Framework geologic map and structure sections along the Bartlett Springs Fault Zone and adjacent area from Round Valley to Wilbur Springs, northern Coast Ranges, California

Metadata also available as

Frequently-anticipated questions:


What does this data set describe?

Title:
Framework geologic map and structure sections along the Bartlett Springs Fault Zone and adjacent area from Round Valley to Wilbur Springs, northern Coast Ranges, California
Abstract:
This geologic map database and cross sections presents a compilation of published and unpublished and new geologic mapping by the authors. The map database depicts the general distribution of bedrock and surficial deposits in the mapped area and provides a context for interpreting the evolution of active faults in the region. Together with the accompanying PDF file, it provides current information on the geologic structure and stratigraphy of the area covered. The database delineates map units that are identified by general age and lithology following the stratigraphic nomenclature of the U.S. Geological Survey.
  1. How should this data set be cited?

    McLaughlin, R.J., Moring, B.C., Hitchcock, C.S., and Valin, Z.C., 2018, Framework geologic map and structure sections along the Bartlett Springs Fault Zone and adjacent area from Round Valley to Wilbur Springs, northern Coast Ranges, California: SIM 3395 U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Map, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.

    Online Links:

    • https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3395

  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?

    West_Bounding_Coordinate: -123.377488
    East_Bounding_Coordinate: -122.298710
    North_Bounding_Coordinate: 39.750499
    South_Bounding_Coordinate: 38.872924

  3. What does it look like?

  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?

    Calendar_Date: 2017
    Currentness_Reference: ground condition

  5. What is the general form of this data set?

    Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: vector digital data

  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?

    1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?

      This is a Vector data set. It contains the following vector data types (SDTS terminology):

      • String (16161)

    2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?

      Grid_Coordinate_System_Name: Universal Transverse Mercator
      Universal_Transverse_Mercator:
      UTM_Zone_Number: 10
      Transverse_Mercator:
      Scale_Factor_at_Central_Meridian: 0.999600
      Longitude_of_Central_Meridian: -123.000000
      Latitude_of_Projection_Origin: 0.000000
      False_Easting: 500000.000000
      False_Northing: 0.000000

      Planar coordinates are encoded using coordinate pair
      Abscissae (x-coordinates) are specified to the nearest 0.000000
      Ordinates (y-coordinates) are specified to the nearest 0.000000
      Planar coordinates are specified in meters

      The horizontal datum used is North American Datum of 1983.
      The ellipsoid used is Geodetic Reference System 80.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378137.000000.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/298.257222.

  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?

    arc_id
    Table containing attribute information associated with the data set. (Source: Producer defined)

    FID
    Internal feature number. (Source: Esri)

    Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.

    Shape
    Feature geometry. (Source: Esri)

    Coordinates defining the features.

    FID_arc_id

    FID_Arc

    ltype
    line type (Source: USGS Open-File Report 91-587-C)

    ValueDefinition
    contactA plane or irregular surface between two types or ages of rock; examples include intrusive borders, bedding planes separating distinct strata, and unconformities. Well located
    contact, approx. locatedA plane or irregular surface between two types or ages of rock; examples include intrusive borders, bedding planes separating distinct strata, and unconformities. Approximately located
    contact, concealedA plane or irregular surface between two types or ages of rock; examples include intrusive borders, bedding planes separating distinct strata, and unconformities. Location concealed beneath younger deposits
    contact, internalirregular surface between landslide deposits
    contact, queriedPossible contact, poorly observed
    faultA discrete surface or zone of discrete surfaces separating two rock masses across which one mass has slid past the other. Well Located
    fault, approx. locatedA discrete surface or zone of discrete surfaces separating two rock masses across which one mass has slid past the other. Approximately located.
    fault, concealedA discrete surface or zone of discrete surfaces separating two rock masses across which one mass has slid past the other. Concealed under younger deposits
    fault, approx. queriedA discrete surface or zone of discrete surfaces separating two rock masses across which one mass has slid past the other. approximately, existence uncertain
    fault, concealed, queriedA discrete surface or zone of discrete surfaces separating two rock masses across which one mass has slid past the other. Concealed under younger deposits, existence uncertain
    fault, inferred from imageryfault inferred from Google Earth Imagery
    layering (not symbolized on associated map)A succession of tabular units exhibiting distinct variation in mineralogy, textural or structural characteristics within igneous, sedimentary, or metamorphic rocks; or the formation of tabular bodies at different rock type, one upon the other
    map boundaryBoundary of mapping
    scratchsymbolized boundary between map two map units with no inference to locational accuracy
    tuffConsolidated or cemented volcanic ash and lapilli
    water boundarymapped boundary between land and water

    USGS_Style
    Line codes for single national standard for the digital cartographic representation of geologic map features. (Source: FGDC Document Number FGDC-STD-013-2006)

    ValueDefinition
    {Null Value / Empty Field Entry}Unknown
    01.01.01Unknown
    01.01.03Unknown
    01.01.04Unknown
    01.01.07Unknown
    01.01.09Unknown
    01.02.09Unknown
    01.03.07Unknown
    02.01.01Unknown
    02.01.03Unknown
    02.01.05Unknown
    02.01.06Unknown
    02.01.07Unknown
    02.01.08Unknown
    04.01.01Unknown
    30.02.01Unknown
    31.08Unknown

    LEFT_polyg
    polygon number on left side of line (Source: calculated by spatial identity with polygon feature class)

    RIGHT_poly
    polygon number on right side of line (Source: calculated by spatial identity with polygon feature class)

    LEFT_ptype
    Ptype of unit on left side of line (Source: calculated by spatial identity with polygon feature class)

    RIGHT_ptyp
    Ptype of unit on right side of line (Source: calculated by spatial identity with polygon feature class)

    Shape_Leng

    Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation: FGDC Document Number FGDC-STD-013-2006


Who produced the data set?

  1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)

  2. Who also contributed to the data set?

  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?

    Robert McLaughlin
    USGS PACIFIC REGION
    Emeritus
    345 Middlefield Rd
    Menlo Park, CA 94025
    USA

    650.329.4945 (voice)
    rjmcl@usgs.gov


Why was the data set created?

This database and accompanying plot files depict the distribution of geologic materials and structures at 1:100,000 scale. The report is intended to provide geologic information for the regional study of materials properties, earthquake shaking, landslide hazards, mineral potential, seismic velocity, and earthquake faults. In addition, the report contains new information and interpretations about the regional geologic history and framework. However, the scale of this report does not provide sufficient detail for site development purposes. In addition, this map does not take the place of fault-rupture hazard zones designated by the California State Geologist. Similarly, although numerous landslides are mapped, the database does not identify or delineate all landslides in the map area or their present states of activity.


How was the data set created?

  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?

    Berkland (1969) (source 1 of 20)
    Berkland, J.O., 1969, Late Mesozoic and Tertiary sequence near the proposed Garrett Tunnel, Mendocino and Lake Counties, California: Sacramento, Calif., U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Region.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 65,500
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Berkland (1973) (source 2 of 20)
    Berkland, J.O., 1973, Rice Valley outlier-New sequence of Cretaceous-Paleocene strata in northern Coast Ranges, California: Geological Society of America Bulletin.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 62500
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Blake and others (1992) (source 3 of 20)
    Blake, M.C., Jr., Helley, E.J., Jayko, A.S., Jones, D.L., and Ohlin, H.N., 1992, Geologic map of the Willows 1: 100,000 quadrangle, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92-271 100,000 quadrangle, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92-271.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 100000
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Brown (1964) (source 4 of 20)
    Brown, R.D., Jr., 1964, Geologic map of the Stonyford quadrangle, Glenn, Colusa and Lake Counties, California: U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Investigations Field Studies Map MF-279.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 480003
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Brown and others (1981) (source 5 of 20)
    Brown, R.D., Jr., Grimes, D.J., Leinz, R., Federspiel, F.E., Leszcykowsky, A.M., and Griscom, A., 1981, Mineral Resources of the Snow Mountain Wilderness Study Area, California: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 48000
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Clark (1940) (source 6 of 20)
    Clark, S.G., 1940, Geology of the Covelo District, Mendocino County, California: University of California Department of Geology Bulletin.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Etter (1979) (source 7 of 20)
    Etter, S.D., 1979, Geology of the Lake Pillsbury area, northern Coast Ranges [Ph.D. dissertation]: Austin, University of Texas.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Hearn and others (1995) (source 8 of 20)
    Hearn, B.C., Jr., Donnelly-Nolan, J.M., and Goff, F.E., 1995, Geologic map and structure sections of the Clear Lake volcanics, northern California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Series I-2362.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 24000
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Jayko and others (1989) (source 9 of 20)
    Jayko, A.S., Blake, M.C., Jr., McLaughlin, R.J., Ohlin, H.N., Ellen, S.D., and Kelsey, H., 1989, Reconnaissance geologic map of the Covelo 30- by 60-minute quadrangle, northern California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2001.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 100000
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Lawton (1956) (source 10 of 20)
    Lawton, J.E., 1956, Geology of the north half of the Morgan Valley quadrangle and the south half of the Wilbur Springs quadrangle, California [Ph.D. dissertation]: Stanford, Calif., Stanford University.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Lehman (1974) (source 11 of 20)
    Lehman, D.H., 1974, Structure and petrology of the Hull Mountain area, northern California Coast Ranges [Ph.D. dissertation]: Austin, University of Texas.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    McLaughlin (1978) (source 12 of 20)
    McLaughlin, R.J., 1978, Preliminary geologic map and structural sections of the central Mayacmas Mountains and The Geysers steam field, Sonoma, Lake, and Mendocino Counties, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Map.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 24000
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    McLaughlin and others (1990) (source 13 of 20)
    McLaughlin, R.J., Ohlin, H.N., and Thormahlen, D.J., 1990, Geologic map and structure sections of the Little Indian Valley-Wilbur Springs geothermal area, northern Coast Ranges, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Map I-1706.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Ohlin and others (2010) (source 14 of 20)
    Ohlin, H.N., McLaughlin, R.J., Moring, B.C., and Sawyer, T.L., 2010, Geologic map of the Bartlett Springs Fault Zone in the vicinity of Lake Pillsbury and adjacent areas of Mendocino, Lake, and Glenn Counties, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 3000032
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Shervais and others (2005) (source 15 of 20)
    Shervais, J.W., Murchey, B.L., Kimbrough, D.L., Renne, P.R., and Hanan, B.B., 2005, Radioisotopic and biostratigraphic age relations in the Coast Range Ophiolite of northern California: Implications for the tectonic evolution of the Western Cordillera: Geological Society of America Bulletin.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Shervais and others (2005) (source 16 of 20)
    Shervais, J.W., Zoglman Schuman, M.M., and Hanan, B.B., 2005, The Stonyford Volcanic Complex: a forearc seamount in the Northern California Coast Ranges: Journal of Petrology.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Stanford (1991) (source 17 of 20)
    Stanford, J.E., 1991, Geology of the Franciscan Complex Central Belt between Redwood Valley and Potter Valley, Mendocino County, California [M.S. thesis]: Hayward, Calif., California State University.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Suppe and Foland (1978) (source 18 of 20)
    Suppe, John, and Foland, K.A., 1978, The Goat Mountain Schists and Pacific Ridge Complex-A redeformed but still-intact late Mesozoic Franciscan schuppen complex, in Howell, D.G., and McDougall, Kristen, eds., Mesozoic paleogeography of the western United States: Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Pacific Section, Pacific Coast Paleogeography Symposium.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Swe and Dickinson (1970) (source 19 of 20)
    Swe, W., and Dickinson, W.R., 1970, Sedimentation and thrusting of late Mesozoic rocks in the Coast Ranges near Clear Lake, California: Geological Society of America Bulletin.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

    Lienkaemper (2010) (source 20 of 20)
    Lienkaemper, J.J., 2010, Recently active traces of the Bartlett Springs Fault, California: A Digital Database: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series.

    Other_Citation_Details:
    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Contribution: Geologic information

  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?

    Date: Unknown (process 1 of 4)
    Development of the data set by the agency / individuals identified in the 'Originator' element in the Identification Info section of the record.

    Date: 14-Jun-2017 (process 2 of 4)
    Metadata imported.

    Data sources used in this process:

    • C:\Users\moring\AppData\Local\Temp\1\xml72B3.tmp

    Date: 15-Jun-2017 (process 3 of 4)
    Metadata imported.

    Data sources used in this process:

    • C:\Users\moring\AppData\Local\Temp\1\xml54A5.tmp

    Date: 05-Jul-2018 (process 4 of 4)
    Metadata imported.

    Data sources used in this process:

    • C:\Users\moring\AppData\Local\Temp\1\xml2CAD.tmp

  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?


How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

  1. How well have the observations been checked?

    No formal attribute accuracy tests were conducted.

  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?

    A formal accuracy assessment of the horizontal positional information in the data set has not been conducted. The database was created for producing a geologic map of a 1:100,000 scale. Source maps varied from 1:12,000 to smaller the 1:500,000

  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?

    NA

  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?

    Data set is considered complete for the information presented, as described in the abstract. Users are advised to read the rest of the metadata record carefully for additional details.

  5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?

    Various logical accuracy tests were conducted. They include: Depositional contacts only separate different units; All concealed contacts or faults separate only identically tagged units; All adjacent terranes are in fault contact with each other (no depositional contacts); All water bodies are fully surrounded with lines tagged "water boundary."


How can someone get a copy of the data set?

Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?

Access_Constraints: None
Use_Constraints:
Uses of this digital geologic map should not violate the spatial resolution of the data. This database was edited for a publishing at scale of 1:100,000; higher resolution information may not be present in the dataset. Plotting at scales larger than 1:100,000 will not yield greater real detail, although it may reveal fine-scale irregularities below the intended resolution of the database.
Acknowledgement of the U.S. Geological Survey would be appreciated in products derived from these data.
U.S. Geological Survey assumes no liability for misuse of these data.

  1. Who distributes the data set?[Distributor contact information not provided.]

  2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set?

    Downloadable Data

  3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?

    Distributor assumes no liability for misuse of data.

  4. How can I download or order the data?


Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:
Last modified: 15-Jun-2017
Metadata author:
Barry Moring
U.S. Geological Survey
Geologist
345 Middlefield Rd
Menlo Park, CA 94025
USA

650.329.5360 (voice)
moring@usgs.gov

Metadata standard:
FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)
Metadata extensions used:


Generated by mp version 2.9.6 on Mon Jul 09 15:38:30 2018