Origin of Strain in Salt Creek Canyon

Loren Holyoak

INTRODUCTION

Salt Creek Canyon is a geologically intriguing area located roughly two miles east of
Cedar City, Utah, where many forms of strain are exposed in the canyon walls. The layer in
which the strain is seen is known as the Carmel Formation which is Jurassic in age. The Carmel
Formation is described by Biek (2006) as consisting of multiple marine units which contains four
different members, with the uppermost member consisting of a gray to reddish-brown soft
mudstone and sandstone. The second is a moderately resistant gypsum and limestone member
that is mostly gray in color, and The third member varies in composition. Siltstone, sandstone,
mudstone and gypsum can all be found within the member. The varying composition leads to its
reddish-brown color. The bottom member is a thin resistant layer of gray limestone. Throughout
the formation in Salt Creek Canyon are several faults, folds, cleavage planes, and joint planes.
The source of these forms of strain is not agreed upon. There are two possible sources of stress
that could have formed the strain seen in Salt Creek Canyon: the Sevier Orogeny or the Rubys
Inn Thrust Fault. Deformation formed by the Sevier Orogeny generally trends north and south.
The Rubys Inn Thrust Fault trends east and west. Both events caused compressional strain, but
studying the orientation of the deformation seen in Salt Creek Canyon will hopefully reveal
similar trends of either the Sevier Orogeny or the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault and thus determine the
source of the deformation.

GEOLOGIC HISTORY /TECTONIC SETTING

The Carmel Formation was deposited in the middle of the Jurassic period. Shortly after,
during the Cretaceous period, the Sevier Orogeny commenced. This orogeny was caused by the
subduction of the Farallon Plate at a normal angle which caused thin-skinned deformation. Due
to the accretion of the terranes, compressional stress was generated in western North America.
This stress created compressional strain throughout the area. Salt Creek Canyon exposes the
leading edge of the Sevier fold and thrust belt. Other areas that expose Sevier deformation in the
area include Kanarra Creek, Spring Creek, and Taylors Creek. The Sevier Orogeny created strain
with a north-south orientation. If deformation in the Salt Creek Canyon has an orientation of
roughly north-south, a reasonable interpretation is that the Sevier Orogeny is the cause of the
deformation.
As the Farallon Plate subducted, the slab began to roll back. As the slab rolled back the
space was filled with hot asthenosphere. The presence of this hot asthenosphere caused the crust
to uplift creating the Marysvale volcanic field during the Cenozoic Era. As the crust was uplifted
the land began to slide because the volcanic field created a slope that the bedding could not
uphold. Due to the steeper slope, compressional stress was generated and the incompetent layers
beneath the surface could no longer support the weight of the overburden. This caused the Rubys
Inn Thrust Fault to form along those layers (Figure 1). The orientation of maximum compression
formed by the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault is expected to have a orientation of approximately N15E.
Another important geologic event that occurred in the area due to the Marysvale volcanic
field is the Markagunt Gravity Slide. As the Marysvale volcanic field developed it uplifted the
Tushar Mountains. Due to the uplift, the gravity slide was triggered and 300 square miles
traveled 20
miles at
supersonic
speeds (Biek,
2013).
Although this
was a major
geological
event, there is
no strain in
Salt Creek
Canyon as a
result of the
Markagunt
Gravity Slide.
The area has also been subject to Basin and Range extension. The area that is in question
is bounded by two normal faults associated with Basin and Range, the Hurricane and Sevier
faults. Although the area as a whole has been affected by the Basin and Range extension, the
strain that is being studied is likely from contraction not extension.

METHODS

The areas in Salt Creek Canyon that were studied were roughly 365 meters from the
mouth of the canyon. Three sections were of particular interest during this study, each of which
were located approximately 100 meters apart. The data collection was a group effort carried out
by the structural geology class at Southern Utah University. The class split into three groups to
cover the three different sections. Each group measured approximately 20 different orientations
of bedding planes, cleavage planes, joint
planes, fault planes, and folds. Each group
also made a cross-sectional map of their
section. Once all the data were collected,
the data points were made into stereonets
using Rick Allmendingers program
Stereonet 9 (Allmendinger 2006-2016).

RESULTS

The data from each section were combined

to compare orientations of the deformation
to determine the source of the strain
(Figure 2). The bedding plane data
consisted of two groups of orientations.
The majority of the bedding planes have
an average orientation of 353,11. The
second group of bedding has an average orientation of 215,42. The cleavage planes all had
similar orientations throughout all three
sections. The average orientation of the
cleavage planes is 280,73. The fault and
joint planes however did not have similar
orientations. The poles of the fault and
joint planes are scattered throughout the stereonet with no obvious pattern or similar orientation.

DISCUSSION

Each data set (bedding planes, cleavage planes, fault planes, and joint planes) provided
information on which geologic events created the strain that is seen in the study area. Some of
the data were very uniform and thus clearly showed which geologic event was the source of the
strain. On the other hand, some of the data were not uniform and thus made it difficult to
determine the source of the strain.
Bedding Planes
The data show two different average orientations. One orientation of an average of
353,11, and the other orientation of an average orientation of 215,42. These two different
orientations are showing the two limbs of a fold. The hinge line of this fold would be
approximately N20E. This would suggest that sigma would be roughly N80W. This orientation
would indicate that this folding is a result of the Sevier Orogeny.
Cleavage Planes
The data collected for cleavage planes was very uniform as seen in Figure 2. The average
orientation of the cleavage planes is 280,73. The pole to this average orientation would be
17\190. This corresponds to the same orientation of the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault. This orientation
of the cleavage planes indicates that the Rubys Inn thrust Fault is likely the source that caused
the cleavage planes in Salt Creek Canyon.
Fault Planes
The orientations of the fault planes were not as uniform as
were expected. The rose diagram in Figure 3 shows that the
majority of the poles to the fault planes lays in the Northeast
quadrant of the stereonet. This orientation also indicates that
the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault formed these faults. The faults
that have an orientation that do not coincide with the Rubys
Inn Thrust Fault could be explained due to the fact that the
deformation is in a gypsum/shale rich layer. Both shale and
gypsum are very weak and can be faulted and broken with
several different mechanisms. The Rubys Inn Thrust Fault
could be the cause of some of these faults, but it may not be
the cause to all the of the faults. The other faults could be a
result of the Sevier Orogeny, Basin and Range extension, or
decompression.

Joint Planes
 The joint planes appear to have no apparent pattern nor similar orientation. In order to
interpret this data the orientations were split into three different groups depending on their strike.
Group one includes joint planes that have strikes from 240 to 290, group two includes strikes
from 300 to 340, and group three includes strikes from 350-050 (Figure 4). The majority of the
data collected fell into groups two (37%) and three (45%) with a small amount in group one
(17%). Since joints are formed from extension sigma one would be parallel to the joint. This
would indicate that the sigma one of
each group would be approximately as
follows: group one N85E, group two
N40W, group three N42E. With these
orientations group one correlates with
the Sevier Orogeny, group two
correlates with Basin and Range
extension, and group three correlates
with the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault.
Another possible interpretation of
this data is to consider the possibility of
conjugate fractures. Groups two and
three make up 80% of the data
collected, and it could be assumed that
these joints are conjugate fractures.
Sigma one bisects the acute angle of the
conjugate fracture. This would indicate
that sigma one would be at an
orientation of approximately N13W,
which corresponds to the Rubys Inn
Thrust Fault.

CONCLUSION

The data that were collected did not suggest a single geologic event that caused the
deformation in Salt Creek Canyon. All of the cleavage planes indicated that the Rubys Inn Thrust
Fault was the source of stress that formed the cleavage planes. The fault planes were not as
conclusive. The majority of the fault planes did suggest that the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault was the
cause of the strain but there were several that had a different sigma one. The joint planes were
also not conclusive. There is evidence of the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault, the Sevier Orogeny and the
Basin and Range extension. Because there are more than one event that created the strain the
history of the previous stress regimes can be inferred. The first event that occurred was the
folding of the layers due to the Sevier Orogeny. During this folding event joints were also
formed. After the folding occurred cleavage planes and more joint planes were formed due to the
Rubys Inn Thrust Fault. This event also created several faults throughout the area as well. The
final event that affected the area, and is still ongoing, is the Basin and Range extension which
has formed several joint planes in the area.
 This geologic history of stress regimes may vary slightly depending if conjugate fractures
are considered. If these fractures are indeed conjugate fractures then the joints in group two and
three will be a result of the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault and there would not be joints present due to
the Basin and Range extension.
Some of the deformation of the sediment may also be attributed to the instability of
gypsum and shale. These types of rocks are deformed easily and can experience strain due to
overburden, overburden decompression, fluid, and other mechanisms. The data indicate that the
origin of the deformation in Salt Creek Canyon varies, but they also suggest that the deformation
caused by the Rubys Inn Thrust Fault extends much farther than previously thought.