Misplaced Pages

Santa Fe Group (geology)

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

Group of geologic formations filling the Rio Grande rift
Santa Fe Group
Stratigraphic range: Oligocene to Pleistocene, 26–1 Ma PreꞒ Ꞓ O S D C P T J K Pg N
Los Barrancos, New Mexico, underlain by Santa Fe Group beds
TypeGroup
Sub-unitsSee text
OverliesEspinaso Formation
Thickness5,000 m (16,000 ft)
Lithology
PrimarySiltstone
OtherSandstone, conglomerate
Location
RegionNew Mexico
Colorado
Country United States
ExtentRio Grande rift
Type section
Named forSanta Fe, New Mexico
Named byHayden
Year defined1869

The Santa Fe Group is a group of geologic formations in New Mexico and Colorado. It contains fossils characteristic of the Oligocene through Pleistocene epochs. The group consists of basin-filling sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Rio Grande rift, and contains important regional aquifers.

Description

The Santa Fe Group is widely defined as basin-filling sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Rio Grande rift. These range in age from late Oligocene to Pleistocene. The oldest formations in the group correspond to the earliest structural deformation associated with rifting. Geologic uplift of the region around the rift has ended deposition, and erosion in the Rio Grande river system has exposed many of the beds deposited earlier, often spectacularly, as in the badlands north of Santa Fe.

The formations in the group are divided into lower and upper sections. The lower Santa Fe Group was deposited in bolsons (closed arid basins) where streams drained into intermittent playa lakes surrounded by piedmont deposits eroded from basin-margin uplifts. The upper Santa Fe Group was deposited after integration of these basins into the ancestral Rio Grande, so that their drainage flowed toward southern New Mexico. Some geologists also define a middle section transitional between the upper and lower sections.

Formations

Formations of the Santa Fe Group are defined in each basin of the Rio Grande rift, though some formations extend across multiple basins.

San Luis Basin

Upper Santa Fe Group:

The lower Santa Fe Group is present only in the subsurface in the San Luis Basin and has not been divided into formations.

Espanola Basin

Upper Santa Fe Group:

Lower Santa Fe Group:

Hagen Basin

Upper Santa Fe Group:

Lower Santa Fe Group:

Northwest Albuquerque Basin

Upper Santa Fe Group:

Middle Santa Fe Group:

Lower Santa Fe Group:

Southern and eastern Albuquerque Basin

Upper Santa Fe Group:

Lower Santa Fe Group:

Orogrande Basin

Upper Santa Fe Group:

Lower Santa Fe Group:

Fossils

G.K. Gilbert visited San Ildefonso Pueblo with the Hayden Survey in 1873 and found fossil mammal bones characteristic of the Pliocene. Some of these were sent to Othniel Marsh. Marsh's bitter rival, Edward Drinker Cope, arrived at San Ildefonso the next year and collected a number of Miocene reptile, bird, and mammal fossils.

Childs Frick sent an expedition into the Tesuque area in 1924, and immediately recognized the paleontological potential of the Santa Fe beds. The Fricks Laboratory (merged with the Department of Vertebrate Paleontology of the American Museum of Natural History in 1968) carried out field work through 1972. Work prior to 1940 was careless about identifying exact source strata, though greater care was taken thereafter. Most of the fossils came from the Pojoaque Member of the Tesuque Formation and were almost entire found within thin (0.5–3 m) maroon-red to pale green claystone to fine-grained siltstone beds of lithosome B. These are interpreted as small lacustrine deposits.

Fossils found in the Santa Fe Group include the canids Hemicyon and Carpocyon webbi, the antilocaprids Cosoryx, Merycodus, and Ramoceros, chiroptera from the Vespertilionidae and Antrozoinae, the turtle Glyptemys valentinensis, and mastodonts.

Economic geology

The groundwater potential of the Santa Fe Group was recognized by Bryan Kirk in 1938, and the Alamosa subbasin of the San Luis Valley, the central part of the Albuquerque Basin, and the southern Mesilla basin from Las Cruces to El Paso are now among the most productive groundwater reservoirs in the western United States. In the Albuquerque area, this has produced significant drawdown of the water table, in some places exceeding 100 feet (30 m). The aquifer continues to be studied to characterize the effects of new development, and resulting shifts in groundwater flow, on pollutants in the aquifer.

History of investigation

Hayden gave the name "Santa Fe Marls" to the extensive sedimentary beds in the valley of the Rio Grande near Santa Fe during his 1869 survey of New Mexico and Colorado. He likened these to the badlands of South Dakota and correctly determined that they were upper Tertiary in age and were much younger than the Galisteo Formation beds which they overlie. He noted their great thickness, which he observed to be at least 1,500 feet (460 m).

By 1936, the Santa Fe Formation had been traced from central New Mexico into southern Colorado. Two years later, Bryan recognized that it extended at least from the San Luis Basin to beyond El Paso and was extensively faulted and deformed. He interpreted the formation as being deposited in a series of basins along an ancestral Rio Grande. The formation was promoted to group rank in 1953 and defined by Baldwin three years later as basin-filling sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Rio Grande rift.

Galusha and Blick advocated a much narrower definition of the Santa Fe Group in 1971. They restricted it to the Tesuque Formation and Chamita Formation in the Espanola basin, and specifically excluded the older Abiquiu and Zia Formation and younger Ancha Formation. However, the broad 1956 definition by Baldwin has been widely accepted.

Footnotes

  1. ^ Baldwin 1956.
  2. Galusha & Blick 1971, p. 9.
  3. ^ Connell 2001, p. A-8.
  4. Brister & Gries 1994, p. 48.
  5. Brister & Gries 1994, p. 46-48.
  6. ^ Baldwin 1956, p. 119.
  7. ^ Connell 2001, p. A-15.
  8. Baldwin 1956, pp. 118–119.
  9. Baldwin 1956, p. 118.
  10. ^ Connell 2001, p. A-9.
  11. Lozinsky & Hawley 1986, pp. 73–78, 82.
  12. ^ Seager, Hawley & Clemons 1971.
  13. Kues, Lewis & Lueth 2014.
  14. Galusha & Blick 1971, p. 14.
  15. Williamson 2016, p. iv.
  16. Galusha & Blick 1971, p. 19.
  17. Williamson 2016.
  18. ^ Kirk 1938.
  19. Hawley & Kernodle 1999, p. 1.
  20. Galanter & Curry 2019.
  21. Myers & Friesz 2019.
  22. Hayden 1869.
  23. Wilmarth 1936.
  24. Kottlowski 1953.
  25. Galusha & Blick 1971.
  26. Hawley & Kernodle 1999.
  27. Connell 2001.
  28. Armstrong et al. (2013).
  29. Brister & Gries 1994.
  30. May & Russell 1994.
  31. Repasch et al. 2017.

References

Categories: