mandible cave “ends in a series of mud chokes” (Grady, 2001a, p. 253). of a taiga vole in New Trout Cave yielded an age of 13,360 ± Gypsum crusts are present in New Trout Cave in the maze 60 14C yr B.P. (University of Georgia, Center for Accelerator section ~213–305 m (~700–1000 ft) from the entrance. An anal- Mass Spectrometry [CAMS], AMS Number CAMS-20595). ysis by Swezey et al. (2002) of two gypsum samples from the They also reported that two AMS dates from mandibles of the cave revealed sulfur isotope (δ34S) values of –18.4 and –7.6 per eastern woodrat in New Trout Cave yielded ages of 47,200 and mil (parts per thousand). The negative δ34S values and their large 50,300 14C yr B.P. (AMS Number CAMS-20593 and AMS Num- range suggest that the sulfur in these gypsum samples was not ber CAMS-20592). These two older ages approach the limit for derived from the simple dissolution and reprecipitation of marine radiocarbon dating, and thus may be minimum ages for the sam- evaporite sulfate within the stratigraphic section. Instead, the sul- ples. All of these ages are reported in radiocarbon (14C) yr B.P. fate-sulfur was probably derived from the oxidation of diagenetic with a 1 sigma standard deviation of the age uncertainty, using the sulfide minerals (such as pyrite) and/or from organically bound Libby half-life of 5568 yr and with 0 B.P. being equivalent to AD sulfur in nearby strata. 1950. On the basis of comparison with fossils from other sites, During the American Civil War, sediment in New Trout Cave the faunal assemblage recovered from sediment in New Trout was mined for nitrate (Faust, 1964; Davies, 1965; Anonymous, Cave is thought to be of Rancholabrean age, ~300–10 thousand 1970; Powers, 1981; Garton and Garton, 2001; Taylor, 2001). A years ago (ka). Grady and Baker (2007), however, indicated that black substance, generally attributed to smoke from the miners’ the presence of the teeth of a small muskrat (Ondatra hiatidens) torches, is present in some places on the cave ceiling. Secretan suggests a much older age of ca. 500 ka. (1952) identified iron, manganese, aluminum, calcium, and silica (and possibly titanium, zirconium, and chromium) in one sample Stop 2: Entrance to Trout Cave of dark powder from the roof of New Trout Cave. Excavations at various locations in New Trout Cave have Along the northwesterly path from New Trout Cave to Trout produced numerous vertebrate fossils, including shrew, mole, Cave, the following two units may be seen within the Keyser

Limestone (Figs. 6 and 7): (1) an ~2-m- (7-ft-) thick unit of lime- (10 April 1977), which found that during the morning when the stone and argillaceous limestone displaying laminations, cross- outside air temperature was 0 °C (32 °F), air flowed into the cave bedding, and small thrust faults; overlain by (2) an ~8-m- (26-ft-) along the bottom of the cave passage and air flowed out of the thick unit of limestone consisting of numerous relatively homog- cave along the top of the cave passage. In that study, the mean air enous 0.1–0.3-m- (0.3–1.0-ft-) thick beds of wackestone-pack- temperature was 9 °C (48 °F) 152.4 m (~500 ft) inside the cave, stone. These two units have been repeated by faulting and thrust- although the air temperature near the ceiling was several degrees ing. At a site where the path changes from relatively horizontal to warmer than the air temperature near the floor. During the after- going steeply up the hill, there is some folded and vertical bed- noon when the outside air temperature was 13 °C (55 °F), the air ding where a thrust fault may be located (Fig. 8). Above the zone currents reversed so that warm air flowed in along the top of the of folded and vertical bedding, the New Creek Limestone and cave passage and cooler air flowed out along the bottom of the the overlying Corriganville Limestone are well exposed at the cave passage. Despite this reversal in flow directions, the mean entrance to Trout Cave (Fig. 9), which is located ~100 m (328 ft) air temperature inside the cave remained at 9 °C (48 °F). northwest of the New Trout Cave entrance. Much of Trout Cave has a floor of dry to slightly damp Like New Trout Cave, Trout Cave has been known since at mud, and near the entrance this sediment is at least 4 m (13 ft) least the time of the American Civil War (Faust, 1964; Davies, thick (Guilday, 1967). In the front (southwest) part of the cave, 1965). The first published mention of the name “Trout Cave” in large boulders are common (classified as breakdown blocks and the scientific/caving literature, however, appears to have been in breakdown slabs, using terminology of White and White, 1969). the book Pendleton County published by the West Virginia Geo- Northeast of the Square Room in an area known as Crisco Mad- logical Survey (Tilton et al., 1927). In a study of Devonian strata ness (Fig. 1), the passage floor is covered by a very sticky and wet of West Virginia, Woodward (1943) noted that the roof of Trout mud. According to Landolt et al. (1992), two sediment samples Cave contains excellent specimens of the brachiopod Eospiri- collected from somewhere in the cave had the following chemi- fer. The cave was subsequently described in the book Caverns cal parameters: calcium (Ca) = >1500 ppm; magnesium (Mg) = of West Virginia published by the West Virginia Geological and 594 ppm; phosphorus (P) = 125 ppm; potassium (K) = 508 ppm; Economic Survey (Davies, 1958). A modern (1993) map of the pH = 7.4. The significance of these chemical parameters is not cave may be found in the book The Caves and Karst of Pendle- certain because there are very few published studies on the com- ton County published by the West Virginia Speleological Survey position and chemistry of cave sediments. Such data, however, (Dasher, 2001). may be important for determining controls on the distribution of Trout Cave is characterized by many northeast-trending white-nose syndrome. passages, although a small area of network maze passages is During the American Civil War, sediment in Trout Cave was present in the westernmost portion of Trout Cave that is closest mined for nitrate (Faust, 1964; Davies, 1965; Anonymous, 1970; to Hamilton Cave. These maze passages lie along the axis of a Powers, 1981; Garton and Garton, 2001; Taylor, 2001). Analysis secondary northeast-trending anticline on the east flank of the of one sediment sample from Trout Cave revealed a nitrate con- main anticline (Fig. 1). The “Triangle Room” also lies along the centration of ~2100 ppm, which is similar to the concentrations axis of this secondary anticline (Fig. 4). As with Hamilton Cave, of nitrate in the sediment of other West Virginia caves that were most of Trout Cave has developed along the contact between the mined for nitrate (Swezey et al., 2004b). New Creek Limestone and the overlying Corriganville Lime- Excavations at various locations in Trout Cave have pro- stone (Haas, 1961; Davies, 1965; Palmer, 1975; Medville, 2000b; duced numerous vertebrate fossils, including shrew, mole, bat, Dasher, 2001). One location in Trout Cave (the “Square Room”), pika, rabbit or hare, woodchuck, chipmunk, squirrel, rat, mouse, however, extends from the Corriganville Limestone into the over- vole, lemming, muskrat, gopher, beaver, porcupine, bear, coy- lying Shriver Chert (Swezey, 2003). The very back (northeast) ote, raccoon, bobcat, weasel, skunk, horse, peccary, deer, end of Trout Cave is filled with large boulders of sandstone that pigeon, hellbender, and catfish, as well as passenger pigeon, are described as breakdown slabs (West, 2003). These sandstone salamander, frog, toad, lizard, and snake (Guilday, 1967, 1971, boulders may be derived from the Oriskany Sandstone. The lon- 1979; Zakrzewski, 1975; Holman, 1982, 1999; Grady, 1981d, ger passages in Trout Cave are approximately horizontal and 1984b, 1985, 2001b, 2001c; Pfaff, 1990; Winkler and Grady, extend northeast along strike. Most of the passages in the cave 1990; Grady and Garton, 1998, 2000, 2001). Fossils of inver- have developed along joints that trend N50E, N40E, or N40W. tebrate species include both terrestrial and aquatic snails (Guil- In the front (southwest) part of the cave, strata dip 12° to the east. day, 1967; Bogan and Grady, 1991). In addition, fossil Celtis Meteorological data from Trout Cave are sparse, consisting (hackberry) seeds have also been recovered from sediment in mostly of air temperature measurements. Davies (1965) reported Trout Cave (Holman, 1982). The faunal assemblages recovered air temperatures of ~12 °C (54 °F); Hoke (2001) reported air tem- from sediment in the upper levels of Trout Cave are thought peratures ranging from 6.7 to 8.9 °C (44–48.1 °F); and Swezey to be of Rancholabrean age (ca. 300–10 ka), whereas faunal et al. (2004b) reported air temperatures ranging from 43 to assemblages recovered from sediment in the lower levels of 55 °F (6–13 °C) and relative humidity ranging from 81 to 92%. In the cave are thought to be of Irvingtonian age, ca. 1.81 million addition, Dyroff (1977) published an account of a one-day study years ago (Ma)–300 ka.

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 56 Swezey and Brent Figure 6. Photograph of the Keyser Limestone along the path from New Trout Cave to Trout Cave. Person is pointing to the contact between the lower ~2-m- (7-ft-) thick unit of Person is pointing to the contact between lower Cave. Trout to Cave Trout Limestone along the path from New Figure 6. Photograph of the Keyser Photograph by C.S. Swezey. homogenous 0.1–0.3-m- (0.3–1.0-ft-) thick beds of wackestone-packstone. ~8-m- (26-ft-) thick unit of relatively laminated limestone and the overlying

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 Geology of the Trout Rock caves in West Virginia and implications regarding maze cave origins 57 Figure 7. Photograph of small thrust fault (just above pocket knife) within unit of argillaceous limestone in the Keyser Limestone along the path from New Trout Cave to Trout Cave. Cave. Trout to Cave Trout Limestone along the path from New limestone in the Keyser knife) within unit of argillaceous pocket (just above Figure 7. Photograph of small thrust fault a sense of scale. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. knife provides An 8.9-cm- (3.5-in-) long pocket movement. sense of fault denote relative Arrows

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 58 Swezey and Brent Figure 8. Photograph of outcrop of folded and vertical bedding along a thrust fault in the Keyser Limestone on path to Trout Cave. Light-blue lines denote vertical bedding planes. Light-blue lines denote vertical Cave. Trout Limestone on path to in the Keyser bedding along a thrust fault Figure 8. Photograph of outcrop folded and vertical Photograph by C.S. Swezey.

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 Geology of the Trout Rock caves in West Virginia and implications regarding maze cave origins 59 Figure 9. Photograph of entrance to Trout Cave. Hand is on contact between the New Creek Limestone and overlying Corriganville Limestone. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. Limestone. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. Corriganville Creek Limestone and overlying Hand is on contact between the New Cave. Trout Figure 9. Photograph of entrance to

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 60 Swezey and Brent Figure 10. Photograph of the New Creek Limestone near entrance to Hamilton Cave. Person is pointing to a fragment of a stromatoporoid. Cross-bedding that dips to the left (west) left the to dips that Cross-bedding stromatoporoid. a of fragment a to pointing is Person Cave. Hamilton to entrance near Limestone Creek New the of Photograph 10. Figure hand in the left portion of image. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. is visible above

Stop 3: Hamilton Cave (Tour of Cave) Creek Limestone is exposed along the passage walls. In this area, many of the passage walls have a sinuous (meandering) morphol- Along the northwesterly path from Trout Cave to Hamilton ogy (Fig. 15), and the cave lacks well-developed network maze Cave, the same following two units may be seen within the Key- morphologies. The passages in the back (lower) part of Hamilton ser Limestone (from base to top): (1) an ~2-m- (7-ft-) thick unit Cave beyond the Slab Room may be divided into the following of limestone and argillaceous limestone displaying laminations, two categories: (1) northeast-trending passages that follow the cross-bedding, and small thrust faults; overlain by (2) an ~8-m- strike of the beds; and (2) northwest-trending passages that fol- (26-ft-) thick unit of limestone consisting of numerous relatively low the dip of the beds. The northeast-trending passages that fol- homogenous 0.1–0.3-m- (0.3–1.0-ft-) thick beds of wackestone- low the strike of the beds are relatively longer and approximately packstone. The entrance of Hamilton Cave is located along the horizontal (e.g., passage at the entrance to the Airblower; Figs. 1 axis of Cave Knob anticline, ~165 m (541 ft) northwest of the and 16). In contrast, the northwest-trending passages that follow Trout Cave entrance, at the northwest end of the path that runs the dip of the beds are relatively short and descend steeply to the along the base of the outcrops at the JGCNP. Near the entrance to northwest (e.g., the Rosslyn Escalator; Figs. 1 and 17). Hamilton Cave, where the path changes from relatively horizon- Meteorological data from Hamilton Cave are sparse, tal to going steeply up the hill, there are excellent exposures of consisting mostly of air temperature measurements. Dyroff’s the New Creek Limestone and the overlying Corriganville Lime- (1977) one-day study (10 April 1977) found that the air flowed stone. At the outcrop just before the path goes steeply uphill, the consistently out of the cave during the morning and afternoon, New Creek Limestone contains cross-bedding, abundant crinoid and that the average air temperature inside the cave was 12 °C columnals (“stems”), some stromatoporoid fragments, and sty- (53 °F). Hoke (2009a, 2009b) reported that air always flows out lolites (Fig. 10). The contact between the New Creek Limestone of the cave during the winter, and that data loggers just inside and the overlying Corriganville Limestone is located ~1–2 m the cave entrance recorded air temperatures that ranged from (3.3–6.6 ft) below the entrance to Hamilton Cave (Fig. 11), and 13 °C (55 °F) at the beginning of winter to 10.8 °C (51.5 °F) at at this location the Corriganville Limestone is characterized by the end of winter. brachiopod shells as well as chert nodules and lenses. Much of Hamilton Cave has a floor of dry to damp mud. In Like New Trout Cave and Trout Cave, Hamilton Cave has some parts of the cave (e.g., Slab Room, room before Rosslyn been known for a long time, but there is no evidence that sedi- Escalator), large boulders are common (classified as breakdown ment in the cave was mined for nitrate during the American Civil blocks and breakdown slabs, using terminology of White and War. The first published mention of the name “Hamilton Cave” in White, 1969). In parts of the cave west of the Airblower, water the scientific/caving literature appears to have been in the Bulle- drips from stalactites and wet mud is present on the cave floor. tin of the National Speleological Society (Stephenson, 1942). The Columns and flowstone are also present in the Old Room and in cave was subsequently described in the book Caverns of West Vir- the room before the Old Room. ginia published by the West Virginia Geological and Economic Gypsum crusts are present within Hamilton Cave along the Survey (Davies, 1958). A modern (1988) map of the cave may be passage walls of the New Creek Limestone from the Slab Room found in the book The Caves and Karst of Pendleton County pub- to the Airblower (Fig. 18). Swezey et al. (2002) reported that the lished by the West Virginia Speleological Survey (Dasher, 2001). analysis of four gypsum samples collected in the passage imme- The front (upper) part of Hamilton Cave has a classic net- diately southwest of the Airblower revealed sulfur isotope (δ34S) work maze pattern that is an angular grid of passages, most of values that range from –11.8 to –10.3 per mil (‱). Additional which follow vertical or near-vertical joints that intersect at right analyses of two of these samples revealed oxygen isotope (δ18O) angles. This part of the cave lies along the axis of Cave Knob values of –11.8 and –11.2 ‱. The negative δ34S values and their anticline (Fig. 1), and most of the passages are located along the large range suggest that the sulfur in these gypsum samples was contact between the New Creek Limestone and the overlying not derived from the simple dissolution and reprecipitation of Corriganville Limestone (Figs. 12 and 13) along joints that trend marine evaporite sulfate within the stratigraphic section. Instead, N50E or N40W. In many of the maze passages, the New Creek the sulfate-sulfur was probably derived from the oxidation of Limestone is obscured by sediment (predominantly mud) that diagenetic sulfide minerals (such as pyrite) and/or from organi- has accumulated on the passage floors, and the visible cave walls cally bound sulfur in nearby strata. The δ18O values are consistent are mostly the Corriganville Limestone, which contains promi- with values expected for sulfate derived from the weathering of nent lenses of chert that protrude into the cave passages (Fig. 14). sulfide minerals where the dominant oxidizing agent is oxygen In contrast with the front (maze) section of Hamilton Cave, dissolved in local meteoric water (Swezey et al., 2002). the passages in the back (lower) part of the cave (beyond the Slab Excavations in the front (maze) part of Hamilton Cave have Room) lie along the west flank of Cave Knob anticline, where produced numerous vertebrate fossils, including bat, shrew, mole, strata dip ~30° to the northwest. Many of these passages are pika, rabbit, woodchuck, squirrel, rat, mouse, vole, lemming, also located along the New Creek–Corriganville contact, but the muskrat, gopher, beaver, porcupine, coyote, dog, raccoon, bear, passages have formed more within the New Creek Limestone weasel, skunk, otter, badger, saber-tooth cat, jaguar, cheetah, (limestone without chert lenses) such that much more of the New bobcat, peccary, deer, tapir, and horse, as well as snake, lizard,

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 62 Swezey and Brent Figure 11. Photograph of entrance to Hamilton Cave. Person is pointing to the uppermost obvious occurrence of crinoid columnals (“stems”). The New Creek–Corriganville contact Creek–Corriganville The New occurrence of crinoid columnals (“stems”). Person is pointing to the uppermost obvious Figure 11. Photograph of entrance to Hamilton Cave. (Fig. 12) than it is in the outcrops outside inside the cave The contact is more obvious between these crinoid columnals (“stems”) and the entrance to cave. is located somewhere entrance. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. the cave

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 Geology of the Trout Rock caves in West Virginia and implications regarding maze cave origins 63 Figure 12. Photograph of the contact between the New Creek Limestone and the overlying Corriganville Limestone in Hamilton Cave. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. Photograph by C.S. Swezey. Limestone in Hamilton Cave. Corriganville Creek Limestone and the overlying Figure 12. Photograph of the contact between New

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 64 Swezey and Brent

Figure 13. Photograph of fossil brachiopod shells in the Corriganville Limestone in Hamilton Cave (from Swezey, 2014). An 8.9-cm- (3.5-in-) long pocket knife provides a sense of scale. Photograph by C.S. Swezey.

turtle, toad, frog, and salamander (Grady, 1981a,b,c; 1983, 1985, spectrometry (AMS) date from the mandible of a taiga vole in 1986a, 1987a, 1988, 1991a,b, 1992, 2001b,c, 2005; Repenning Hamilton Cave yielded an age of 12,730 ± 60 14C yr B.P. (AMS and Grady, 1988; Holman and Grady, 1989; Van Valkenburgh et Number CAMS-20589). This age is reported in radiocarbon yr al., 1990; Winkler and Grady, 1990; Mead and Grady, 1996; Hol- before present (B.P.) with a 1 sigma standard deviation of the age man, 1999; Grady and Garton, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2005; Martin et uncertainty, using the Libby half-life of 5568 yr and with 0 B.P. al., 2003, 2009). Fossils of invertebrate species include crayfish, being equivalent to AD 1950. millipede, terrestrial snails, aquatic snails, and bivalves (Bogan and Grady, 1991). The vertebrate faunal assemblage recovered DISCUSSION from sediment in Hamilton Cave is thought to be of Irvingto- nian age (ca. 1.81 Ma–300 ka). In most of the publications by The Trout Rock caves are excellent sites for examining the Grady and colleagues (listed above), it is estimated that this geologic controls on cave morphology and cave location. The faunal assemblage is ~800 thousand years old, on the basis of recognition that individual caves have both network maze pas- the assemblage of rodent and pika fossils. Martin et al. (2003, sages and non-maze passages yields important information on 2009), however, estimated that the vertebrate faunal assemblage the variables required for the development of maze caves. In in Hamilton Cave is ~1.6–1.3 million years (m.y.) old. In addi- addition, the variations in passage morphology and passage location, Semken et al. (2010) reported that one accelerator mass tion with respect to strike and dip may be related to positions

Figure 14. Photograph of joint-controlled passage in the maze section of Hamilton Cave (from Swezey, 2014). The small protruding ledges are lenses of chert within the Corriganville Limestone. A 14-cm- (5.5-in-) long pen is shown for scale. Photograph by C.S. Swezey.

of the water table during cave development. Finally, the relative (2) The thickness of the overlying bedrock (Oriskany Sand- elevations of the caves with respect to the modern river provide stone) being less over Hamilton Cave (compared to Trout a framework for speculating about the ages of the Trout Rock Cave and New Trout Cave), resulting in greater joint caves, a framework for proposing a chronology of water-table enlargement by erosional unloading; behavior at this site during the past few million years, and a (3) Groundwater recharge to Hamilton Cave both as diffuse framework for possible regional correlations with cave levels recharge from the surface and as backflooding from the elsewhere in the Appalachian region. South Branch of the Potomac River. In the publication by Palmer (1975), however, the map of The Origin of Maze Caves Hamilton Cave shows only the front (maze) portion of the cave. With the subsequent availability of more extensive and more Hamilton Cave is an instructive place to investigate the con- detailed maps (Fig. 1), it is apparent that classic maze pattern trols on network maze caves. In a classic study, Palmer (1975) is restricted to only the front (upper) part of the cave. Hamil- attributed the maze character of Hamilton Cave to the combina- ton Cave is much more extensive than was mapped originally tion of the following three factors: (Davies, 1965), and some parts of the cave have maze character- (1) Tension along the axis of the anticline creating promi- istics, whereas other parts of the cave do not. Therefore, with the nent joints; availability of new data, it now appears that the network maze

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 66 Swezey and Brent Figure 15. Photograph of cave passage wall with sinuous (meandering) morphology in the New Creek Limestone between the Slab Room and Rosslyn Escalator (e.g., with sinuous (meandering) morphology in the New passage wall Figure 15. Photograph of cave Photograph by C.S. Swezey. the maze section) in Hamilton Cave. beyond

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 Geology of the Trout Rock caves in West Virginia and implications regarding maze cave origins 67 Figure 16. Photograph of the Airblower in Hamilton Cave. The Airblower is the opening in the rock next to the person’s head. The strata shown here are beds in the New Creek Lime - here are beds in the New The strata shown head. to the person’s is the opening in rock next Airblower The in Hamilton Cave. Airblower Figure 16. Photograph of the of the beds. Photograph by E.L. Brent. along the strike passage has developed The cave stone that dip to the left (northwest) at an angle of 38°.

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 68 Swezey and Brent

Figure 17. Photograph of upper (southeast) entrance to the Rosslyn Escalator in Hamilton Cave. The passage (and the photograph) are oriented down the dip of the beds (dip is ~38° northwest) along the contact between the New Creek Limestone and the overlying Corriganville Limestone. Photograph by C.S. Swezey.

ggypsuypsum cruscrust

Figure 18. Gypsum crust on the New Creek Limestone near the Airblower in Hamilton Cave (from Swezey, 2014). Gypsum crust is ~5 cm (2 in) thick. Photograph by C.S. Swezey.

portion of Hamilton Cave developed where the following condi- tact with air—in other words, cave development at or near tions were present: the top of the water table or under deep phreatic condi- (1) Location on or near the axis of an anticline (the location tions, not vadose conditions). The interpretation that the of the greatest amount of flexure); network maze portion of Hamilton Cave developed at or (2) Abundant vertical or near vertical joints, favored by loca- near the top of the water table or under deeper phreatic tion in area of greatest amount of flexure and by a litho- conditions is supported by the observation that most of the logic unit (limestone with chert lenses) that is more likely cave is located along the same stratigraphic contact, which to experience brittle deformation than ductile deforma- is interpreted as a karst “inception horizon” (thought to tion; develop most commonly under phreatic conditions; Lowe (3) Widening of joints to enhance ease of water infiltration, and Gunn, 1997; Filipponi et al., 2009). In addition, the favored by location in area of greatest amount of flexure major cave passages of Hamilton Cave are oriented nearly (a correlation with the thickness of the Oriskany Sand- parallel to strike, and the cave passages terminate abruptly stone may or may not be important here); in both updip and downdip directions. In areas of dipping (4) Dissolution along nearly all major joints to produce cave strata, such characteristics suggest that a cave developed passages of approximately the same size (which would near the top of the water table/phreatic zone (Palmer, most likely occur via water without a free surface in con- 1991, 2005a, 2005b; Audra and Palmer, 2011).

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 70 Swezey and Brent

In contrast, the back (lower) level of Hamilton Cave is inter- cline axis, but they lack well-developed network maze patterns. preted as having formed later as the water table fell, and pas- Examples from Bath County (Virginia) include Sand Canyon in sage enlargement occurred preferentially within the New Creek Butler Cave and the Burns Streamway in the greater Chestnut Limestone by flowing water with a free surface in contact with Ridge Cave System (White, 2015; Swezey et al., 2017). Thus, the air (vadose conditions). A phreatic to vadose transition is sug- location of the greatest amount of flexure (anticline or syncline gested by the presence from the Slab Room to the top of the axis) is not the sole criterion necessary for the development of Rosslyn Escalator of large boulders, classified as breakdown network maze caves. blocks and breakdown slabs, which according to Palmer (2007) are most likely to form when a passage is first drained of water The Development of Caves in Relation to the Position of and buoyant support of the ceiling is removed. In addition, the the Water Table wavy and scalloped morphology of the cave walls in Hamilton Cave between the Slab Room and the Rosslyn Escalator (Fig. Some early publications suggested that caves develop deep 15) strongly suggests that passage morphology in this area was below the water table where groundwater flow paths are likely shaped by flowing water with a free surface in contact with air to be stable for a long duration (e.g., Davis, 1930; Bretz, 1942), (vadose conditions). Vadose conditions are also suggested by the whereas other publications suggested that caves are most likely northwest-trending passages of relatively short length that follow to develop at and/or just below the water table (especially the the dip of the beds and descend steeply to the northwest in the zone of water-table fluctuation), where the groundwater flow is back (lower) part of Hamilton Cave beyond the Slab Room (e.g., most vigorous (e.g., Swinnerton, 1932). Subsequent publications the Rosslyn Escalator; Fig. 19). concluded that caves may develop both above the water table (in Despite being located along the axis of an anticline, a maze the vadose zone), below the water table (in the phreatic zone), pattern did not develop within the back (lower) part of Hamilton and in the zone of transition (epiphreatic or epigenic zone) where Cave. The absence of a network maze pattern may be attributed water-table fluctuations occur (Ford and Ewers, 1978; Palmer, to the combination of the following features: (1) a less dense net- 1991, 2005a, 2005b). On a worldwide basis, however, at least work of joints, possibly related to the lower portion of the cave 80%–90% of known caves are thought to have developed in epi- being located predominantly within the New Creek Limestone genetic settings (Audra and Palmer, 2011). where the lack of chert lenses resulted in slightly more ductile Some clues about cave development with respect to the deformation; and (2) flowing water with a free surface in contact water table may be determined by answering certain questions with air (vadose conditions), which prevented slow and simulta- regarding cave location and passage morphology. For example: neous dissolution along all possible conduits. (1) Are the major cave passages located along strike, or along Published details of other nearby maze caves are relatively dip, or do they cut across strike or dip? sparse, but it seems likely that at least some other maze caves (2) Are the slopes of the major cave passages gentle or steep? may share similar geologic and geomorphological characteris- (3) Do the major cave passages change size in the direction tics. For example, both Withero’s Cave (Bath County, Virginia) of the nearest river valley? and Paxton’s Cave (Alleghany County, Virginia) have network (4) What are the shapes in profile of the major cave passages, maze passages and are located in Silurian–Devonian limestone and how are these profile shapes related to stratigraphic on or near the axes of anticlines (Stephenson, 1945; Baroody, bedding or structural features? 1966–1967). Likewise, Helictite Cave and Owl Cave (both in (5) Do the elevations of major cave passages correlate with Highland County, Virginia) also have network maze passages, the elevations of nearby river terraces? and are located in Silurian–Devonian limestone on or near the With respect to strike and dip, cave passages that follow the axes of anticlines (Swezey et al., 2017; Brent et al., 2019). Fur- dip of bedding are generally considered to have developed above thermore, both Helictite Cave and Owl Cave have the following the water table (under vadose conditions), whereas cave passages geomorphological characteristics, which are similar to those of that follow the strike of bedding are generally considered to have Hamilton Cave (Swezey et al., 2017; Brent et al., 2019): developed under the influence of a water table or under deeper (1) An upper level of horizontal passages that follow inter- phreatic conditions (Palmer, 1991, 2005a; Audra and Palmer, secting joints at right angles, thought to have developed 2011). Under vadose conditions, the water has a free surface in under conditions where the water did not have a free sur- contact with air, and water flow is governed primarily by gravita- face in contact with air (either at shallow depths beneath tional processes. Therefore, in areas of dipping strata, most cave the water table or under deeper phreatic conditions); passages that form under vadose conditions are relatively short (2) A lower level of passages with wavy (meandering) pas- and they descend abruptly along dip (unless prominent fractures sage wall morphology, thought to have developed subse- impose other trends). Excellent examples include Breathing Cave quently under vadose conditions where the water had a and Butler Cave in Bath County, Virginia (Deike, 1960; Swezey free surface in contact with air. et al., 2017). In contrast, under phreatic conditions (either at shal- In contrast, nearby caves that are located along the axes of low depths beneath the water table or under deeper phreatic con- synclines tend to have a major trunk channel that follows the syn- ditions), the water does not have a free surface in contact with air,

West East

Elevation above sea level 2,040 ft 620 m Upper NE-trending horizontal passage Corriganville Limestone that extends along the strike of the beds New Creek Limestone 2,020 ft ~614.5 m (2,016 ft) elevation above sea level

Rosslyn Escalator, passage that follows dip of the 610 m 2,000 ft beds, and connects upper and lower NE-trending horizontal passages

Lower NE-trending horizontal passage (at the Airblower) that extends along the strike of the beds 1,980 ft ~603.2 m (1,979 ft) elevation above sea level 600 m 0 50 ft eek Limestone 0 10 m CorriganvilleNew Limestone Cr

Chronology of Events: (1) Water table stillstand above ~614.5 m (2,016 ft) elevation above sea level: Upper NE-trending horizontal passage that extends along the strike of the beds [the floor of this passage is located at ~614.5 m (2,016 ft) elevation above sea level] developed under phreatic conditions at or near the top of the water table. Water did not have a free surface in contact with air, and water flow followed the hydraulic gradient at a gentle slope.

(2) Initial drop in water table: In the upper NE-trending horizontal passage, breakdown blocks and breakdown slabs formed when passage was first drained of water. Flowing water had a free surface in contact with air, and cave walls in the upper NE-trending horizontal passage developed a wavy and scalloped morphology in the lower part of the passage (New Creek Limestone).

(3) New water table stillstand above ~603.2 m (1,979 ft) elevation above sea level: Rossyln Escalator, which is a passage that descends steeply along the dip of the beds, developed under vadose conditions (above the water table), and water flow down this passage was governed primarily by gravitational processes. At the position of the new water table stillstand, the lower NE-trending horizontal passage that extends along the strike of the beds [the floor of this passage is located at ~603.2 m (1,979 ft) elevation above sea level] developed under phreatic conditions at or near the top of the water table. Water did not have a free surface in contact with air, and water flow followed the hydraulic gradient at a gentle slope.

Figure 19. Schematic cross section and chronology of events at the Rosslyn Escalator in Hamilton Cave. The Rosslyn Escalator is a relatively short northwest-trending passage that descends steeply along dip at the contact between the New Creek Limestone and the overlying Corriganville Limestone. At the top and base of the Rosslyn Escalator, the upper NE-trending horizontal passage and the lower NE-trending horizontal passage (shown in schematic profile) are relatively long and they extend along the strike of the beds at the contact between the New Creek Limestone and the overlying Corriganville Limestone.

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 72 Swezey and Brent

and water flow tends to follow the hydraulic gradient at gentle Yet other passages have bell-shaped profiles where the passage slopes. Therefore, in areas of dipping strata, most cave passages morphology is controlled by a fold in the strata (e.g., Triangle that form under phreatic conditions (either at shallow depths Room in Trout Cave; Fig. 4). beneath the water table, or under deeper phreatic conditions) Finally, if the elevations of major cave passages correlate do not follow the dip of the strata. Furthermore, in areas of dip- with the elevations of nearby river terraces, then it is likely that ping strata, elongate cave passages that extend along the strike of the development of these cave passages occurred at or near the bedding, and that terminate abruptly in both updip and downdip elevation of a water table (Davies, 1960; Palmer, 1987, 1991). directions, are thought to have developed at or near the top of the Furthermore, in a cave with multiple levels, the larger cave pas- water table/phreatic zone (Palmer, 1991, 2005a, 2005b; Audra sages are those that remained active for a longer duration, and and Palmer, 2011). Excellent examples from Pendleton County the development of these larger passages usually correlates with include Cave Mountain Cave (Swezey and Dulong, 2010) and times of nearly static base level and with times of greater devel- the longer northeast-trending passages of the Trout Rock caves opment of river floodplains (Palmer, 1987, 1991). At Cave Knob, (Hamilton Cave, Trout Cave, New Trout Cave), where the major for example, each of the three major caves (Hamilton, Trout, New cave passages are oriented nearly parallel to strike. Trout) has passages at discrete levels or elevations (Fig. 2), and Cave passage length and slope can provide some clues to Davies (1960) thought that these different cave-level elevations water-table influences on cave development (Palmer, 1991, correspond closely with the elevations of nearby river terraces 2005a; Audra and Palmer, 2011). As stated above, in areas of dip- at the town of Franklin and at the mouth of nearby Thorn Creek. ping strata, most cave passages that are relatively short and that In summary, the assumption that each of the three large descend abruptly are thought to have developed under vadose Trout Rock caves (Hamilton Cave, Trout Cave, New Trout Cave) conditions. In contrast, cave passages that are relatively long and formed initially at or near the water table is supported by the fol- that have a relatively gentle slope are thought to have developed lowing observations: at or near the top of the water table/phreatic zone. (1) The major cave passages are elongate along the strike of Changes in the size of major cave passages may provide bedding, and they terminate abruptly in both updip and additional clues to water-table influences on cave development. downdip directions. For example, Davies (1960) noted that many caves in the Appa- (2) The major cave passages are inclined at gentle gradients. lachian region have passages that are large in the part of the cave (3) The major cave passages of Trout Cave and New Trout closest to a nearby river valley, whereas cave passages are pro- Cave are larger where they are closest to the nearby river gressively narrow and lower in height with increasing distance valley, and they are progressively narrow and lower in from the nearby river valley. He implied that this feature was height with increasing distance from the river valley. indicative of a water-table control on cave development, and he (4) The three caves have developed along the same strati- cited both Trout Cave and New Trout Cave as examples. graphic contact, which is interpreted as a karst “incep- The shape in profile of a cave passage may provide use- tion horizon” (thought to develop most commonly under ful information on cave development (Deike, 1989; White and phreatic conditions; Lowe and Gunn, 1997; Filipponi et Deike, 1989; Palmer, 1991, 2005a; Audra and Palmer, 2011). al., 2009). For example, unless prominent fractures impose other trends, (5) The elevations of the major cave passages correlate with dissolution by groundwater at or below the water table (in the the elevations of nearby river terraces (postulated by phreatic zone) tends to form tubular passages with lenticular, Davies, 1960). elliptical, or nearly circular cross sections. If the water table Likewise, the assumption that each of the three large Trout drops and phreatic passages are abandoned, then the water will Rock caves experienced a subsequent phreatic to vadose transi- have a free surface in contact with air (vadose conditions), and tion is supported by the following observations: the water may cut a canyon in the cave floor to form a keyhole (1) The wavy and scalloped morphology of the cave walls in cross section. Within a given cave, some passages have profiles the New Creek Limestone in the lower (sub-maze) por- that are clearly controlled by joints, whereas other passages tion of Hamilton Cave from the Slab Room to the top of have profiles that are clearly controlled by bedding planes (e.g., the Rosslyn Escalator; Butler Cave; Swezey et al., 2017). “Joint-controlled passages” (2) The northwest-trending passages of relatively short usually have greater height to width ratios than “bedding-plane length that follow the dip of the beds and descend controlled passages.” In the maze (front) portion of Hamilton steeply to the northwest in the back (lower) part of Cave and in the northwest portion of Trout Cave, the cave pas- Hamilton Cave beyond the Slab Room (e.g., the Ross- sages are clearly joint controlled. Palmer (1991) attributed the lyn Escalator); development of most maze caves to “simultaneous enlargement (3) The presence throughout the caves of large boulders that of many competing openings.” In contrast, other portions of are classified as breakdown blocks and breakdown slabs, Trout Cave and some portions of New Trout Cave have pas- which according to Palmer (2007) are most likely to form sages with trapeziform cross sections (Davies, 1960), which when a passage is first drained of water and buoyant sup- are governed primarily by bedding planes of dipping strata. port of the ceiling is removed.

The Ages of the Trout Rock Caves cave, and the age estimate of 1.5–0.5 m.y. for New Trout Cave is consistent with the estimate of 0.5 m.y. for the older fauna from Reliable estimates for the age of a cave are difficult to the cave. obtain, although an approximate age may be estimated by using the following assumptions and observations: (1) assuming that Regional Correlations of Cave Levels the cave formed at and/or not far below the top of the water table; (2) noting the elevation of the cave above the elevation of the If the Trout Rock caves are a few million years old, and nearby river; and (3) assuming an average rate of fluvial incision if the along-strike northeast-trending passages developed under and erosion during the past several million years. the influence of a water table that was at a stable position for a There are several means of estimating an average rate of flu- long duration, then it is tempting to correlate portions of each vial incision and erosion. One estimate is provided by Springer et of the three caves with distinct episodes of water-table stillstand al. (1997), who used cave magneto-stratigraphy and elevation data during the past few million years. The biggest drop in water to estimate an incision rate of ~61 m (200 ft) per m.y., or 30.5 m table during the past few million years was probably coincident (100 ft) of incision every 0.5 m.y., for the Cheat River Basin in with the sudden increase in ice sheet extent in the Arctic that Monongalia and Preston Counties, West Virginia. Their incision occurred ca. 3.1–2.5 Ma (e.g., Shackleton et al., 1984; Maslin rate would suggest that Hamilton Cave formed ca. 1.5 Ma, Trout et al., 1998; Haug et al., 1999; Prueher and Rea, 2001). With Cave formed ca. 1.2 Ma, New Trout Cave formed ca. 0.6 Ma, and subsequent behavior of the northern hemisphere ice sheet and NSS Flood Cave formed ca. 0.25 Ma. corresponding influences on sea level, episodes of ice sheet sta- Another estimate is provided by Matmon et al. (2003), who bility might correlate with times of water table at stable posi- used 10Be techniques in the Great Smoky Mountain National Park tions (approximately horizontal cave passages developing along (North Carolina, Tennessee) to estimate an erosion rate of ~27 m strike), and episodes of ice sheet growth might correlate with (89 ft) per m.y. for the Mesozoic and Cenozoic (i.e., during the times of water-table falls (steeply dipping cave passages devel- past 252 m.y. according to the geologic time scale of Gradstein oping along the dip of bedding). et al., 2012). This erosion rate is equivalent to ~30.5 m (100 ft) With these assumptions in mind, a proposed chronology of of erosion every 1.1 m.y., and would suggest that Hamilton Cave events is outlined as follows: formed ca. 3.5 Ma, Trout Cave formed ca. 2.8 Ma, New Trout (1) ca. 3.5–3.1 million years ago (Ma): Water table still- Cave formed ca. 1.4 Ma, and NSS Flood Cave formed ca. 0.6 Ma. stand; upper (maze) part of Hamilton Cave at ~631– In summary, as a very general first-order approximation, for 641 m elevation (85–95 m above modern river) devel- every 30 m (~100 ft) of elevation that a cave is located above oped in phreatic zone (below water table) along New the modern river, one might estimate ~1 m.y. (±50%) of time for Creek–Corriganville contact; incision and erosion. Interestingly, a similar order of magnitude (2) ca. 3.1–2.5 Ma: Water table dropped coincident with the was presented by Dole and Stabler (1909), who calculated that onset of glaciation in the northern hemisphere; in some the surface of the United States is being removed at the rate of upper parts of Hamilton Cave (e.g., Slab Room, Room 2.54 cm (1 in) per 760 yr, or 30 m (~100 ft) per ~912,000 yr. before Rosslyn Escalator), northwest-trending passages Despite approximately similar orders of magnitude, the ero- that follow the dip of the bedding were modified in the sion rate estimates should be viewed very cautiously. At Dolly vadose zone or epiphreatic zone; Sods Wilderness, which is located ~48 km (30 miles) due north (3) ca. 2.5–1.5 Ma: Several water-table falls and stillstands; of the Trout Rock caves, Hancock and Kirwan (2007) calculated Development of much of Trout Cave and lower por- a mean bare-bedrock erosion rate of 5.7 m (18.7 ft) per m.y., tions of Hamilton Cave, specifically passages at 601.7– which is much lower than typical rates of fluvial incision in the 623.6 m elevations (or 55.7–77.6 m above modern river); central Appalachian region. Furthermore, Mills (2000) demon- (4) ca. 1.5–0.5 Ma: Another water table stillstand; most of New strated that incision rates in the Appalachian region have not been Trout Cave (~574.6–587.7 m elevation, or 28.6–41.7 m constant, and that changes in climate may accelerate or deceler- above modern river) developed in phreatic zone (below ate rates of fluvial incision. Nevertheless, the rates listed above water table) along New Creek–Corriganville contact; yield a general estimate that Hamilton Cave may have started to (5) After 0.5 Ma: Water table dropped again to near present develop ca. 3.5–1.5 Ma, Trout Cave may have started to develop position. ca. 3–1 Ma, New Trout Cave may have started to develop ca. Using the chronology proposed above for the Trout Rock 1.5–0.5 Ma and NSS Flood Cave may have started to develop ca. caves, it is tempting to make comparisons with ages proposed by 600–250 ka. The paleo-fauna (fossils) found among sediment in Granger et al. (2001) and Anthony and Granger (2007) for differ- a cave must be younger than the age of the cave, and thus the age ent cave levels at Mammoth Cave in Kentucky and in the Cum- estimate of 3.5–1.5 m.y. for Hamilton Cave is consistent with the berland River Basin in Tennessee and Kentucky. For example: estimate of 0.80 m.y. for the fauna found in the cave. Likewise, (1) The upper (maze) portion of Hamilton Cave (~623.6– the age estimate of 3–1 m.y. for Trout Cave is consistent with the 641.6 m elevation, or 77.6–95.6 m above modern river) estimate of 1.8–0.3 m.y. for the fauna from the lower levels of the might be comparable with Cave Level A at Mammoth

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 74 Swezey and Brent

Cave (>80 m above the Green River; age range estimated Audra, P., and Palmer, A.N., 2011, The pattern of caves: Controls of epigenic at 4.12–3.12 Ma) and with the Highland Rim upper cave speleogenesis: Géomorphologie: Relief, Processus, Environnement, 2011, no. 4, p. 359–378. level of the Cumberland River Basin (66–91 m above Báez Rodríguez, N., 2005, Stratigraphy of the Silurian–Devonian Upper Hel- modern river; age range estimated at 6.77–3.10 Ma). derberg Group in Northeastern West Virginia (U.S.A.) [M.S. thesis]: May- (2) Much of Trout Cave (~601.7–623.6 m elevation, or agüez, Puerto Rico, University of Puerto Rico, 133 p. Baroody, R., 1966–1967, Notes on geology of Paxton’s Cave: Cavalier Caver, v. 55.7–77.6 m above modern river) might be comparable 8, no. 4 and v. 9, no. 1, p. 1–2 [Reprinted as Baroody, R., 1974, Notes on with Cave Level B at Mammoth Cave (50–80 m above geology of Paxton’s Cave, in McCutchen, G.P., ed., Speleo Digest 1967: the Green River; age range estimated at 2.39–1.91 Ma) Huntsville, Alabama, National Speleological Society, p. 2–13 to 2–14]. Bogan, A.E., and Grady, F.V., 1991, Two Pleistocene molluscan faunas from and with the middle cave level/Parker strath of the Cum- eastern West Virginia, in Purdue, J.R., Klippel, W.E., Styles, B.W., and berland River Basin (40–54 m above modern river; age Parmalee, P.W., eds., Beamers, Bobwhites, and Blue-Points—Tributes to range estimated at 2.62–0.68 Ma). the Career of Paul W. Parmalee: Illinois State Museum Scientific Papers 23 and The University of Tennessee Department of Anthropology Report (3) Most of New Trout Cave (~574.6–587.7 m elevation, or of Investigations No. 52, p. 189–213. 28.6–41.7 m above modern river) might be comparable Bowen, Z.P., 1967, Brachiopoda of the Keyser Limestone (Silurian–Devonian) with Cave Level D at Mammoth Cave (30 m above the of Maryland and Adjacent Areas: Geological Society of America Memoir 102, 103 p., https://doi.org/10.1130/MEM102-p1. Green River; age range estimated at 1.57–1.33 Ma) and Brent, E.L., Knez, M.H., Williams, B.S., Swezey, C.S., Haynes, J.T., and Lucas, with the lower cave level/first terrace below Parker strath P.C., 2019, Geology and geomorphology of Owl Cave (Siphon No. 1 of the Cumberland River Basin (28–38 m above modern Cave) in the Silurian–Devonian Keyser Limestone, Highland County, Virginia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 51, river; age range estimated at 1.24–0.48 Ma). no. 3, https://doi.org/10.1130/abs/2019SE-326421. Although the chronology and correlations proposed above Bretz, JH., 1942, Vadose and phreatic features of limestone caverns: The Jour- are quite speculative, as more data become available on the ele- nal of Geology, v. 50, p. 675–811, https://doi.org/10.1086/625074. Butts, C., 1940, Geology of the Appalachian Valley in Virginia: Virginia Geo- vations, morphologies, geologic settings, and ages of caves, it logical Survey Bulletin 52, pt. I—Geologic Text and Illustrations, 568 p. might be possible to determine whether the different cave levels Dasher, G.R., ed., 2001, The Caves and Karst of Pendleton County: West Vir- at Cave Knob have developed in response to local changes or in ginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, 404 p. Dasher, G., 2009, WNS updates: The West Virginia Caver, v. 27, no. 3, p. 12. response to regional/global changes in water table, climate, and Davies, W.E., 1958, Caverns of West Virginia: West Virginia Geological and tectonic activity. In other words, it might be possible to deter- Economic Survey, v. 19A, 330 p. mine whether or not the different cave levels of the Trout Rock Davies, W.E., 1960, Origin of caves in folded limestone: National Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, v. 22, pt. 1, p. 5–18. caves are part of a larger assemblage of cave levels in the east- Davies, W.E., 1965, Caverns of West Virginia (2nd edition): West Virginia Geo- ern United States that developed synchronously in response to logical and Economic Survey, v. 19A, 330 p. with separate 72 p. supple- regional forcing mechanisms. ment. Davis, W.M., 1930, Origin of limestone caverns: Geological Society of Amer- ica Bulletin, v. 41, p. 475–628, https://doi.org/10.1130/GSAB-41-475. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Deike, G.H., III, 1960, Origin and geologic relations of Breathing Cave, Virginia: National Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, v. 22, pt. 1, p. 30–42. The authors thank the Potomac Speleological Club, Bob Hoke, Deike, G.H., III, 1989, Fracture controls on conduit development, in White, Dave West, and numerous other cavers who have accompa- W.B., and White, E.L., eds., Karst Hydrology; Concepts from the Mam- nied us on various trips to the Trout Rock caves during the moth Cave Area: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, p. 259–291, https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-7317-3_10. past several years. Grant Colip, Andrew Everett, Karlee Dennison, J.M., 1985, Devonian sea level curve for Virginia and West Virginia Prince, and Katherine Worms provided additional field assis- compared with eustatic curve of Johnson, Klapper, and Sandberg (1985) tance in preparation for this GSA field trip. The manuscript and relations to hydrocarbons: Appalachian Basin Industrial Associates, Program for Fall Meeting (17–18 October 1985), v. 9, p. 57–81. was improved by suggestions from reviewers John Repetski Dole, R.B., and Stabler, H., 1909, Denudation, in Papers on the Conservation (U.S. Geological Survey) and John Haynes (James Madison of Water Resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 234, University). Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for p. 78–93. Dorobek, S.L., and Read, J.F., 1986, Sedimentology and basin evolution of descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the Siluro-Devonian Helderberg Group, central Appalachians: Jour- the U.S. Government. nal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 56, no. 5, p. 601–613, https://doi.org/ 10.1306/212F89E5-2B24-11D7-8648000102C1865D. Dove, V.A., 2012, The Geologic Control, Development, and Survey of Short REFERENCES CITED Cave in Pendleton County, West Virginia [B.S. thesis]: Morgantown, West Virginia, West Virginia University, 54 p. Anonymous, 1970, Pendleton County’s saltpetre caves and their role in the Dunham, R.J., 1962, Classification of carbonate rocks according to depositional Civil War: Karst Kaver, v. 4, no. 4, p. 13–17. texture, in Ham, W.E., ed., Classification of Carbonate Rocks: American Anonymous, 2010a, White nose syndrome (WNS) news: The Northeastern Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 1, p. 108–121. Caver, v. 41, no. 2, p. 41–43. Dyas, M., 1977, Hamilton Cave—New information: DC Speleograph, v. 33, Anonymous, 2010b, WNS in Hellhole: The West Virginia Caver, v. 28, no. 2, no. 1, p. 6–7. p. 10. Dyroff, T., 1977, Hamilton Trout connection?: D.C. Speleograph, v. 33, no. 7, Anthony, D.M., and Granger, D.E., 2007, A new chronology for the age of p. 11–12. Appalachian erosional surfaces determined by cosmogenic nuclides in Emmons, C., 1951, Some cave fungi: DC Speleograph, v. 5, no. 10, p. 1–2. cave sediments: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 32, p. 874– Faust, B., 1964, Saltpeter caves and Virginia history, in Douglas, H.H., ed., 887, https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1446. Caves of Virginia: Falls Church, Virginia, Virginia Cave Survey, p. 31–55.

Filipponi, M., Jeannin, P.-Y., and Tacher, L., 2009, Evidence of inception hori- Grady, F., 1993, The 1993 bat count at the Trout Rock caves: The West Virginia zons in karst conduit networks: Geomorphology, v. 106, p. 86–99, https:// Caver, v. 11, no. 3, p. 5. doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2008.09.010. Grady, F., 1994, Bat counts at Hamilton and Trout Caves: The West Virginia Fong, D.W., Culver, D.C., Hobbs, H.H., III, and Pipan, T., 2007, The Inverte- Caver, v. 12, no. 3, p. 7. brate Cave Fauna of West Virginia (2nd edition): West Virginia Speleo- Grady, F., 2001a, New Trout Cave, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst logical Survey Bulletin 16, 163 p. of Pendleton County: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, Ford, D.C., and Ewers, R.O., 1978, The development of limestone cave systems p. 253, 255–256. in the dimensions of length and depth: Canadian Journal of Earth Sci- Grady, F., 2001b, Quaternary vertebrate fossils found in Pendleton County ences, v. 15, p. 1783–1798, https://doi.org/10.1139/e78-186. caves, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst of Pendleton County: Forsythe, A., Giglio, V., Asa, J., and Xu, J., 2018, Phenotypic divergence along West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, p. 87–88. geographic gradients reveals potential for rapid adaptation of the white- Grady, F., 2001c, The Pleistocene faunas of the Guilday Cave Preserve, Pend- nose syndrome pathogen, Pseudogymnoascus destructans, in North leton County, West Virginia, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst America: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, v. 84, no. 16, paper of Pendleton County: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, e00863-18, 16 p. p. 89–93. Fowler, J.A., 1941, Systematic list of the fauna collected from caves: National Grady, F., 2005, Hamilton Cave, West Virginia paleontology update: Journal of Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, no. 2, p. 44–47. Caves and Karst Studies, v. 67, no. 3, p. 194. Fowler, J.A., 1942, Cave fauna … Recent additions to the checklist of fauna Grady, F., and Baker, C., 2007, New finds from New Trout Cave, Pendleton from caves explored by the National Speleological Society: National Spe- County, West Virginia: Journal of Caves and Karst Studies, v. 69, no. 3, leological Society (NSS) Bulletin, no. 3, p. 34–35. p. 371–372. Fowler, J.A., 1943, Cave fauna: National Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, Grady, F.V., and Garton, E.R., 1980, New Trout Cave bone dig annual report: no. 5, p. 37–40. Karst Kaver, v. 13, no. 1, p. 3–12. Ganter, J., 1984, Trout Rock FRO holes: DC Speleograph, v. 40, no. 7, p. 11–12. Grady, F.V., and Garton, E.R., 1981, The collared lemming Dicrostonyx hudo- Gargas, A., Trest, M.T., Christensen, M., Volk, T.J., and Blehert, D.S., 2009, nius (Pallas) from a Pleistocene cave deposit in West Virginia, in Beck, Geomyces destructans sp. nov. associated with bat white-nose syndrome: B.F., ed., Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Speleology, Mycotaxon, v. 108, p. 147–154, https://doi.org/10.5248/108.147. v. 1, p. 279–280. Garton, E.R., Grady, F., and Carey, S.D., 1993, The Vertebrate Fauna of West Grady, F., and Garton, R., 1998, The Pleistocene faunas of the Guilday Cave Virginia Caves: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 11, 107 p. Preserve, Pendleton County, West Virginia: The West Virginia Caver, Garton, M.E., and Garton, R., 2001, Pendleton County’s saltpeter caves and their v. 16, no. 6, p. 3–7. role in the Civil War, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst of Pendleton Grady, F., and Garton, R., 2000, Paleontology and historic field trip of the John County: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, p. 70–73. Guilday Cave Preserve (Trout Rock), in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves of Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M.D., and Ogg, G.M., 2012, The Geologic East-Central West Virginia: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin Time Scale 2012, v. 2: Amsterdam, Elsevier, p. 437–1144. 14, p. 241–244. Grady, F., 1981a, A Pleistocene cheetah from West Virginia: DC Speleograph, Grady, F., and Garton, R., 2001, The Pleistocene faunas of the Guilday Cave v. 37, no. 9, p. 7. Preserve, Pendleton County, West Virginia, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Grady, F., 1981b, Saber tooth cats from West Virginia caves: DC Speleograph, Caves and Karst of Pendleton County: West Virginia Speleological Sur- v. 37, no. 9, p. 9. vey Bulletin 15, p. 89–93. Grady, F., 1981c, The Hamilton Cave jaguar: Potomac Speleograph, a joint Grady, F., and Garton, E.R., 2005, Pleistocene beaver tooth is new record for publication of The Potomac Caver (v. 24, no. 4, p. 3) and the DC Speleo- West Virginia: Journal of Caves and Karst Studies, v. 67, no. 3, p. 194– graph (v. 37, no. 4, p. 3). 195. Grady, F., 1981d, Trout Cave fossil bone discovery: DC Speleograph, v. 37, Granger, D.E., Fabel, D., and Palmer, A.N., 2001, Pliocene–Pleistocene inci- no. 2, p. 9. sion of the Green River, Kentucky, determined from radioactive decay of Grady, F., 1982, Pleistocene fauna from New Trout Cave: Capital Area Cavers cosmogenic 26Al and 10Be in Mammoth Cave sediments: Geological Soci- Bulletin, v. 1, p. 62–69. ety of America Bulletin, v. 113, p. 825–836, https://doi.org/10.1130/0016 Grady, F., 1983, Recent paleontological work at the John Guilday Cave Pre- -7606(2001)113<0825:PPIOTG>2.0.CO;2. serve: DC Speleograph, v. 39, no. 9, p. 9. Guilday, J.E., 1967, Trout fishing: The Netherworld News, v. 15, no. 9, p. 188– Grady, F., 1984a, First annual progress report on the Pleistocene faunas of the 192. John Guilday Cave Preserve: National Speleological Society (NSS) Bul- Guilday, J.E., 1971, The Pleistocene history of the Appalachian mammal fauna, letin, v. 46, no. 1, p. 6 of supplement. in Holt, P.C., ed., The Distributional History of the Biota of the South- Grady, F., 1984b, Paleontological fauna of the John Guilday Cave Preserve: DC ern Appalachians, Part III: Vertebrates: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and Speleograph, v. 40, no. 7, p. 18–21. State University Research Division Monograph 4, p. 233–262. Grady, F., 1985, Second annual report on the paleontology of the caves at the Guilday, J.E., 1979, Eastern North American Pleistocene Ochotona (Lago- John Guilday Cave Preserve: National Speleological Society (NSS) Bul- morpha: Mammalia): Annals of Carnegie Museum, v. 48, article 24, letin, v. 47, no. 1, p. 69. p. 435–444. Grady, F., 1986a, Hamilton Cave 1985: DC Speleograph, v. 42, no. 1, p. 23. Haas, J., 1961, Haas hits (field) house: Cleve-O-Grotto News, v. 8, no. 1, p. 5–6. Grady, F., 1986b, The significance of bone sites in West Virginia caves: The Hancock, G., and Kirwan, M., 2007, Summit erosion rates deduced from 10Be: West Virginia Caver, v. 4, no. 4, p. 11–12. Implications for relief production in the central Appalachians: Geology, Grady, F., 1987a, Fossil mammals from Hamilton Cave, A progress report, in v. 35, no. 1, p. 89–92, https://doi.org/10.1130/G23147A.1. Kite, J.S., ed., Research on the Late Cenozoic of the Potomac Highlands: Haug, G.H., Sigman, D.M., Tiedemann, R., Pedersen, T.F., and Sarnthein, M., Southeastern Friends of the Pleistocene, v. 1 [West Virginia Geological 1999, Onset of permanent stratification in the subarctic Pacific Ocean: and Economic Survey Open-File Report OF 8802], p. 63–66. Nature, v. 401, p. 779–782, https://doi.org/10.1038/44550. Grady, F., 1987b, Update on paleontological work in New Trout Cave, Pendle- Head, J.W., 1972, Upper Silurian–Lower Devonian stratigraphy and nomencla- ton Co., West Virginia: The Potomac Caver, v. 30, no. 6, p. 4–11. ture in the central Appalachians, in Dennison, J.M., de Witt, W., Jr., Has- Grady, F., 1988, The extinct skunk Brachyprotoma obtusata from three caves son, K.O., Hoskins, D.M., and Head, J.W., III, field trip leaders, Stratigra- in West Virginia: National Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, v. 50, phy, Sedimentology, and Structure of Silurian and Devonian Rocks along no. 1, p. 33. the Allegheny Front in Bedford County, Pennsylvania, Allegany County, Grady, F., 1991a, Fossil Chiroptera from two West Virginia caves: National Maryland, and Mineral and Grant Counties, West Virginia: Guidebook Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, v. 53, no. 2, p. 122. for the 37th Annual Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists: Mid- Grady, F., 1991b, Hamilton Cave, West Virginia: Paleontology update: National dletown, Pennsylvania, Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists, Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, v. 53, no. 1, p. 32. p. 96–103. Grady, F., 1992, Platygonus vetus and Platygonus compressus from Hamilton Hoke, B., 1991, Trout Rock bat counts: The Potomac Caver, v. 34, no. 1, p. 6–7. Cave, West Virginia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Pro- Hoke, B., 2001, 2001 Trout Rock Caves bat counts: The West Virginia Caver, grams, v. 24, no. 6, p. 15–16. v. 19, no. 2, p. 11.

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 76 Swezey and Brent

Hoke, B., 2003, 2003 Trout Rock bat counts: DC Speleograph, v. 59, no. 2, p. 9. Owens, K., 2012, 2012 Trout Rock bat counts: The West Virginia Caver, v. 30, Hoke, B., 2009a, White nose syndrome has come to West Virginia: DC Speleo- no. 3, p. 14. graph, v. 65, no. 1, p. 5. Owens, K., 2017, 2017 Trout Rock bat counts: The Potomac Caver, v. 60, no. 2, Hoke, B., 2009b, White-nose syndrome appears to have come to West Virginia: p. 13–15 [Data reprinted in “The West Virginia Caver” (2017), v. 35, The West Virginia Caver, v. 27, no. 2, p. 12. no. 3, p. 10–11]. Hoke, B., 2010, 2010 Trout Rock bat counts—WNS takes its toll: The West Owens, K., and Hoke, B., 2013, 2013 Trout Rock bat counts: DC Speleograph, Virginia Caver, v. 28, no. 3, p. 6–9. v. 68, no. 6, and v. 69, no. 1, p. 11–12. Hoke, B., 2011, 2011 Trout Rock Caves bat count: The West Virginia Caver, Palmer, A.N., 1975, The origin of maze caves: National Speleological Society v. 29, no. 3, p. 7–10. (NSS) Bulletin, v. 37, no. 5, p. 56–76. Holman, J.A., 1982, The Pleistocene (Kansan) herpetofauna of Trout Cave, Palmer, A.N., 1987, Cave levels and their interpretation: National Speleological West Virginia: Annals of Carnegie Museum, v. 51, article 20, p. 391–404. Society (NSS) Bulletin, v. 49, p. 50–66. Holman, J.A., 1999, Appalachian Pleistocene herpetofaunas; General stasis in Palmer, A.N., 1991, Origin and morphology of limestone caves: Geological the Epoch, in Eckerlin, R.P., ed., Proceedings of the Appalachian Bio Society of America Bulletin, v. 103, p. 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1130/0016 geography Symposium: Virginia Museum of Natural History Special -7606(1991)103<0001:OAMOLC>2.3.CO;2. Publication 7, p. 145–153. Palmer, A.N., 2005a, Passage growth and development, in Culver, D.C., and Holman, J.A., and Grady, F., 1987, Herpetofauna of New Trout Cave: National White, W.B., eds., Encyclopedia of Caves: Amsterdam, Elsevier, p. 440– Geographic Research, v. 3, no. 3, p. 305–317. 444. Holman, J.A., and Grady, F., 1989, The fossil herpetofauna (Pleistocene: Irving- Palmer, A.N., 2005b, Solution caves in regions of moderate relief, in Culver, tonian) of Hamilton Cave, Pendleton County, West Virginia: National D.C., and White, W.B., eds., Encyclopedia of Caves: Amsterdam, Else- Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, v. 51, no. 1, p. 34–41. vier, p. 527–535. Holsinger, J.R., Baroody, R.A., and Culver, D.C., 1976, The Invertebrate Cave Palmer, A.N., 2007, Cave Geology: Dayton, Ohio, Cave Books, 454 p. Fauna of West Virginia: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 7, Pfaff, K.S., 1990, Irvingtonian Microtus, Pedomys, and Pitymys (Mammalia, 82 p. Rodentia, Cricetidae) from Trout Cave No. 2, West Virginia: Annals of the Landolt, J.C., Stephenson, S.L., and Stihler, C.W., 1992, Cellular slime molds Carnegie Museum, v. 59, no. 2, p. 105–134. in West Virginia caves including notes on the occurrence and distribution Powers, J., 1981, Confederate niter production: National Speleological Society of Dictyostelium rosarium: Mycologia, v. 84, no. 3, p. 399–405, https:// (NSS) Bulletin, v. 43, no. 4, p. 94–97. doi.org/10.1080/00275514.1992.12026153. Prueher, L.M., and Rea, D.K., 2001, Volcanic triggering of late Pliocene glacia- Loomis, H.F., 1939, The millipeds collected in Appalachian caves by Mr. Ken- tion: Evidence from the flux of volcanic glass and ice-rafted debris to the neth Dearolf: Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard North Pacific Ocean: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecol- College, v. 86, no. 4, p. 165–193. ogy, v. 173, p. 215–230, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-0182(01)00323-6. Lorch, J.M., Meteyer, C.U., Behr, M.J., Boyles, J.G., Cryan, P.M., Hicks, A.C., Reeder, D.M., and Moore, M.S., 2013, White-nose syndrome: A deadly emerg- Ballmann, A.E., Coleman, J.T.H., Redell, D.N., Reeder, D.M., and Ble- ing infectious disease of hibernating bats, in Adams, R.A., and Peder- hert, D.S., 2011, Experimental infection of bats with Geomyces destruc- sen, S.C., eds., Bat Evolution, Ecology, and Conservation: New York, tans causes white-nose syndrome: Nature, v. 480, p. 376–378, https://doi Springer, p. 413–434, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7397-8_20. .org/10.1038/nature10590. Repenning, C.A., and Grady, F., 1988, The microtine rodents of the Cheetah Lowe, D., and Gunn, J., 1997, Carbonate speleogenesis: An inception horizon Room fauna, Hamilton Cave, West Virginia, and the spontaneous origin of hypothesis: Acta Carsologica, v. 38, p. 457–488. Synaptomys: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1853, 32 p. Martin, R.A., Duobinis-Gray, L., and Crockett, C.P., 2003, A new species of Ryder, R.T., Swezey, C.S., Crangle, R.D., Jr., and Trippi, M.T., 2008, Geologic Early Pleistocene Synaptomys (Mammalia, Rodentia) from Florida and its cross section E–E′ through the central Appalachian Basin from the Find- relevance to southern bog lemming origins: Journal of Vertebrate Paleon- lay Arch, Wood County, Ohio, to the Valley and Ridge Province, Pendle- tology, v. 23, no. 4, p. 917–936, https://doi.org/10.1671/2291-16. ton County, West Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investiga- Martin, R.A., Marcolini, F., and Grady, F., 2009, The Early Pleistocene Hamil- tions Map SIM-2985, 2 sheets with 48-p. pamphlet, http://pubs.er.usgs. ton Cave muskrats and a review of muskrat size change through the Late gov/publication/sim2985. Neogene: Paludicola, v. 7, no. 2, p. 61–66. Secretan, L., 1952, A spectrographic analysis, or “adventures with a homemade Maslin, M.A., Li, X.S., Loutre, M.-F., and Berger, A., 1998, The contribution spectrograph”: DC Speleograph, v. 6, no. 8–9, p. 1–2. of orbital forcing to the progressive intensification of northern hemisphere Semken, H.A., Jr., Graham, R.W., and Stafford, T.W., Jr., 2010, AMS 14C glaciation: Quaternary Science Reviews, v. 17, p. 411–426, https://doi analysis of Late Pleistocene non-analog faunal components from 21 cave .org/10.1016/S0277-3791(97)00047-4. deposits in southeastern North America: Quaternary International, v. 217, Matmon, A., Bierman, P.R., Larsen, J., Southworth, S., Pavich, M., and Caffee, no. 1–2, p. 240–255, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2009.11.031. M., 2003, Temporally and spatially uniform rates of erosion in the south- Shackleton, N.J., Backman, J., Zimmerman, H., Kent, D.V., Hall, M.A., Rob- ern Appalachian Great Smoky Mountains: Geology, v. 31, no. 2, p. 155– erts, D.G., Schnitker, D., Baldauf, J.G., Desprairies, A., Homrighausen, 158, https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(2003)031<0155:TASURO>2.0 R., Huddlestun, P., Keene, J.B., Kaltenback, A.J., Krumsiek, K.A.O., .CO;2. Morton, A.C., Murray, J.W., and Westberg-Smith, J., 1984, Oxygen iso- Mead, J.I., and Grady, F., 1996, Ochotona (Lagomorpha) from late Quater- tope calibration of the onset of ice-rafting and history of glaciation in nary cave deposits in eastern North America: Quaternary Research, v. 45, the North Atlantic region: Nature, v. 307, p. 620–623, https://doi.org/ no. 1, p. 93–101, https://doi.org/10.1006/qres.1996.0009. 10.1038/307620a0. Medville, D., 2000a, Hamilton Cave, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves of East- Springer, G.S., Kite, J.S., and Schmidt, V.A., 1997, Cave sedimentation, gen- Central West Virginia: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 14, esis, and erosional history in the Cheat River Canyon, West Virginia: Geo- p. 92. logical Society of America Bulletin, v. 109, no. 5, p. 524–532, https://doi Medville, D., 2000b, My cave, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves of East-Central .org/10.1130/0016-7606(1997)109<0524:CSGAEH>2.3.CO;2. West Virginia: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 14, p. 104– Stephenson, W.J., 1942, Hamilton Cave (Franklin Pendleton County, West Vir- 105. ginia): Bulletin of the National Speleological Society, no. 4, p. 52. Medville, D., 2000c, Trout Cave (Trout Rock Cave), in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Stephenson, W.J., 1945, Further notes on Withero’s Cave: Bulletin of the Caves of East-Central West Virginia: West Virginia Speleological Survey National Speleological Society, no. 7, p. 69–70. Bulletin 14, p. 130–131, 133. Stihler, C., 2009, Laboratory results confirm white-nose syndrome in West Vir- Mills, H.H., 2000, Apparent increasing rates of stream incision in the eastern ginia: The West Virginia Caver, v. 27, no. 2, p. 18–19. United States during the late Cenozoic: Geology, v. 28, no. 10, p. 955–957, Stihler, C., 2017, West Virginia white-nose syndrome update: The West Virginia https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(2000)28<955:AIROSI>2.0.CO;2. Caver, v. 35, no. 3, p. 12. Minnis, A.M., and Lindner, D.L., 2013, Phylogenetic evaluation of Geomyces Swezey, C.S., 2003, Trout Cave (Pendleton County, WV): DC Speleograph, and allies reveals no close relatives of Pseudogymnoascus destructans, v. 59, no. 10–11, p. 7. comb. nov., in bat hibernacula of eastern North America: Fungal Biology, Swezey, C.S., 2014, Geology of the Trout Rock caves (Hamilton Cave, Trout v. 117, p. 638–649, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funbio.2013.07.001. Cave, New Trout Cave, NSS Flood Cave), John Guilday Caves Nature

Preserve, Pendleton County, West Virginia, in Swezey, C.S., ed., Geology Van Valkenburgh, B., Grady, F., and Kurtén, B., 1990, The Plio-Pleistocene of Some Caves in Pendleton County, West Virginia: West Virginia Speleo- cheetah-like cat Miracinonyx inexpectus of North America: Journal of logical Survey (WVASS) Monograph 5, p. 24–50. Vertebrate Paleontology, v. 10, no. 4, p. 434–454, https://doi.org/10 Swezey, C.S., and Dulong, F.T., 2010, Some notes on the geology of Cave .1080/02724634.1990.10011827. Mountain Cave, Pendleton County, West Virginia: The West Virginia Verant, M.L., Bohuski, E.A., Richgels, K.L.D., Olival, K.J., Epstein, J.H., and Caver, v. 28, no. 2, p. 5–10. Blehert, D.S., 2018, Determinants of Pseudogymnoascus destructans Swezey, C.S., and Garrity, C.P., 2011a, Geographical and geological data from within bat hibernacula: Implications for surveillance and management caves and mines infected with white-nose syndrome (WNS) before Sep- of white-nose syndrome: Journal of Applied Ecology, v. 55, p. 820–829, tember 2009 in the eastern United States: Journal of Caves and Karst https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13070. Studies, v. 73, no. 3, p. 125–157. West, D., 2001a, Cathy’s Crack, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst Swezey, C.S., and Garrity, C.P., 2011b, Notes on the geology and meteorol- of Pendleton County: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, ogy of sites infected with white-nose syndrome before July 2010 in the p. 114. southeastern United States: National Speleological Society (NSS) News, West, D., 2001b, Film Can Cave, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst v. 69, no. 2, p. 16–25. of Pendleton County: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, Swezey, C.S., Piatak, N.M., Seal, R.R., II, and Wandless, G.A., 2002, The iso- p. 142. topic compositions of sulfur from gypsum in caves of Virginia and West West, D., 2001c, NSS Flood Cave, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst Virginia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 34, of Pendleton County: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, no. 6, p. 231 [Reprinted in the journal Virginia Cellars (2003), v. 8, no. 1, p. 258–259. p. 35]. West, D., 2001d, Spider Cave, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst of Swezey, C.S., Piatak, N.M., Chiehowsky, L.A., Hadden, R.L., Hackley, P.C., Pendleton County: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, Doolan, C.A., Alemán-González, W.B., Bingham, P.A., and Hoke, R.B., p. 331, 342. 2004a, A guide to the geology of the Sinnett-Thorn Mountain Cave Sys- West, D., 2001e, Trammelton Cave, in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst tem, Pendleton County, West Virginia: The Potomac Caver, v. 47, no. 1, of Pendleton County: West Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, p. 3–14. p. 342–343. Swezey, C.S., Hadden, R.L., and Piatak, N.M., 2004b, Nitrate concentrations of West, D., 2003, Geology of Hamilton Cave … Cave Knob: DC Speleograph, soils in “saltpeter caves” in West Virginia (USA): National Speleological v. 59, no. 12, p. 7. Society (NSS) News, v. 62, no. 12, p. 342–345. White, E.L., and White, W.B., 1969, Processes of cavern breakdown: National Swezey, C.S., Haynes, J.T., Lucas, P.C., and Lambert, R.A., 2017, Geologic Speleological Society (NSS) Bulletin, v. 31, no. 4, p. 83–96. controls on cave development in Burnsville Cove, Bath and High- White, W.B., 2015, The geology of the Chestnut Ridge caves, in White, W.B., land Counties, Virginia, in Bailey, C.M., and Jaye, S., eds., From the ed., The Caves of Burnsville Cove, Virginia: Cham, Switzerland, Springer Blue Ridge to the Beach: Geological Field Excursions across Virginia: International Publishing, p. 385–395, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319 Geological Society of America Field Guide 47, p. 89–123, https://doi -14391-0_20. .org/10.1130/2017.0047(04). White, W.B., and Deike, G.H., III, 1989, Hydraulic geometry of cave passages, Swinnerton, A.C., 1932, Origin of limestone caverns: Geological Society of America in White, W.B., and White, E.L., eds., Karst Hydrology; Concepts from Bulletin, v. 43, p. 663–694, https://doi.org/10.1130/GSAB-43-663. the Mammoth Cave Area: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, p. 223–258, Taylor, J.C., 2001, The early history of Pendleton County caves 1760 to 1860, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-7317-3_9. in Dasher, G.R., ed., The Caves and Karst of Pendleton County: West Winkler, A.J., and Grady, F., 1990, The Middle Pleistocene rodent Atopomys Virginia Speleological Survey Bulletin 15, p. 42–59. (Cricetidae: Arvicolinae) from the eastern and south-central United States: Tilton, J.L., Prouty, W.F., and Price, P.H., 1927, Pendleton County: West Vir- Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, v. 10, no. 4, p. 484–490, https://doi ginia Geological Survey County Report, 384 p. .org/10.1080/02724634.1990.10011831. Turner, G.G., Reeder, D.M., and Coleman, J.T.H., 2011, A five-year assessment Woodward, H.P., 1943, Devonian System of West Virginia: West Virginia Geo- of mortality and geographic spread of white-nose syndrome in North logical Survey Report 15, 655 p. American bats and a look to the future: Bat Research News, v. 52, no. 2, Zakrzewski, R.J., 1975, The Late Pleistocene arvicoline rodent Atopomys: p. 13–27. Annals of Carnegie Museum, v. 45, article 12, p. 255–261. U.S. Geological Survey National Wildlife Health Center, 2009, Quarterly Mor- tality Reports, 2009, Quarter 1, online at https://archive.usgs.gov/archive/ sites/www.nwhc.usgs.gov/publications/quarterly_reports/index.jsp.html. Manuscript Accepted by the Society 6 January 2020

Printed in the USA

Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/4973209/fld057-03e.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021