Lithology of Evaporite Cycles and Cycle Boundaries in the Upper Part of the Paradox Formation of the Hermosa Group of Pennsylvanian Age in the Paradox Basin, Utah and Colorado U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 2000-B -3 I On the Front Cover: View south toward LaSal Mountains along Colorado River between Cisco and Moab, Utah. Fisher Towers in center are composed of Permian Cutler Formation and capped by Triassic Moenkopi Formation. Prominent mesa at left center is capped by Jurassic Kayenta Formation and Wingate Sandstone and underlain by slope-forming Triassic Chinle and Moenkopi Formations. The Chinle- Moenkopi contact is marked by a thin white ledge-forming gritstone. Valley between Fisher Towers and Fisher Mesa in background is part of Richardson Amphitheater part of Professor Valley. Photograph by Omer B. Raup, U.S. Geological Survey. Lithology of Evaporite Cycles and Cycle Boundaries in the Upper Part of the Paradox Formation of the Hermosa Group of Pennsylvanian Age in the Paradox Basin, Utah and Colorado By OMER B. RAUP and ROBERT J. KITE EVOLUTION OF SEDIMENTARY BASINS PARADOX BASIN A.C. HUFFMAN, JR., Project Coordinator U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 2000-B A multidisciplinary approach to research studies of sedimentary rocks and their constituents and the evolution of sedimentary basins, both ancient and modern UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1992 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25286 Denver, CO 80225 Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive, purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Evolution of sedimentary basins Paradox Basin. p. cm. (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 2000) Includes bibliographical references. Contents: ch. B. Lithology of evaporite cycles and cycle boundaries in the upper part of the Paradox Formation of the Hermosa Group of Pennsylvanian age in the Paradox Basin, Utah and Colorado / by Omer B. Raup and Robert J. Kite. Supt. of Docs. no.: I 19.3:2000 (v. 2) 1. Geology Paradox Basin. I. Raup, Omer B. (Omer Beaver), 1930-. II. Kite, R. J. (Robert J.) m. Series. QE75.B9 no. 2000, etc. [QE79] 552'.5 dc20 92-15577cn» CONTENTS Abstract................................................................................................................................. Bl Introduction........................................................................................................................... 1 Geologic Setting................................................................................................................... 1 Core Description................................................................................................................... 3 Delhi-Taylor Oil Company Cane Creek No. 1........................................................... 3 Delhi-Taylor Oil Company Shafer No. 1 ................................................................... 4 Evaporite Cycles................................................................................................................... 5 Lithologic Characteristics of Cycles 2 and 3 of the Paradox Formation.............................. 6 Interbeds..................................................................................................................... 6 Anhydrite (transgressive)...................................................................................... 6 Silty Dolomite (transgressive).............................................................................. 13 Black Shale........................................................................................................... 14 Dolomite (regressive)........................................................................................... 15 Anhydrite (regressive).......................................................................................... 16 Halite Beds.................................................................................................................. 18 Anhydrite Laminations......................................................................................... 21 Bromine Distribution............................................................................................ 26 Potash Deposits..................................................................................................... 29 Interbed Contact Relationships............................................................................................. 30 Detailed Correlation of Cycle 3 Interbeds Between Cane Creek No. 1 and Shafer No. 1 Core Holes ................................................................................................................... 31 Sea-Level Control During Evaporite Deposition ................................................................. 33 Summary of Evidence for Environments of Deposition of Evaporites in the Paradox Basin............................................................................................................................. 35 References Cited................................................................................................................... 36 FIGURES 1. Map of Paradox Basin, southwestern Colorado and southeastern Utah, showing limits of evaporite facies in the Paradox Formation........................................................................................................................................... B2 2-4. Schematic stratigraphic columns of: 2. Cane Creek No. 1 core hole........................................................................................................................... 4 3. Shafer No. 1 core hole................................................................................................................................... 5 4. Cycle 2 facies in Cane Creek No. 1 core....................................................................................................... 6 5. Diagram showing correlation of lithologic units in Shafer No. 1 and Cane Creek No. 1 core.............................. 7 6. Charts showing mineral composition of penesaline and clastic intervals in Cane Creek No. 1 core as determined by X-ray diffraction............................................................................................................................. 8 7-12. Photographs of polished surface of core: 7. Cane Creek No. 1, depth 2,460.5 ft............................................................................................................... 10 8. Shafer No. 1, depth 2,588 ft........................................................................................................................... 10 9. Cane Creek No. 1, depth 2,456.5 ft............................................................................................................... 11 10. Cane Creek No. 1, depth 2,455.3 ft............................................................................................................... 11 11. Shafer No. 1, depth 2,583.5 ft........................................................................................................................ 12 12. Shafer No. 1, depth 2,581.5 ft........................................................................................................................ 12 13. Photograph of segment of Cane Creek No. 1 core, depth 2,438 ft......................................................................... 14 14. Photograph of polished surface of core from Shafer No. 1 core, depth 2,569 ft.................................................... 14 15. Photomicrograph of transgressive dolomite from Cane Creek No. 1 core, depth 2,433.5 ft................................. 15 16. Photograph of polished surface of core from Shafer No. 1 core, depth 2,542 ft.................................................... 15 m IV CONTENTS 17. Photomicrograph of black shale from Cane Creek No. 1 core, depth 2,410.5 ft................................................... 16 18-24. Photographs of polished surface of cores from: 18. Shafer No. 1, depth 2,523.5 ft........................................................................................................................ 16 19. Cane Creek No. 1, depth 2,372 ft ................................................................................................................. 17 20. Shafer No. 1, depth 2,517.5 ft........................................................................................................................ 17 21. Cane Creek No. 1, depth 2,366 ft.................................................................................................................. 18 22. Cane Creek No. 1, depth 2,364.2 ft............................................................................................................... 18 23. Cane Creek No. 1, depth 2,356.7 ft .............................................................................................................. 19 24. Cane Creek No. 1, depth 2,353.7 ft............................................................................................................... 19 25. Photographs of polished surface of core from Shafer No. 1 at consecutive depths, 2,500-2,505 ft...................... 20 26-35. Photographs of segment of: 26. Cane Creek No. 1 core, depth 2,336.5 ft......................................................................................................