AGGREGATE POTENTIAL - POLYGONS
|
Field |
Description |
|
Main ID Information |
Metadata Updated 2007 |
|
Title |
Benton County Aggregate
Resource Evaluation |
|
Filename |
Agp02py3 (ArcView
Shapefile) |
|
Abstract |
This dataset consists
of information about the geology, geological characteristics, and aggregate
potential of 165 map units. Five
fields relate to the surficial geology of the map unit. Twelve fields relate to the sand and
gravel characteristics, including probability, quality, texture, overburden
thickness, and deposit size, of the map unit. Eleven fields relate to crushed stone characteristics,
including probability, quality, overburden thickness, and deposit size, of
the map unit. These characteristics
were used to calculate the aggregate potential of the map unit for both
crushed stone and sand and gravel. |
|
Place Keywords |
Benton County,
Minnesota |
|
Theme Keywords |
Surficial Geology,
Geological Characteristics, Aggregate Potential, Sand, Gravel, Crushed Stone |
|
Time Period of
Content |
Fall 2001 – Spring 2002 |
|
Parent Theme |
NA (FIELDOBS) |
|
Spatial Extent of
the Data |
Benton County,
Minnesota |
|
Contact Person |
Aggregate Resources
Mapping Program |
|
Contact Person Organization/Division |
Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Lands and Minerals |
|
Contact Person
Position |
Geologist or GIS
Specialist |
|
Contact Address |
500 Lafayette Road, Box
45 |
|
Contact City |
St. Paul |
|
Contact Zip Code |
55155-4045 |
|
Contact Voice Phone |
651-259-5959 |
|
Contact Fax Phone |
651-296-5939 |
|
Additional ID
Information |
|
|
Originator |
Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Lands and Minerals, Mineral Potential Section |
|
Purpose |
To summarize the geological
characteristics, surficial geology, and aggregate potential (sand, gravel,
and crushed stone) of the different units.
To help categorize the geological characteristics and incorporate them
into a model to help determine the aggregate potential of the deposit. |
|
Progress |
Complete |
|
Currentness
Reference |
All data was gathered
in the late fall of 2000 and the summer and fall of 2001 and compiled in
the Fall of 2001 through the spring
of 2002. |
|
Maintenance
Frequency |
None Planned |
|
Access Constraints |
NA |
|
Use Constraints |
NA |
|
Associated Data Sets |
Field Observations
(FIELDOBS), Aggregate Resources of Benton County, Minnesota |
|
Data Quality |
|
|
Attribute Accuracy |
The sand and gravel and
surficial geology units were delineated by the interpretation of aerial
photographs at a 1:40,000 scale.
These interpretations were plotted on 1:24,000 USGS topographic
maps. These delineations and unit
descriptions were field checked and revised.
The final coverage was digitized on-screen using Digital Orthographic
Quads (DOQ 1:12,000 Scale). This was
a reconnaissance scale study and was mapped at 1:50,000. The crushed stone units were delineated
based on a model used to define a depth to bedrock surface (see the “Lineage”
section below for more information. |
|
Logical Consistency |
NA |
|
Completeness |
The sand and gravel
resource units were delineated by aerial photograph interpretations. The potential of the deposit is based on
geological factors and not economical factors. Generalizations were made, this is a reconnaissance-scale study
(1:50,000). The crushed stone
resource units were delineated by creating a model of the depth to bedrock
(1:100,000). |
|
Horizontal
Positional Accuracy |
1:50,000 for sand and
gravel, 1:100,000 for crushed stone. |
|
Vertical Positional
Accuracy |
NA |
|
Lineage |
The first step in
determining the distribution of aggregate resources is to understand the
surficial geology and the recent geological history of the area. The geological history basically tells us
the story, or sequence of events, of when the aggregate and other sediments
were deposited. By understanding this
story we can determine where the aggregate was deposited, as well as some of
the general characteristics about the material. This was accomplished for this study by completing an aerial
photograph interpretation of the entire county and confirming these
interpretations with approximately 1,000 water well logs and by observing
approximately 1,325 field sites.
Several other data sets and techniques were also used and are
described below. These
interpretations and observations were then compiled to form a sequence of
events to tell the geologic story.
Finally, the aggregate bearing landforms were delineated and
categorized based on their geological characteristics. For
sand and gravel: Color
infrared and black-and-white aerial photographs were used to delineate
geological landforms and aggregate resources. Stereoscopic pairs of color infrared aerial photographs (NAPP,
9"x9" at 1:40,000 scale, April 1991 and 1992) were used along with
reconnaissance-level, high-altitude, black-and-white photographs (1:80,000
scale). Aerial photographs (DOQs) were
also available digitally and used within ARCVIEW (1:12,000 scale). Aerial photographic interpretation was
completed with a glacial mapping technique known as the landsystems
approach. This technique relies on
the principle that depositional glacial landforms are composed of a
predictable range of sediments, some consisting of sorted sand and gravel and
others consisting of silts, clays, or unsorted materials. In addition to the landsystems approach,
several other general characteristics helped determine the nature of the
material, such as tonal contrasts, texture, context, shape, size, trend,
association, and patterns. These
characteristics can help determine the properties of the surface material
(e.g., certain vegetation grows on well drained soils such as sand and
gravel, which on an aerial photograph has a distinctive texture, tone,
pattern, etc.). The
landform recognition approach (part of the landsystems approach) was also
used when interpreting the topography within Benton County; glacial landforms
have distinct and unique shapes and patterns that can be observed in their
topographic expression. Topographic
maps (USGS 1:24,000), digital elevation models, and shaded relief maps were
all used to help delineate these sand and gravel bearing features. The topographic expression of a feature
can also be observed by looking at the distribution of lakes and
wetlands. For example, a string of
lakes and/or wetlands may be the signature of a glacial outwash channel or
collapsed channel, which may host sand or gravel deposits. Several aggregate bearing features were
located using this technique (outwash channels, collapsed channels,
glaciofluvial fans, eskers, and terraces). For crushed stone: A model was developed using Arcview and its Spatial Analyst extension to determine the depth to bedrock. The data incorporated into the model included well locations with well log information indicating a depth to bedrock; outcrops from the soil information; outcrops observed in the field; and surface elevations, stored as digital elevation model (30-meter DEM data from USGS). To calculate the depth to bedrock in relation to the surface elevation, the point locations for depth to bedrock and outcrops (i.e., the depth to bedrock equals 0 for outcrops) were subtracted from the surface elevations. A “top of bedrock” surface for the county was then created by interpolating these points. These “top of bedrock” values were then subtracted from the surface elevations, resulting in an approximate depth to crushed stone resource values for the county. |
|
Source Scale Denominator |
1:50,000 for sand and gravel, 1:100,000 for crushed stone. |
|
Spatial Reference |
|
|
Horizontal
Coordinate Scheme |
UTM |
|
Ellipsoid |
GRS80 |
|
Horizontal Datum |
NAD83 |
|
Horizontal Units |
Meters |
|
Distance Resolution |
NA |
|
Altitude Datum |
NA |
|
Altitude Units |
NA |
|
Depth Datum |
NA |
|
Depth Units |
NA |
|
UTM Zone Number |
15 |
|
Raster only |
|
|
Cell Width |
NA |
|
Cell Height |
NA |
|
Spatial Data
Organization |
|
|
Geographic Reference
for Tabular Data |
The units are
referenced as geological features (glacial drift, bedrock, and modern
sediments). |
|
Native Dataset
Environment |
ArcView 3.1/ArcInfo
8.0.2 |
|
Vendor Specific
Object Type |
NA |
|
Tiling Scheme |
County |
|
Spatial Object Type |
Vector-polygon |
|
Transfer Size |
|
|
Entities --
Attributes |
|
|
Entity-Attribute
Overview |
Geological Features, Geological Characteristics, and Aggregate Potential. |
|
Entity-Attribute
Detailed Citation |
ArcView specific fields
include shape (i.e., feature type = polygon), area (given in square meters),
perimeter (given in meters), Agp02ne3_ (counter field - assigned by the
software), and Agp02ne3_i (an id usually assigned during theme creation). The aggregate potential attributes for the polygons are described in the table below. |
|
Table Name |
Field Name |
Begin Column |
Definition |
Valid Values |
Descriptions |
|
Agp02py3.dbf |
Map_unitno |
|
Number,4,0 |
Ex: 101-3250. |
Unique identifier
(Combination or adding Sg_mapu and Cs_mapu:
Numbers have no significance). |
|
|
Surf_desc |
|
Text, 56 |
Ex: Glaciofluvial Outwash, Outwash Modified
Till. |
A short, summarized
description of the surficial geologic mapping units. |
|
|
Sgeo_age |
|
Text, 24 |
Ex: Holocene,
Precambrian, Quaternary, etc. |
Describes the age of
the material encountered at the surface. |
|
|
Sgeo_pl3 |
|
Text, 66 |
Ex: Alluvial Fan
Sediments, Alluvial Terrace Sediments, Glaciofluvial Fan Sediments, etc. |
Describes the surficial
geologic unit. It may be a bedrock
material, a glacial sediment, or a modern Holocene sediment |
|
|
Sgeo_proc |
|
Text, 37 |
Alluvial |
The geological process that
deposited these features. Alluvial processes are modern stream processes. |
|
|
|
|
|
Alluvial over
Glaciofluvial |
Modern stream processes
overlying glaciofluvial (glacial stream) processes |
|
|
|
|
|
Bedrock |
Precambrian age granitic
rocks such as granites and granodiorites that were deposited by volcanic
activity. Deposited billions of years ago. |
|
|
|
|
|
Eolian |
Material that was
deposited by wind, usually as dunes. |
|
|
|
|
|
Eolian and
Glaciofluvial over Glacial |
Glacial Till that was
modified by glaciofluvial outwash, which was later modified by eolian
material. These areas represent
patchy and discontinues areas of these three processes, which were too
difficult to differentiate at this mapping scale. |
|
|
|
|
|
Glacial |
Unsorted glacial
material deposited in place. |
|
|
|
|
|
Glaciofluvial |
Glacial sediments that
have been sorted by meltwater. |
|
|
|
|
|
Glaciofluvial over
Glaciolacustrine |
Glacial Sediments that
have been sorted by meltwater overlying material that was deposited at the
bottom of a glacial lake. |
|
|
|
|
|
Glaciolacustrine |
Sediments that were
deposited at the bottom of an ancient glacial lake. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lacustrine over
Glaciofluvial |
Lake sediments
overlying glaciofluvial outwash sands and gravels. |
|
|
Sgeo_feat |
|
Text, 41 |
Ex: Alluvial Fan,
Alluvial Terrace, Bedrock Outcrop, Beach, Kame, Esker, Flood Plain, etc... |
The type of geological
feature encountered at the surface (surficial geology). Surficial Geology is defined as the
geologic units encountered within the top 5 to 10 feet of the surface. |
|
|
Sgeo_mat |
|
Text, 34 |
Ex: Des Moines Till, Granite,
Sand, Sand and Gravel, Silt and Clay, etc… |
The dominant type of
material encountered in the surficial geologic unit. |
|
|
Sg_prob |
|
Text, 17 |
Very High, High,
Moderately High, Moderate, Moderately Low, Low, Very Low. |
The relative degree of
certainty that sand and gravel exists within a unit. Based on air photo interpretations, field
observations, CWI, drilling, presence of gravel pits and quarries, etc. Each unit is relative to the other units
and range from very high to very low. |
|
|
Sg_depsize |
|
Text, 18 |
Very Large |
Size of the sand and
gravel deposit (areal extent). Ex:
number of acres. A very large deposit
would be considered > 50 acres. |
|
|
|
|
|
Large |
40-50 acres |
|
|
|
|
|
Moderately Large |
30-40 acres |
|
|
|
|
|
Moderate |
20-30 acres |
|
|
|
|
|
Moderately Small |
10-20 acres |
|
|
|
|
|
Small |
5-10 acres |
|
|
|
|
|
Very Small |
< 10 acres |
|
|
Sg_thick |
|
Text, 12 |
Ex: 0-10, <10,
>10, 20-50, >50 |
The assumed range of
thickness of the sand and gravel deposit (in feet). |
|
|
Sg_ovrbrdn |
|
Text, 16 |
Ex:
0-10, 0-3,<5, >20, 10-20, 20-50 |
The assumed range of
overburden thickness of a sand and gravel deposit (in feet). |
|
|
Sg_texture |
|
Text, 18 |
Very Good, Good,
Moderately Good, Moderate, Moderately Poor, Poor, Very Poor. |
A relative scale of the
textural quality of the sand and gravel resource (sieve analysis). The coarser the material the higher the
rating. Fine sand material would have
a poorer rating. See MN/DOT Pit
sheets for more detail. |
|
|
Sg_quality |
|
Text, 17 |
Very Good, Good,
Moderately Good, Moderate, Moderately Poor, Poor, Very Poor. |
A relative scale of the
quality of the sand and gravel (soundness, durability, and mineral
makeup). Determined from MN/DOT pit
sheets. |
|
|
Cs_prob |
|
Text, 15 |
Very High, High,
Moderately High, Low. |
The relative degree of
certainty that crushed stone exists within a unit. Based on air photo interpretations, field observations, CWI,
drilling, presence of gravel pits and quarries, etc. Each unit is relative to the other units
and range from very high to very low. |
|
|
Cs_depsize |
|
Text, 14 |
Very Large |
Size of the crushed
stone deposit (areal extent). Ex:
number of acres. A very large deposit
would be considered > 50 acres. |
|
|
|
|
|
Large |
40-50 acres |
|
|
|
|
|
Small |
5-10 acres |
|
|
Cs_thick |
|
Text, 11 |
Ex: >50 |
The assumed thickness of the crushed stone (in feet). |
|
|
Cs_ovrbrdn |
|
Text, 16 |
Ex:
0-10, 0-20, 20-30, 30-50, >50. |
The assumed range of
overburden thickness of a crushed stone deposit (in feet). |
|
|
Cs_quality |
|
Text, 14 |
Very Good and Good |
A relative scale of the
quality of crushed stone (soundness, durability, and mineral makeup). Determined from MN/DOT pit sheets. |
|
|
Sg_pot_pl1 |
|
Text, 17 |
Limited, Sand and
Gravel. |
Sand
and Gravel Potential that is depicted on plate 1 (Significant Aggregate
Resources). Sand and Gravel refers to
those units that have a high to moderate potential of containing significant
sand and gravel deposits.
Desirability is determined by the sand and gravel potential attributes
(Sg_xxxxx, as described above). |
|
|
Sg_pot_pl2 |
|
Text, 15 |
High, Moderate, Low,
Limited. |
Sand and Gravel
Potential that is depicted on plate 2 (Aggregate Resources). High, Moderate, and Low refer to the relative
potential of the Sand and Gravel units.
Desirability is determined by the sand and gravel potential attributes
(Sg_xxxxx, as described above).
Limited refers to those units that do not contain sand and gravel or
where the deposits are insignificant. |
|
|
Cs_pot_pl1 |
|
Text, 13 |
Bedrock, Limited. |
Crushed
Stone Potential that is depicted on plate 1 (Significant Aggregate
Resources). Bedrock refers to those
units that have a high to moderate potential of containing significant
crushed stone resources. Desirability
is determined by the crushed stone potential attributes (Cs_xxxxx, as
described above). |
|
|
Cs_pot_pl2 |
|
Text, 13 |
High, Moderate, Low,
Limited. |
Crushed Stone Potential
that is depicted on plate 2 (Aggregate Resources). High, Moderate, and Low refer to the relative potential of the
Crushed Stone resources. Desirability
is determined by the Crushed stone potential attributes (Cs_xxxxx, as
described above). Limited refers to
those units where the depth to crushed stone is greater than 50 feet. |
|
|
Pot_plate1 |
|
Text, 28 |
Sand and Gravel |
Aggregate Potential
(Sand, Gravel, and Crushed Stone) that is depicted on Plate 1 (Significant
Aggregate Resources). Sand and Gravel
refers to those units with moderate or high potential of containing
significant sand and gravel resources. |
|
|
|
|
|
Bedrock |
Those units with
moderate or high potential of containing significant crushed stone resources. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sand and Gravel over
Bedrock. |
Those units with
moderate or high potential of containing significant sand and gravel
resources overlying areas with moderate or high potential of containing
significant crushed stone resources. |
|
|
|
|
|
Limited |
Those areas containing
low potential sand, gravel, and crushed stone resources, as well as area with
limited potential. |
|
|
Pot_plate2 |
|
Text, 30 |
Ex: High over Low
Bedrock, Low, Moderate, Moderate over High Bedrock. |
Aggregate Potential
(Sand, Gravel, and Crushed Stone) that is depicted on Plate 2 (Aggregate
Resources). |
|
|
Sg_min |
|
Number,3,0 |
Ex: 0,5,10,15,20,50 |
Describes the minimum
thickness of the sand and gravel unit. |
|
|
Sg_max |
|
Number,3,0 |
Ex: 0, 5, 10, 20, 30,
40, 50 |
Describes the maximum
thickness of the sand and gravel unit. |
|
|
Sgover_min |
|
Number,3,0 |
Ex: 0, 10,20 |
Describes the minimum
thickness of the overburden covering the sand and gravel. |
|
|
Sgover_max |
|
Number,3,0 |
Ex: 0, 3, 5, 10, 20, 30 |
Describes the maximum
thickness of the overburden covering the sand and gravel. |
|
|
Cs_min |
|
Number,3,0 |
Ex: 0,5,10,15,20,50 |
Describes the minimum
thickness of the crushed stone unit. |
|
|
Cs_max |
|
Number,3,0 |
Ex: 0, 5, 10, 20, 30,
40, 50 |
Describes the maximum
thickness of the crushed stone unit. |
|
|
Csover_min |
|
Number,3,0 |
Ex: 0, 10,20 |
Describes the minimum
thickness of the overburden covering the crushed stone. |
|
|
Csover_max |
|
Number,3,0 |
Ex: 0, 3, 5, 10, 20, 30 |
Describes the minimum
thickness of the overburden covering the crushed stone. |