Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70003850

Introduction to paleoenvironments of Bear Lake, Utah and Idaho, and its catchment

Abstract

In 1996 a group led by the late Kerry Kelts (University of Minnesota) and Robert Thompson (U.S. Geological Survey) acquired three piston cores (BL96-1, -2, and -3) from Bear Lake. The coring arose from their recognition of Bear Lake as a potential repository of long records of paleoenvironmental change. They recognized that the lake is located in an area that is sensitive to changes in regional climate patterns (Dean et al., this volume), that the lake basin is long lived (see Colman, 2006; Kaufman et al., this volume), and that, unlike many lakes in the Great Basin, Bear Lake was never dry during warm dry periods. Bear Lake lies in the northeastern Great Basin to the northeast of Great Salt Lake, just south of the Snake River drainage, and a short distance west of the Green River drainage that makes up part of the Upper Colorado River Basin (Fig. 1). Similarity among the historic Bear Lake and Great Salt Lake hydrographs and flows on the Green River indicates that the hydrology of Bear Lake reflects regional precipitation (Fig. 2). Therefore, paleorecords from Bear Lake are important to understanding past climate for a large region, including the Upper Colorado River Basin, the source of much of the water for the southwestern United States. Initially, paleoenvironmental studies of Bear Lake sediments focused on cores BL96-1, -2, and -3. Additional coring was conducted to elucidate the spatial distribution of sedimentary units and to extend the record back in time. The study was also expanded to include extensive study of the catchment, including the properties of catchment materials and the processes that could potentially affect the delivery of catchment materials to the lake. Cores BL96-1, -2, and -3 were taken with a Kullenburg piston corer along an east–west profile in roughly 50, 40, and 30 m of water, respectively (Table 1, Fig. 3). These three cores, each taken as a single 4- to 5-m-long segment, provide a nearly complete composite section from ca. 26 cal ka to the late Holocene. In 1998 a number of short gravity cores were taken from the uppermost water-rich sediments that were not sampled by the 1996 cores. During 2000, cores were taken with a percussion piston corer (manufactured by UWITEC) at three locations in and around Mud Lake and at two locations in the northern end of Bear Lake (Fig. 3). Cores acquired with the percussion corer comprise as many as three overlapping segments up to 2 m in length. In 2002, additional percussion piston cores and associated gravity cores of the uppermost sediments were acquired from five sites in the northern half of the lake. In conjunction with two of the cores collected in 2000, these cores form a north–south profile along a seismic line and span water depths from less than 10 m to ~40 m. Data from this profile provide much of the evidence for lake-level variations (Smoot and Rosenbaum, this volume). Finally, during 2000, two long cores, BL00-1D and -1E (collectively referred to here simply as BL00-1), were taken at a site near the depocenter during testing of the GLAD800 coring platform (Fig. 4; Dean et al., 2002). These cores provide a record back to ca. 220 ka.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 40° to 44.75° latitude; -114.25° to -109.5° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joseph G. Rosenbaum, Darrell S. Kaufman. 2009. Introduction to paleoenvironments of Bear Lake, Utah and Idaho, and its catchment. https://doi.org/10.1130/2009.2450(00)

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

The Maryland Coastal Plain Aquifer Information System: A GIS-based tool for assessing groundwater resources

Groundwater is the source of drinking water for ∼1.4 million people in the Coastal Plain Province of Maryland (USA). In addition, groundwater is essential for commercial, industrial, and agricultural uses. Approximately 0.757 × 109 L d –1 (200 million gallons/d) were withdrawn in 2010. As a result of decades of withdrawals from the coastal plain confined aquifers, groundwater levels have declined by as much as 70 m (230 ft) from estimated prepumping levels. Other issues posing challenges to long-term groundwater sustainability include degraded water quality from both man-made and natural sources, reduced stream base flow, land subsidence, and changing recharge patterns (drought) caused by climate change. In Maryland, groundwater supply is managed primarily by the Maryland Department of the Environment, which seeks to balance reasonable use of the resource with long-term sustainability. The chief goal of groundwater management in Maryland is to ensure safe and adequate supplies for all current and future users through the implementation of appropriate usage, planning, and conservation policies. To assist in that effort, the geographic information system (GIS)–based Maryland Coastal Plain Aquifer Information System was developed as a tool to help water managers access and visualize groundwater data for use in the evaluation of groundwater allocation and use permits. The system, contained within an ESRI ArcMap desktop environment, includes both interpreted and basic data for 16 aquifers and 14 confining units. Data map layers include aquifer and ­confining unit layer surfaces, aquifer extents, borehole information, hydraulic properties, time-series groundwater-level data, well records, and geophysical and lithologic logs. The aquifer and confining unit layer surfaces were generated specifically for the GIS system. The system also contains select groundwater-quality data and map layers that quantify groundwater and surface-water withdrawals. The aquifer information system can serve as a pre- and postprocessing environment for groundwater-flow models for use in water-supply planning, development, and management. The system also can be expanded to include features that evaluate constraints to groundwater development, such as insufficient available drawdown, degraded groundwater quality, insufficient aquifer yields, and well-field interference. Ultimately, the aquifer information system is intended to function as an interactive Web-based utility that provides a broad array of information related to groundwater resources in Maryland’s coastal plain to a wide-ranging audience, including well drillers, consultants, academia, and the general public.

Special Paper of the Geological Society of America

The 2011 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake and its significance for seismic hazards in eastern North America: overview and synthesis

The 23 August 2011 M w (moment magnitude) 5.7 ± 0.1, Mineral, Virginia, earthquake was the largest and most damaging in the central and eastern United States since the 1886 M w 6.8–7.0, Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake. Seismic data indicate that the earthquake rupture occurred on a southeast-dipping reverse fault and consisted of three subevents that progressed northeastward and updip. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) "Did You Feel It?" intensity reports from across the eastern United States and southeastern Canada, rockfalls triggered at distances to 245 km, and regional groundwater-level changes are all consistent with efficient propagation of high-frequency seismic waves (∼1 Hz and higher) in eastern North America due to low attenuation. Reported damage included cracked or shifted foundations and broken walls or chimneys, notably in unreinforced masonry, and indicated intensities up to VIII in the epicentral area based on USGS "Did You Feel It?" reports. The earthquake triggered the first automatic shutdown of a U.S. nuclear power plant, located ∼23 km northeast of the main shock epicenter. Although shaking exceeded the plant's design basis earthquake, the actual damage to safety-related structures, systems, and components was superficial. Damage to relatively tall masonry structures 130 km to the northeast in Washington, D.C., was consistent with source directivity, soft-soil ground-motion amplification, and anisotropic wave propagation with lower attenuation parallel to the northeast-trending Appalachian tectonic fabric. The earthquake and aftershocks occurred in crystalline rocks within Paleozoic thrust sheets of the Chopawamsic terrane. The main shock and majority of aftershocks delineated the newly named Quail fault zone in the subsurface, and shallow aftershocks defined outlying faults. The earthquake induced minor liquefaction sand boils, but notably there was no evidence of a surface fault rupture. Recurrence intervals, and evidence for larger earthquakes in the Quaternary in this area, remain important unknowns. This event, along with similar events during historical time, is a reminder that earthquakes of similar or larger magnitude pose a real hazard in eastern North America.

Virginia

Aftershocks illuminate the 2011 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake causative fault zone and nearby active faults

Deployment of temporary seismic stations after the 2011 Mineral, Virginia (USA), earthquake produced a well-recorded aftershock sequence. The majority of aftershocks are in a tabular cluster that delineates the previously unknown Quail fault zone. Quail fault zone aftershocks range from ~3 to 8 km in depth and are in a 1-km-thick zone striking ~036&deg; and dipping ~50&deg;SE, consistent with a 028&deg;, 50&deg;SE main-shock nodal plane having mostly reverse slip. This cluster extends ~10 km along strike. The Quail fault zone projects to the surface in gneiss of the Ordovician Chopawamsic Formation just southeast of the Ordovician&ndash;Silurian Ellisville Granodiorite pluton tail. The following three clusters of shallow (<3 km) aftershocks illuminate other faults. (1) An elongate cluster of early aftershocks, ~10 km east of the Quail fault zone, extends 8 km from Fredericks Hall, strikes ~035&deg;&ndash;039&deg;, and appears to be roughly vertical. The Fredericks Hall fault may be a strand or splay of the older Lakeside fault zone, which to the south spans a width of several kilometers. (2) A cluster of later aftershocks ~3 km northeast of Cuckoo delineates a fault near the eastern contact of the Ordovician Quantico Formation. (3) An elongate cluster of late aftershocks ~1 km northwest of the Quail fault zone aftershock cluster delineates the northwest fault (described herein), which is temporally distinct, dips more steeply, and has a more northeastward strike. Some aftershock-illuminated faults coincide with preexisting units or structures evident from radiometric anomalies, suggesting tectonic inheritance or reactivation.

Virginia