Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · pp1730

The Gogebic Iron Range — A sample of the northern margin of the Penokean fold and thrust belt

Abstract

The Gogebic iron range is an elongate belt of Paleoproterozoic strata extending from the west shore of Lake Gogebic in the upper peninsula of Michigan for about 125 km westward into northern Wisconsin. It is one of six major informally named iron ranges in the Lake Superior region and produced about 325 million tons of direct-shipping ore between 1887 and 1967. A significant resource of concentrating-grade ore remains in the western and eastern parts of the range. The iron range forms a broad, gently southward-opening arc where the central part of the range exposes rocks that were deposited somewhat north of the eastern and western parts. A fundamental boundary marking both the tectonic setting of deposition and the later deformation within the Penokean orogen lies fortuitously in an east-west direction along the range so that the central part of the range preserves sediments deposited north of that boundary, whereas the eastern and western parts of the range were deposited south of the boundary. Thus, the central part of the range provides a record of sedimentation and very mild deformation in a part of the Penokean orogen farthest from the interior of the orogen to the south. The eastern and western parts of the range, in contrast, exhibit a depositional and deformational style typical of parts closer to the interior of the orogen. A second fortuitous feature of the iron range is that the entire area was tilted from 40° to 90° northward by Mesoproterozoic deformation so that the map view offers an oblique cross section of the Paleoproterozoic sedimentary sequence and structures. Together, these features make the Gogebic iron range a unique area in which to observe (1) the lateral transition from deposition on a stable platform to deposition in a tectonically and volcanically active region, and (2) the transition from essentially undeformed Paleoproterozoic strata to their folded and faulted equivalents. Paleoproterozoic strata in the Gogebic iron range are part of the Marquette Range Supergroup. They were deposited unconformably on Neoarchean rocks consisting of a diverse volcanic suite (the Ramsay Formation) which was intruded by granitic rocks of the Puritan Quartz Monzonite. The Marquette Range Supergroup in this region consists of a basal sequence of orthoquartzite (Sunday Quartzite) and dolomite (Bad River Dolomite), both of which are part of the Chocolay Group. The group is preserved only in the eastern and western parts of the range but was probably present throughout before the erosion interval that separated it from the overlying Menominee Group. The Menominee Group consists of basal clastic rocks (Palms Formation) that grade upward into the Ironwood Iron-Formation, which is the principal iron-bearing unit of the range. The Ironwood interfingers with the Emperor Volcanic Complex in the eastern part of the range and with volcanic rocks and gabbro in the western part of the range. The Ironwood is overlain unconformably by the Tyler Formation in the central and western parts of the range and by the Tyler’s equivalent, the Copps Formation, in the eastern part of the range. Strata in the central part of the iron range are entirely sedimentary. Deposition occurred in a relatively stable tectonic setting, at least until the deposition of the Tyler Formation. The Tyler consists largely of turbidites deposited in a foreland basin in advance of accreting volcanic arcs to the south. Penokean deformation in the central part of the range was very minor; the evidence of deformation consists of steep faults with small offsets and a few bedding-parallel faults that also have small offsets and that are recognized only in mine workings. In both the eastern and western parts of the iron range, abrupt facies changes mark a passage into a more tectonically and volcanically active belt. These relationships are especially well displayed in the east where a graben, the Presque Isle trough, began to subside during deposition of the Ironwood Iron-Formation. The thickness of the Ironwood increases into the graben and its internal stratigraphy also changes. The most prominent changes in the graben are the presence of a thick volcanic unit, the Emperor Volcanic Complex of the Menominee Group, and comagmatic gabbro sills that interfinger with the Ironwood. In the western part of the range, volcanic rocks and comagmatic gabbro sills are also present in the Ironwood, but a graben that is equivalent to the Presque Isle trough is not evident. Penokean structures are well developed in both the eastern and western parts of the iron range. They consist of folds ranging from outcrop to regional scale and thrust faults which, in places, either repeated the section or detached it from Neoarchean basement. The sharp transition from the little-deformed central part of the range to the more intensely deformed eastern and western parts coincides closely with the earlier developed transition from the stable sedimentary setting in the central part to the tectonically active sedimentation in the east and west parts. The extensional structures that formed during sedimentation may have helped to control the extent of later Penokean compressional structures.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 46.01222384063236° to 46.558860303117164° latitude; -91.07666015625° to -89.6044921875° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

William F. Cannon, Gene L. LaBerge, John S. Klasner, Klaus J. Schulz. 2008. The Gogebic Iron Range — A sample of the northern margin of the Penokean fold and thrust belt. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1730

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Allostratigraphy and formalizing the Cold Harbor Alloformation, Virginia Coastal Plain, Eastern Virginia

Introduction Distinct morphologic features in the Virginia part of the Coastal Plain Province (herein referred to as the Virginia Coastal Plain) were noted in one of the earliest geologic surveys in 1839 (Rogers, 1884). South of the James River, Rogers (1884, p. 252) described a western bench that ranged from “a low rocky coast…of the primeval sea” to an eastern facing scarp east of the City of Suffolk, Virginia. His eastern bench extended from the scarp at Suffolk, which he suggested was a former shoreline, to the present Atlantic Ocean. Notably, the eastern plain was described as less dissected than the western plain. In Virginia, creation and publication of topographic maps by the U. S. Geological Survey began in the mid-1880s. By 1905, many areas in eastern Virginia were mapped as 30-minute and 15-minute series with 10-foot (ft) contour interval accuracy (Virginia Division of Mineral Resources [VDMR] , 2008). After the continued release of these early maps that displayed Virginia Coastal Plain morphology in increasingly greater detail, several geological reports were published where scarps and plains were traced, named, and origins proposed (Shaler, 1890; Shattuck, 1901; Clark and Miller, 1906, 1912; Wentworth, 1930). Shattuck (1901) recognized three continuous scarps in Maryland and most importantly suggested that there was a correlation between surficial deposits (geologic formations) and morphologic terraces; this defined the terrace-formation concept that became the basis of geologic mapping of the Upper Pliocene and Pleistocene sediments in the Virginia Coastal Plain. Clark and Miller (1912) described three Pleistocene formations and supported the terrace-formation concept because the sediments within each formation were lithologically similar to one another, and differentiating them by comparing key vertical sections was not helpful. In Virginia, Wentworth (1930) defined and mapped five Pleistocene terraces on the basis of correlating morphologic terraces with their underlying formation sediments. Similarly, Cooke (1931) identified and traced seven marine shorelines and proposed corresponding terrace names from Maryland to Florida. Cooke (1931) also pointed out that the various elevations of scarps were related to interglacial sea-level highstands whereas prior workers called on vertical land movement of emergence and submergence to create shoreline scarps. Cooke’s (1936) geologic map of eastern South Carolina showing the Pleistocene sediments is also based on the terrace-formation concept. Detailed geologic mapping of the Virginia Coastal Plain by Virginia Division of Mineral Resources (VDMR) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) followed lithostratigraphic convention for Early Pliocene and older marine sediments. However, geologic mapping of Upper Pliocene and Pleistocene sediments used the concept of morphologic setting and elevations of scarp toe and flat-plain, or the terrace-formation concept. The 1983 version of the North American Stratigraphic Code (hereafter the Code) (North American Commission on Stratigraphic Nomenclature [NACSN] , 1983) introduced allostratigraphy that gave credence to the terrace-formation concept. According to the current Code (NACSN, 2021; Article 58), “an allostratigraphic unit is a mappable body of rock that is defined and identified on the basis of its bounding discontinuities,” and, “formal allostratigraphic units may be defined or distinguish between different (1) superposed discontinuity-bounded deposits of similar lithology, (2) contiguous discontinuity-bounded deposits of similar lithology, or (3) geographically separated discontinuity-bounded units of similar lithology…The lithology of an allostratigraphic unit plays no part in its definition.” However, definition and placement of bounding discontinuities relies on lateral and vertical knowledge of lithology and is so recognized in Article 58e, “A type locality and type area must be designated; a composite stratotype or a type section and several reference sections are desirable.” We understand that each of the terrace formations of Late Pliocene and Pleistocene age were deposited during a marine transgressive event tied to an interglacial sea-level highstand (scarp above the Poquoson Member of the Tabb Formation may be the result of a still-stand as sea level was falling after deposition of the Lynnhaven Member, refer to fig. 1). The base of each map unit is an unconformity (or is at least in part for the base of the Poquoson) and nomenclature for each unit might be changed from “formation” to “alloformation,” as suggested by Doar and Berquist (2009). Figure 1 shows the relative placement of these mapped and named alloformations as used in the Virginia Coastal Plain and Fall Zone (a zone of transition between the Piedmont and Coastal Plain Provinces) (Berquist, 2021). Except perhaps for the Poquoson, many of these proposed alloformations are unlikely to interfinger or grade laterally seaward into extensive deep marine sediments. After their deposition, erosion during sea-level fall and then rise for the next depositional event would seemingly obliterate any marine connection without a basal unconformity. All these alloformations contain sediments deposited in fluvial, estuarine, and shallow-marine environments and are bound everywhere by unconformities. This paper documents the Cold Harbor Alloformation as a formal stratigraphic unit and the rationale for mapping the sediments using an allostratigraphic classification. The Cold Harbor Alloformation is composed of sediments from a variety of environments such as gravel beds, shoreline beach sands, marsh and estuarine sand and mud, and shallow marine sands. These sediments are found at elevations up to 240 ft and lie unconformably above older sediments and rocks. Our work relied on observations of outcrops and many auger borings to identify basal unconformities.

Professional Paper↗

Formalization of the Elsing Green Alloformation, Virginia Coastal Plain, Eastern Virginia

The Elsing Green Alloformation is herein formalized as a new Pleistocene alloformation in the Virginia Coastal Plain. This allostratigraphic unit is characterized by an unconformity-bounded terrace deposit occupying a morphologic flat with a mapped elevation range of about 26 to 38 feet (7.9 to 11.6 meters); its landward extent is commonly marked at the base of an erosional scarp where the toe is typically at 38 feet (11.6 meters) and is distinguished by its topographic expression and stratigraphic position. Sediments of this unit were previously mapped as part of the Shirley Formation or Sedgefield Member of the Tabb Formation but differ significantly in their bounding scarps and terrace morphology. The type area is within the Tunstall 7.5-minute quadrangle near Elsing Green Plantation, King William County, Virginia. The reference section is provided by boring 2012270-2. Correlation is proposed with other mid-Pleistocene terrace deposits in the mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain, including the younger Lynch Heights Formation of Delaware and the Butlers Bluff Member of the Nassawadox Formation of the Eastern Shore of Virginia. The age of the Elsing Green Alloformation is interpreted to be Marine Isotope Stage 9e (about 330,000 years).

Professional Paper↗

Resurvey of the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon dam sites in Grand Canyon National Park—Changes in sediment storage and evidence supporting the occurrence of bedrock incision through the mid-20th century

The Bureau of Reclamation developed an extensive plan for a network of dams, water tunnels, and hydropower plants in and around Grand Canyon, Arizona, in the 1940s through 1960s. The two largest of these planned dams were the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon Dams on the Colorado River. Though these dams were ultimately never built, Reclamation conducted extensive topographic, bathymetric, and subsurface exploration work at the sites proposed for these dams in the 1940s and 1950s. Resurveys of these dam sites were conducted between 1998 and 2021 to determine the changes in sediment storage at these dam sites caused by the upstream construction and operation of Glen Canyon Dam and by the recession of Lake Mead, the reservoir impounded by Hoover Dam. The resurveys of the Marble Canyon dam sites indicate that the post-1950s changes in sediment storage at these dam sites are broadly consistent with flux-based estimates of voluminous sand erosion from Marble Canyon since the 1963 closure of Glen Canyon Dam. These resurveys also suggest that the pre-dam longitudinal variation in sediment thickness over bedrock played a key role in determining the locations of the sand erosion induced by Glen Canyon Dam; more sand eroded from locations where more sand was present in the 1950s. The resurvey of the Bridge Canyon dam sites indicates that the Colorado River’s incision of the Lake Mead delta is regulated both by bed-sediment grain size and downstream hydraulic controls. Finally, analyses of bed-sediment thickness and sedimentological data at the dam sites, and observations of bed scour and gravel transport, suggest that sufficient bedrock was exposed to allow bedrock incision during commonly recurring pre-dam snowmelt floods that entrained small boulders into transport.

Arizona↗