 |
Sixty million
years ago, more or less, the beach was much further inland, and the
Wilmington area was in fact a shallow sea, and over the millions of years,
the sediments - remains of marine plants and animals - compacted into a
stony mass of limestone.
The seas retreated, leaving a thick seabed behind
that was gradually covered over with coastal sands and flood deposited
silt from what is now the Cape Fear and NE Cape Fear rivers.
The limestone has great commercial value, in
aggregates and cement, and Martin Marietta operates a large quarry near
Castle Hayne, NC.
A couple of afternoons each week, Martin Marietta
allows fossil hunting in the spoil areas, the fossil rich layers of soil
overburden that must be pushed aside to reach the limestone.
On my first visit I met a few members of the
NC Fossil Club, and
they gave me an overview of the area, what I might find, and which
deposits contain certain fossils. Unfortunately,
on my second visit, after only about 15 minutes, I raked through the sand
pile I was exploring and pulled out this beautiful 'trophy' echinoid, at
top. I say unfortunately because now I'm hooked, and look forward to each
visit to expand my range of explorations, and learning more about the what
and why and how this one-time shallow sea. The
overburden is arranged in rows, and away from the quarry pit. The quarry
rules are simple enough: stay out of and away from the quarry pit, and
stay out of everywhere marked with no access signs. After
you drive down the fossil area access road, you'll find a large pile of
sand, and this is where I found the echinoid in the top picture. Drive a
little further and park, and you can enter the rows of overburden piles seen
in the second picture. Look carefully and
you'll see that some of the piles are darker, and these piles contain dark
green phosphate mineral, nodules formed possibly by nitrate fixing
bacteria, possibly Thiomargarita. These piles seem to have more and
larger shark's teeth than the other piles. Some
more piles are notably whiter, and contain more chalky-looking sediments,
and with more shells and bryozoan fragments. In
the larger limestone rock, there are impressions of where the shells were,
and it seems the calcium carbonate shell has dissolved and been
transformed into calcite mineral, clear small crystals deposited on the
inner surface of the cavity. (Note: if you're
a student and take anything I might write as the basis for science fact,
you're going to be in trouble. I'm an enthusiastic amateur, without
discipline or direction, striving to understand a little something about
the stuff I'm looking at, but being unburdened by the need for strict
academic rigor, or course requirements for accuracy.) Try
as I might, understanding the words of geology and paleology-speak *
doesn't come easy. In the excerpt below, there
is discussion of the lithostratigraphic (arrangements of rock layers)
characteristics of the Castle Hayne Formation. There
are three member layers: The New Hanover
Member is the lowest, and darkest.
The Comfort Member is in the middle, and contains bryozoans and echinoids. The Spring Garden Member is on top, with
mollusks There's
a picture near the bottom that shows the layers. There is a marked
difference in the type of deposits above and below the middle seam of
chalky deposit.
* Rarely seen coleoid phragmacone steinkerns from the
Eocene Castle Hayne Limestone of southeastern
North Carolina
PATRICIA WEAVER, Raleigh, CHARLES CIAMPAGLIO, Celina and
RICHARD CHANDLER, Raleigh
Geological setting
Near-surface deposits of the middle Eocene Castle Hayne
Limestone extend as a 16-32 km wide
zone from Brunswick County and New Hanover County north through
east-central Pender County, through
western portions of Onslow, Jones and Craven Counties, and into southeastern
Pitt County in southeastern North Carolina (Otte, 1986). Bounded by
unconformities above and below, the formation
is typically overlain by Oligocene and younger rocks
and underlain by Paleocene and Cretaceous rocks. The Castle Hayne
Limestone is thought to range in age
from mid-Lutetian to Priabonian (Harris and Laws, 1997). Baum
et al.,
1978; Ward et al.,
1978; Kier, 1980, Zullo and Harris, 1986 and 1987; and Harris
and Zullo, 1987, have interpreted the lithostratigraphic subdivisions of
the Castle Hayne Limestone. Ward et
al. (1978) named three lithosomes
within the Formation (New Hanover, Comfort
and Spring Garden Members). The lowest unit (New Hanover Member) is
a slightly arenitic, micritic and phosphatic lithocalrudite; the middle
unit (Comfort Member) is a gray to cream colored bryozoan-echinoid
calcirudite, grading to a fine calcarenite; and the uppermost unit (Spring
Garden Member) is a tan to gray arenaceous molluscan-mold biocalcirudite.
All units typically represent differing time sequences at different
exposures.
Applying a sequence approach, Harris and Zullo (1987)
divided the Castle Hayne Limestone into five depositional sequences (0-4).
These sequences, divided by regional unconformities, reflect sea-level and
depositional environmental change. A complete lithologic section consists
of a phosphate pebble biomicrudite base overlain by biosparudite, in turn
overlain by biomicrudite grading into biosparudite. A complete
lithostratigraphic section is rarely represented at a single locality and
sequences are typically represented by different lithologies at various
exposures.
Using an echinoid-based biostratigraphic approach, Kier
(1980) divided the Castle Hayne Limestone
into three informal biozones (early, middle, late).These temporal biozones
overlap somewhat with the depositional
sequences defined by Harris and Zullo (1987) and provide a reasonable
biostratigraphic interpretation. Correlation between sequence stratigraphy
(Harris and Zullo, 1987),
biostratigraphy (Kier, 1980) and lithostratigraphy (Ward et
al., 1978) is provided in Text-figure
1.
Stratigraphic location within the Castle Hayne Limestone
is not precisely known, but based on
where in the quarry the specimens were collected, coupled with the
presence of Periarchus lyelli and
the lithologic composition of the phragmacone steinkerns, it is likely
that these specimens were contained
within sequences 3 or 4 (Zullo and Harris, 1987). |