Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Research about Lake Bonneville

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Lake Bonneville.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2018

Computational fluid dynamics simulations of the Late Pleistocene Lake Bonneville flood

At approximately 18.0 ka, pluvial Lake Bonneville reached its maximum level. At its northeastern extent it was impounded by alluvium of the Marsh Creek Fan, which breached at some point north of Red Rock Pass (Idaho), leading to one of the largest floods on Earth. About 5320 km 3 of water was discharged into the Snake River drainage and ultimately into the Columbia River. We use a 0D model and a 2D non-linear depth-averaged hydrodynamic model to aid understanding of outflow dynamics, specifically evaluating controls on the amount of water exiting the Lake Bonneville basin exerted by the Red Rock Pass outlet lithology and geometry as well as those imposed by the internal lake geometry of the Bonneville basin. These models are based on field evidence of prominent lake levels, hypsometry and terrain elevations corrected for post-flood isostatic deformation of the lake basin, as well as reconstructions of the topography at the outlet for both the initial and final stages of the flood. Internal flow dynamics in the northern Lake Bonneville basin during the flood were affected by the narrow passages separating the Cache Valley from the main body of Lake Bonneville. This constriction imposed a water-level drop of up to 2.7 m at the time of peak-flow conditions and likely reduced the peak discharge at the lake outlet by about 6%. The modeled peak outlet flow is 0.85·10 6 m 3 s −1 . Energy balance calculations give an estimate for the erodibility coefficient for the alluvial Marsh Creek divide of ∼0.005 m y −1 Pa −1.5 , at least two orders of magnitude greater than for the underlying bedrock at the outlet. Computing quasi steady-state water flows, water elevations, water currents and shear stresses as a function of the water-level drop in the lake and for the sequential stages of erosion in the outlet gives estimates of the incision rates and an estimate of the outflow hydrograph during the Bonneville Flood: About 18 days would have been required for the outflow to grow from 10% to 100% of its peak value. At the time of peak flow, about 10% of the lake volume would have already exited; eroding about 1 km 3 of alluvium from the outlet, and the lake level would have dropped by about 10.6 m.

Lake Bonneville↗
USGS2016

The Pilot Valley shoreline: An early record of Lake Bonneville dynamics

The Pilot Valley shoreline is named for distinctive gravel beaches on the eastern, northern, and western sides of Pilot Valley playa, Utah. The shoreline has been identified across the Bonneville basin where it is characterized by one to three beach crests between ~ 1305 and 1309 m elevation, all overlain by deep-water marl of Lake Bonneville. It thus represents the lowest and earliest recognized shoreline of Lake Bonneville. Features of the shoreline indicate that both high wave energy and high stream sediment discharge contributed to shoreline development. Basin hypsometry did not play a role in the development of the shoreline, which must have been caused by a combination of climatically driven hydrologic and storm factors, such as reduced precipitation that stabilized lake level and increase in storm-driven wave energy. The Pilot Valley shoreline is poorly dated at about 30 ka. If it is somewhat older, correlation with Greenland Interstadial 5.1 at 30.8–30.6 ka could explain the stabilization of lake level.

Idaho, Nevada, Utah↗
USGS2016

The Provo shoreline of Lake Bonneville

G.K. Gilbert studied the Bonneville basin 150 years ago and his findings have largely stood the test of time: The Provo shoreline, the most prominent geomorphic feature of Lake Bonneville, reflects threshold-stabilized overflow of the lake after the Bonneville flood and before a drier climate caused the lake to shrink. Subsequent refinements in chronology allow the Provo lake to be identified as about 18.2–14.8 cal ka BP, and stratigraphic studies show that the lake was gradually growing deeper during that time. Because the lake deepened through time as isostatic rebound occurred, individual landforms in general reflect processes operating for a small part of the ~ 3400 year of Provo time. Opportunities remain to improve our knowledge of the Provo lake; topics include (1) refinement of lake levels using delta and beach stratigraphy; (2) improved understanding of lake water chemistry and its role in determining deep-water sediment and cave deposits, which have disparate interpretations; (3) identifying processes at the threshold that caused the lake level to rise; and (4) identifying climate variability signals during Provo time.

Idaho, Nevada, Utah↗
USGS2015

Limiting age for the Provo shoreline of Lake Bonneville

Pluvial Lake Bonneville features a prominent shoreline at the Provo level, which has been interpreted as having formed during a period of threshold-stabilized overflow. The timing of Provo shoreline development is important for paleoclimate interpretations and for inferences on geomorphic process rates. Estimates for the timing of the shoreline formation, based on radiocarbon measurements from gastropod shells, are from approximately 18 to 15 cal ka. One key radiocarbon age on plant fragments from Swan Lake, which formed in the threshold spillway after overflow ceased, has been taken as a young limiting age. The conventional age of 12090 ± 300 14 C when calibrated at 2σ has large uncertainty (13375–15103 cal BP). We report six new AMS radiocarbon ages recovered from new Swan Lake sediment cores. A twig near the base of lacustrine muds was dated at 11,615 ± 40 14 C yr (13,350 to 13,560 cal BP). Age determinations on roots in that interval and deeper in the core are somewhat younger. These ages limit the last overflow of the Provo stand to earlier than ∼13.5 cal ka BP, consistent with the younger bound of the imprecise age reported by Bright. If conservative interpretations of sedimentation rates for the thick well-sorted sand interval below the lacustrine muds are correct and landscape change that resulted in damming of Swan Lake is accounted for, cessation of flow probably occurred before ∼14.5 cal ka BP.

Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming↗
USGS2012

Stratigraphy and chronology of Provo shoreline deposits and lake-level implications, Late Pleistocene Lake Bonneville, eastern Great Basin, USA

The Provo shoreline of Lake Bonneville formed following the Bonneville flood, and, based on previous dating, was formed during a period of overflow from about 17.5 to 15.0 cal. ka. In many places the Provo shoreline consists of a pair of distinct shorelines, one ∼3 m higher than the other. We present data from two cuts through double beaches to show that the upper beach is younger and represents sedimentation after a lake-level rise. In addition, the lower beach deposits are internally stratified by beds that suggest three more lake-level rises during its development. The Provo beach complex thus appears to have been built during rising lake levels, which can be explained by rises in the overflow threshold by sequential landslide deposition. Evaluation of beach altitudes demonstrates that the two beach crests throughout the Bonneville basin experienced equivalent rebound from removal of the lake load, and therefore they formed after the rebound associated with the Bonneville flood occurred in early Provo time. However, radiocarbon ages on gastropods collected within the beach deposits suggest both that the sequence of five beach deposits formed from c. 18.1 to c. 17.0 cal. ka, and that the Bonneville flood occurred before 18 cal. ka. These ages are discordant with previous dates on shells within offshore sands, and raise questions about the validity of radiocarbon ages for shells in Lake Bonneville as well as about the age of the Bonneville flood and Provo shoreline. The timing for maximum Provo lake depths and its association with climate stages during deglaciation remain unresolved.

Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming↗
USGS2001

Statistical analysis of sand and gravel aggregate deposits of late Pleistocene Lake Bonneville, Utah

Sedimentary deposits of pluvial Lake Bonneville are an important source of sand and gravel suitable for aggregate and construction in Utah. Data on Lake Bonneville basin sand and gravel deposit thickness, volume, grain size, percent of fines, and durability were statistically analyzed to detect variations associated with geologic domains, geographic location, Lake Bonneville shorelines, and sand and gravel deposit type, and to construct quantitative deposit models. Analysis showed several trends; (1) sand and gravel in younger shorelines was slightly more durable and the deposits considerably larger in volume, (2) younger shorelines are also more likely to contain more than one genetic deposit type, (3) the volume of terrace deposits is larger than beach deposits, (4) terraces and beaches are generally thicker than spits and bars, (5) the northern part of the Bonneville Basin contains slightly more durable sand and gravel than the southern part of the basin and is more likely to contain deposits composed of more than one genetic deposit type, and (6) the Wasatch domain deposits are composed of more than one genetic deposit type more often than deposits of the Basin and Range domain. Three additional conclusions with immediate economic significance are; (1) the median sand and gravel deposit in the Wasatch domain, 360,000 m 3 (275,000 yd 3 ), is three times larger than that of the Basin and Range domain (120,000 m 3 [90,000 yd 3 ]), (2) the median deposit thickness in the Wasatch domain, 5.8 m (19.0 ft), is nearly twice that of the Basin and Range domain (3 m [10 ft]), and (3) the Wasatch domain also contains slightly larger diameter gravel. These three conclusions are significant because the trend for sand and gravel development in the Bonneville Basin is to move from the Wasatch domain to the Basin and Range domain. Smaller, thinner deposits with smaller diameter gravel will require more surface area to mine than would have been necessary in the Wasatch domain. The result is a higher cost for sand and gravel in construction projects in the Salt Lake City area, especially since the gravel must also be hauled further.

Idaho;Nevada;Utah↗