Geologic map of the Elk City 30¢ X 60¢ quadrangle, Beckham, Custer, Greer, Harmon, Kiowa, Roger Mills, and Washita Counties, Oklahoma

Frequently asked questions:
•	What does the data describe? 
•	How should the data be cited? 
•	What geographic area does the data cover?
•	What does it look like?
•	Does the data describe conditions during a particular time period? 
•	How are geographic features stored in the data? 
•	What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features? 
•	How does the data describe geographic features? 
•	Who are the originators of the data? 
•	Who also contributed to the data? 
•	To whom should users address questions about the data? 
•	Why was the data created? 
•	From what previous works were the data drawn? 
•	How were the data generated, processed, and modified? 
•	How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data? 
•	Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data? 
•	Who distributes the data? 
•	What's the catalog number I need to order the data? 
•	What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read? 
•	How can I download or order the data? 
•	Who wrote the metadata? 

What does the data describe?
Title: Geologic map of the Elk City 30¢ X 60¢ quadrangle, Beckham, Custer, Greer, Harmon, Kiowa, Roger Mills, and Washita Counties, Oklahoma.

Abstract: The geologic map of the Elk City quadrangle was compiled from existing, previously published geologic maps (listed on map and below) and from field reconnaissance by the authors. The reconnaissance geology was compiled onto modern 7.5¢ topographic quadrangles; the geology was subsequently digitized for ultimate publication at a scale of 1:100,000.

How should the data be cited? 

Johnson, Kenneth S.; Stanley, Thomas M.; and Miller, Galen W., 2003, Geologic map of the Elk City 30¢ X 60¢ quadrangle, Beckham, Custer, Greer, Harmon, Kiowa, Roger Mills, and Washita Counties, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey Oklahoma Geologic Quadrangle OGQ-44, scale 1:100,000.
What geographic area does the data cover?
West Bounding Coordinate: -100.00
East Bounding Coordinate: -99.00
North Bounding Coordinate: 35.50
South Bounding Coordinate: 35.00
What does it look like?
A PDF of the published geologic map, a zipped (ZIP) file containing all the geologic map features in an ESRI shapefile format, and a metadata document
Does the data describe conditions during a particular time period?
Calendar Date: 2003
Currentness Reference: Publication date 
How are geographic features stored in the data?
PDF and ESRI shapefile format
What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?
Grid Coordinate System: Universal Transverse Mercator
UTM Zone: 14N
Scale Factor at Central Meridian: 0.99960
Longitude of Central Meridian: -99.00
Latitude of Projection Origin: 0.00
False Easting: 500000.00
False Northing: 0.00
Planar Coordinates: Meters
Horizontal Datum: North American Datum 1927 (NAD27)
Ellipsoid: Clarke 1866
Semi-Major Axis of the Ellipsoid: 6378206.40
Flattening of the Ellipsoid: 1/294.9786980
How does the data describe geographic features?
The published geologic map of the Elk City 30¢ X 60¢ quadrangle uses a digital U.S. Geological Survey 1:100,000 topographic base map, where symbols and line work are the same as those found on the published U.S. Geological Survey 1:100,000 paper topographic map for the quadrangle. Geologic symbols and line work are shown in the explanation on the map. Structural information and how the areal extent of geologic units is shown, also are typical of geologic maps published by the USGS and other state geological surveys. The PDF file is a digital representation of a paper geologic map and all the topographic and geologic symbols are the same as those used on commonly used and widely accessible federal- and state-survey-produced geologic maps. The geologic symbols conform closely, but not exact in every case, to the FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization. The ESRI shapefiles of the geologic map can be symbolized by the user to represent the published map or other geologic standards.
Who are the originators of the data?
Geologists: Kenneth S. Johnson, Thomas M. Stanley, and Galen W. Miller
Digital Cartographer: G. Russell Standridge
Who also contributed to the data?
Manager of OGS Cartographic Section: James H. Anderson
To whom should users address questions about the data?
Either: Kenneth S. Johnson or Thomas M. Stanley
Oklahoma Geological Survey
100 E. Boyd St., Rm. N-131
Norman, Oklahoma  73019
Phone: (405) 325-3031
Fax: (405) 325-7069
E-mail: ksjohnson@ou.edu, tmstanley@ou.edu
Why was the data created?
The data was created to provide a geologic map of the Elk City 30¢ X 60¢ quadrangle. The map or any parts of it can be printed or viewed at a variety of scales and be used in many ways by homeowners, landowners, civil engineers, land-use planners, government agencies, businesses, etc. This map data is not meant to be used or displayed at any scale larger than 1:100,000 (e.g., 1:62,500 or 1:24,000).
From what previous works were the data drawn?
Bullard, F.M., 1928, Lower Cretaceous of western Oklahoma, a study of outlying areas of Lower Cretaceous in Oklahoma and adjacent states: Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin 47, 116 p.

Burton, L.C., 1965, Ground water in terrace deposits of central Beckham County, Oklahoma. Oklahoma Water Resources Board Bulletin 25, 30 p.

Cannon, P.J., 1967, Pleistocene geology of Salt Fork and North Fork of Red River, southwestern Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma unpublished M.S. thesis, 38 p.

Carr, J.E.; and Bergman, D.L., 1976, Reconnaissance of the water resources of the Clinton quadrangle, west-central Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas Map HA-5, 4 plates.

Cederstrand, J.R., 1996, Digital geologic map of the Clinton quadrangle, west-central Oklahoma: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report OF-96-373.

Edwards, J.R., 1958, Areal geology of the northwest Mangum area: University of Oklahoma unpublished M.S. thesis, 96 p.

Fay, R.O., 1968, Geology and mineral resources (exclusive of petroleum) of Custer County, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin 114, 88 p.

Johnson, K.S., 1962, Areal geology of the Sentinel-Gotebo area, Kiowa and Washita Counties, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma unpublished M.S. thesis 99 p.

Johnson, K.S.; and Ham, W.E., 1966, Geologic map of the Mangum-Erik area: Oklahoma Geological Survey unpublished map.

Johnson, K.S.; and Ham, W.E., 1966, Geologic map of the Sentinel-Carnegie area: Oklahoma Geological Survey unpublished map.

Meinert, J.G., 1961, Areal geology of the Starvation Creek area, Roger Mills and Beckham Counties, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma unpublished M.S. thesis, 66 p.

Merritt, C.A., 1958, Igneous geology of the Lake Altus area, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin 76, 70 p.

Moussavi-Harami, Reza, 1977, Areal geology of the Cordell area, central Washita County, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma unpublished M.S. thesis, 76 p.

Murphey, C.W., 1958, Areal geology of the Erik area, Beckham and Greer Counties, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma unpublished M.S. thesis, 76 p.

Richardson, J.L., 1970, Areal geology of western Washita County, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma unpublished M.S. thesis, 67 p.
Scott.G.L., Jr.; and Ham, W.E., 1957, Geology and gypsum resources of the Carter area, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey Circular 42, 64 p.

Smith, A.H., 1964, Areal geology of the Elk City area, Beckham and Roger Mills Counties, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma unpublished M.S. thesis, 64 p.

How were the data generated, processed, and modified?

The geology from previously published maps was redrawn by hand onto 32 modern 7.5¢ topographic maps. Differences in geologic contacts and distribution of geologic units were noted. The 7.5¢ topographic maps were taken into the field and used as the base maps for revising the geology of the area. The geologists field checked all the geologic contacts and distribution of units and, where necessary, modified or reinterpreted previously published data. In general, most of the field checking was done in areas that were readily accessible by vehicles; contacts and units were then projected to those areas that were not checked directly.

The geology was digitized at a scale of 1:24,000 from revisions drawn on 32 modern 7.5¢ topographic maps with each map unit as a separate layer in an ESRI shapefile format. All shapefiles are then assembled together and overlain by a USGS 1:100,000-scale topographic base map and checked for errors. Symbology and labels were designated for a final map layout at 1:100,000 scale. The final map was then published as Oklahoma Geologic Quadrangle OGQ-44 as a PDF along with the data files in ESRI shapefile format.
How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data?
The geologic map is based on reconnaissance field checking of previously existing geologic maps and interpretation by the authors. Most of the contacts bordering Quaternary units are gradational. The contact between the Ogallala Formation and adjacent units is typically gradational or uncertain, particularly where the Ogallala consists of sand, silt, and gravel and the adjacent unit is predominantly sand, silt and/or gravel. Much work remains to be done concerning the distribution and origin of the different rock types that make up the Ogallala Formation. Key to this may be understanding the distribution and age of several volcanic ash deposits in the Ogallala.

There may be several different units that are included within the unit labeled “Older Alluvium”— differentiation of these units is an important unstudied geologic issue.

Correlation and documentation of Permian strata in northwestern Oklahoma also requires additional study, particularly the distribution and correlation of gypsum and dolomite beds over large distances.

The format of the data as an ESRI shapefile was originally used as a cartographic tool for constructing a printable map. The map was digitized at a scale of 1:24,000 from 7.5¢ topographic maps. Errors may exist from the digitizing process done at that scale and transferring the geology onto a 1:100,000-scale 30¢ X 60¢ topographic quadrangle. This may include errors in relation to the locational accuracy and precision of:  the contact or map unit boundary to the topographic contour; a map unit layer to another map unit layer (e.g., gaps, overlaps, slivers, overshoots). These data and adjoining data for other quadrangles were produced on a quadrangle-by-quadrangle basis. Therefore, misalignment issues may exist between these data and other data downloaded for adjoining quadrangles. Also, the attribute table for each geologic feature layer may not contain detailed information except when used for categorizing some feature objects. Specific information about each geologic unit can be found in the Description of Units on the published PDF map. Currently underway, these issues are being resolved for each quadrangle map through revision and implementation of a geologic data model based on an ESRI geodatabase environment. These revised data files will be available for download on the OGS website in the near future. Finally, some geologic contacts abruptly end at a water body as mapped by the authors; therefore, a Water layer is included that represents an open water contact.
Are there additional data describing the geologic units?
WHITEHORSE GROUP, Undifferentiated—The Whitehorse Group is red-brown and orange-brown, fine-grained sandstone and siltstone that typically is friable (not cemented). The Whitehorse is divided into the Marlow Formation (below) and the Rush Springs Sandstone (above), although the two formations are not readily differentiated or mapped separately in the quad. At the base of the Whitehorse Group is a poorly exposed, friable, white sandstone that is about 0.3 m thick. The Whitehorse Group has a regionally disconformable contact with the underlying Dog Creek Shale, and its thickness, about 120–150 m in the quad, increases northward into the Anadarko Basin.

DOG CREEK SHALE—The Dog Creek Shale is 25–60 m of red-brown, silty shale, with thin interbeds of green-gray shale and light-gray dolomite (3–15 cm thick). The base of the Dog Creek Shale is at the top of a persistent, but intermittently exposed, gypsum/dolomite cycle at the top of the Blaine Formation. The formation is separated from the overlying Whitehorse Group by a regional disconformity that diminishes northward into the Anadarko Basin.

BLAINE FORMATION—The Blaine Formation is a series of cyclic rock units, wherein each cycle consists of (in ascending order) dolomite, gypsum, red-brown shale, and green-gray shale (then the next-overlying dolomite).It contains 9 thick beds of white gypsum that are persistent and thicken from east to west across the quad. The Blaine typically is 45–55 m thick in the quad. Locally, the gypsum and dolomite beds are partly or totally dissolved by natural ground-water and surface-water flow. Caves, sinkholes, cavities, and abrupt thinning of the gypsum layers in the Blaine are typical “karst” features that develop in water-soluble rocks. The Blaine Formation is divided into the Elm Fork Member (below) and the Van Vacter Member (above).  

VAN VACTER MEMBER—Six beds of white gypsum, each typically 1–5 m thick, are separated by thin beds of dolomite and shale that are 3 cm to 1.2 m thick. Gypsum beds typically are thinner in the east, and several of them grade laterally into shale in the eastern part of the quad. The base of the Van Vacter is at the base of the Mangum Dolomite Bed, which typically is 0.6–1.2 m of light-gray to tan dolomite that caps buttes and cuestas. The thickness of the Van Vacter Member commonly is 20–25 m in the quad.

ELM FORK MEMBER—Three beds of white gypsum, each typically 1.5–10 m thick, are interbedded with thick beds of red-brown shale (3–10 m thick) and thinner beds of  dolomite and green-gray shale (3 cm to 1 m thick). Gypsum beds commonly are thinner toward the east, and the middle gypsum grades laterally into shale in the eastern part of the quad. The base of the Elm Fork is the base of the Haystack Gypsum Bed, which normally is 3–6 m of white gypsum. The thickness of the Elm Fork Member typically is 25–30 m in the quad.

FLOWERPOT SHALE—The Flowerpot Shale consists of red-brown, silty shale. It contains thin interbeds of green-gray shale, and several thin layers of gypsum and dolomite in the upper part. In the east half of the quad, the Flowerpot overlies the Duncan Sandstone and typically is 30–50 m thick. The Duncan sandstone beds grade laterally into Flowerpot shales in the central and western parts of the quad, and, in those areas, about 90 m of Flowerpot Shale rests directly upon the Brinkman Sandstone Bed of the Hennessey Shale. A conspicuous and persistent gypsum bed in the upper part of the Flowerpot shale is not mapped: the Chaney Gypsum Bed (0.6–1.2 m of white to light-gray gypsum) is 8–15 m below the top.

DUNCAN SANDSTONE—The Duncan Sandstone is 15–60 m of light-gray and red-brown sandstone, siltstone, and mudstone conglomerate, interbedded with yellow-gray and red-brown shale. The Duncan is present only in the east half of the quad. Duncan strata are an alluvial/deltaic complex, wherein the sandstone beds grade laterally into shales of the Flowerpot Shale farther west. The top and base of the Duncan are not the same stratigraphic units throughout the quad: they are the uppermost and lowest sandstone units, respectively, that have Duncan-like characteristics. 

HENNESSEY SHALE—The Hennessey Shale consists of red-brown shale with thin interbeds of siltstone in the quad. As much as 15–45 m of Hennessey strata crop out in the east and central parts of the quad. In the central part of the quad, the Duncan Sandstone was not deposited; thus Hennessey shales are overlain by similar Flowerpot shales. To differentiate these two shale units in this area, the Brinkman Sandstone Bed, about 15 m below the base of the Duncan in the east, is arbitrarily defined here as the top of the Hennessey Shale. The Brinkman Bed is 2–3 m of light-gray, friable sandstone and siltstone. Uniquely, the basal several inches of the Brinkman Bed contain scattered subrounded to rounded quartz and feldspar grains 0.5–2.0 mm in diameter.

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

Access Constraints: None

Use Constraints: This digital map is not meant to be used or displayed at any scale greater than 1:100,000. Users should cite the Oklahoma Geological Survey as the original source of the data, but clearly denote cases where the original data has been updated, modified, or in any way altered from the original condition. There are no restrictions on the distribution of the data or interpretations shown on this data or reproduction of the data from the graphics files. However, users are encouraged to refer others to the Oklahoma Geological Survey to acquire the original data or any updated versions of the data.
Who distributes the data?
Oklahoma Geological Survey
100 E. Boyd St., Rm. N-131
Norman, OK  73019
What's the catalog number I need to download the data?
Oklahoma Geologic Quadrangle OGQ-44.
What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
The Oklahoma Geological Survey (OGS) provides these geologic data “as is”. The OGS makes no guarantee or warranty concerning the accuracy of information contained in the data. The OGS further makes no warranties, either expressed or implied, as to any other matter whatsoever including, without limitation, the condition of the product, or its fitness for any particular purpose. The burden for determining fitness for use lies entirely with the user. Although these data have been processed successfully on computers at the OGS, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the OGS regarding the use of these data on any other system, nor does the fact of distribution constitute or imply any such warranty.
In no event shall the OGS have any liability whatsoever for payment of any consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or tort damages of any kind, including, but not limited to, any loss of profits arising out of use of or reliance on the geologic data or arising out of the delivery, installation, operation, or support by OGS.
This digital geologic map of the Elk City 30¢ X 60¢ quadrangle, Beckham, Custer, Greer, Harmon, Kiowa, Roger Mills, and Washita Counties, Oklahoma is not meant to be used or displayed at any scale larger than 1:100,000.
How can I download or order the data?
Availability in Digital Form:
Data Format:
PDF and ESRI shapefile		
Free Download at: 
Oklahoma Geological Survey website
http://www.ogs.ou.edu/geolmapping.php
Who wrote the metadata?
	Dates: 
Last Modified: May 2008

Metadata Author:
Oklahoma Geological Survey
c/o Thomas M. Stanley and/or G. Russell Standridge
100 E. Boyd St., Rm. N-131
Norman, OK  73019
Phone (405) 325-3031
Fax (405) 325-7069