Geology of the Greater Atlanta region

GEOLOGY OF THE GREATER ATLANTA REG-ION
Keith I. McConnell and Charlotte E. Abrams
Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division
Georgia Geologic Survey

Cover and title page photo: Atlanta skyline looking west from Glen Iris overpass on Boulevard, May 1984.

GEOLOQY OF THE GREATER ATLANTA REGION
Keith I. McConnell and Charlotte E. Abrams
=.========
Department of Natural Resources J. Leonard Ledbetter, Commissioner
Environmental Protection Division Harold F. Reheis, Assistant Director
Georgia Geologic Survey William H. McLemore, State Geologist
Atlanta 1984
BULLETIN 96

CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT.................. .. ....... . .. ... .......... . .................... 1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Purpose and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Belt terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Previous works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Valley and Ridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . 4 Blue Ridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Northern Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Southern Piedmont and Brevard fault zone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
STRATIGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . ........ 8 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Stratigraphy of the Valley and Ridge ... . . ... .. . .... .. .. .-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Stratigraphy of the Blue Ridge .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. .. . . .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. 11 Corbin Gneiss Complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Ocoee Supergroup....... .... ........................................... 16 Murphy belt group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Regional correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Stratigraphy of the Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Northern Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 New Georgia Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Sandy Springs Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Sandy Springs Group (eastern belt) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Sandy Springs Group (western belt) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Unclassified stratigraphic units.................................... 40 Regional correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Brevard fault zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Southern Piedmont. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Atlanta Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Regional correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
PLUTONIC ROCKS ........ .... ............. .. ............................... 43 Premetamorphic intrusives (category 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Pre- to synmetamorphic intrusives (category 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Postmetamorphic intrusives (category 3) . .. ... . .. .... . .. ... ........... ... . . . 50 Summary ................................................................ 53
METAMORPHISM AND DEFORMATION .............. . ................... 55 Metamorphism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Deformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
ECONOMIC RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Valley and Ridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Barite. ...... . . ........ ....... ............ . ...... .... ........... . ...... 60 Ocher and Umber.. . .. .... ..... ... . .. . .. .... .. .. . ...... .. ..... . ... ..... 60 Manganese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Iron ore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Tripoli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Bauxite . .. .......... .... ........... . ... . .......... ... ................. 62 Shale and clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Slate ........ ...... . .. .... . .... ... ...... ...... .. .. .. ..... ..... .. .. ..... 62 Limestone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Molybdenum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Sand and gravel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
iii

!~,~!"""'".

CONTENTS (Contin1:1ed)
Page
Blue Ridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Barite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Pegmatites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Graphite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Limonite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Manganese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Marble ............................................................. . . . 64 Sand and gravel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Talc and chlorite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 64 Gold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Aluminosilicates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Northern Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Gold, sulfides, magnetite, and manganese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Soapstone, talc, and asbestos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Corundum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Titanium and titaniferous magnetite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Clay ................................................................ 69 Sand and gravel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Crushed stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Graphite. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Pegmatites and mica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Southern Piedmont and Brevard zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Granites and gneisses (crushed and dimension).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Clay, sand and gravel, and fill material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Marble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Graphite. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Soapstone, asbestos, and talc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Pegmatites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Pyrite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Gold ................................................................ 70
SUMMARY ................................................................ 70
REFERENCES CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
APPENDICES Appendix A - Descriptions of geologic units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Appendix B -Mines, prospects and mineral localities ......................... 89 Appendix C -Isotopic age dates ............................................ 119 Appendix D - Data sources for Plate I ...................................... 125

iv

Figure

FIGURES

Page

1. Atlanta Regional map area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Regional location map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3. Major structural features of the Greater Atlanta Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4. Geologic map of the Blue Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. Photograph of paragneiss . .. ................................... . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6. Plots of normative analyses of the Corbin Gneiss Complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. Variation diagrams, Corbin Gneiss Complex ............ .. ..... . ............ 15
8. Map showing Etowah Formation type locality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9. Map showing Sweetwater Creek Formation type locality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
10. Location of Dean Formation exposures in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11. Group and formation boundaries of the crystalline rocks in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area .................................... 23
12. Photograph of the Cedar Lake Quartzite .............. ... . .. . .... ... .... ... 25
13. Geologic map of the northeastern portion of the AustellFrolona antiform . .. ... ... .. .......................... . ........ ... ........ 25
14. Plots of modal analyses of felsic igneous rocks in the Greater Atlanta Region .. .... .... .... . . .. . ................................... . .... 26
15. Geologic map of the Pumpkinvine Creek and Canton Formations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
16. Map showing Galts Ferry Gneiss type locality ............................... 29
17. Photograph of the Galts Ferry Gneiss ............ . ..... . ................... 29
18. a. Rare-earth element data for the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
b. Discrimination of volcanic rock types based on Ti02 vs. FeO*/MgO ...... ... ................... .. .... ... ........... . ....... .. ... 32
c. Discrimination of volcanic rock series based on Ni vs. FeO*/MgO ............................................................. 32
d. Discrimination of volcanic rock series based on Cr vs. FeO*/MgO ............................................................. 33
e. Discrimination of ocean floor basalts vs. low potassium tholeiites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
19. Photograph of relict pillows in the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
20. Map showing Canton Formation type locality ............................... 34
21. Map showing Univeter Formation type locality ........ .. .......... . . . ...... 35
22. Photograph of garnet-chlorite schist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
23. Map showing Lost Mountain Amphibolite type locality ...................... 35
24. Map showing Rose Creek Schist type locality .... ... ... ..... ... . ...... .. .... 35
25. Map showing Dog River Formation type locality . . ................... .. ..... 38

v

Figure

FIGURES (Continued)

Page

26. Cross section through the Austell-Frolona antiform ......................... 39
27. Diagrammatic cross section through the northern Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
28. Xenoliths of Bill Arp Formation within Austell Gneiss ....................... 40
29. Hornfels texture within xenolith ........................................... 41
30. Plot of normative analyses of felsic igneous rocks in the Greater Atlanta Region ................................................... 45
31. Map showing Laura Lake Mafic Complex type locality ...................... 45
32. Photograph of magnetite porphyroblasts in the Laura Lake Mafic Complex ........................................................... 45
33. Photograph of coarse amphiboles in the Laura Lake Mafic Complex ................................................................. 46
34. Map showing Kennesaw Gneiss type locality ................................ 46
35. Map showing Kellogg Creek Mafic Complex type locality .................................................................. 47
36. Variation diagrams of mafic rocks of the New Georgia Group ................................................................... 48
37. Na20+K20, FeO*, MgO+Mnoplotofmeta-igneousrocksofthe New Georgia Group ...................................................... 49
38. Map showing Sand Hill Gneiss type locality ................................ 49
39. Map showing Mulberry Rock Gneiss type locality ........................... 50
40. Variation diagrams of premetamorphic and synmetamorphic rocks of the Greater Atlanta Region ........................................ 52
41. Variation diagrams of felsic igneous rocks in the Greater Atlanta Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
42. Generalized plot of post-Grenville metamorphic isograds in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area .................................... 56
43. Generalized model of the sequence of events in the Mud Creek and Pumpkinvine Creek Formations ................................. 66
44. Photograph of kyanite-quartz granofels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

vi

TABLES

Tables

Page

1. Stratigraphic successions in the Valley and Ridge ....... .. ... .... ........... 10

2. Whole-rock and normative analyses of Corbin Gneiss Complex ............... . ... . . .. .. . . . ..................... .. .... . ......... 14

3. Correlation chart of stratigraphic successions in the Blue Ridge . ..... .. ............... . .. . .. . .......... .. ..... . .... . .. . . .. ... . . . .. 17

4. Correlation chartoflithologic units in Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

5. Chemical and normative analyses of Gaits Ferry, Villa Rica and Dallas Gneisses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

6. Chemical and normative analyses of amphibolites from the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation . ... . ..................... . ..... . ... . ....... 30

7. Trace-element analyses of amphibolites from the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

8. Rare-earth element analyses of amphibolites from the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation ...... . . .... . . .... . . . .... . . .. .. . . ... . ...... . . . ... 31

9. Modal analyses of felsic igneous rocks north of the Brevard fault zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

10. Correlation chart of Sandy Springs Group, eastern and western belts ............................................ ... .............. 37

11. Correlation chart of northern and southern Piedmont lithologic units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

12. Chemical analyses of mafic rocks of the northern Piedmont . . . . ... . . .. . . . . ... 47

13. Chemical and normative analyses of the Austell Gneiss ... . .. ... ....... . ..... 51

14. Chemical and normative analyses of the Sand Hill Gneiss . . .... .. . ... .. ...... 51

15. Chemical and normative analyses of intrusive rocks of the southern Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

16. Correlation chart of fold events in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge . ................ . . . . .. .. .... . . .. . ................. .. .. . ........... 57

17. Post Grenville-aged tectonic elements of the Greater Atlanta Region . . ......... . ...... . . . .... . .. . ....... . ......... . ......... . .... .. . . . . 58

18. Selected sulfide and gold mines of west Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

19. Partial whole-rock analyses of banded iron formation . . .... .. . . ........... . .. 66

20. Whole-rock analyses of banded iron formation .......... . ................... 67

21. Gold assays of banded iron formation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

vii

GEOLOGY OF THE GREATER ATLANTA REGION
Keith I. McConnell and Charlotte E. Abrams

ABSTRACT
The oldest rocks present in the Greater Atlanta Region (i.e., Corbin Gneiss Complex) are exposed in the crest of the Salem Church anticlinorium, a major northeast trending fold in the Blue Ridge portion of the study area. Nonconformably overlying these 1 b.y.-old Grenville gneisses are metasedimentary rocks of the Pinelog and Wilhite Formations. These two formations are interpreted as lithostratigraphic equivalents of units within the late Precambrian Snowbird and Walden Creek Groups of the Ocoee Supergroup. Stratigraphically above the Wilhite Formation is a metamorphosed clastic sequence that is interpreted as a lithostratigraphic equivalent of the Great Smoky Group as defined to the northeast of the study area. Rocks of the Murphy belt group are exposed in the Murphy synclinorium conformably above the Great Smoky Group. The Murphy belt group is composed predominantly of a metamorphosed succession of clastic rocks and also includes the Murphy Marble. The Murphy belt group does not extend southwest of the Murphy synclinorium east of Cartersville; however, rocks of the Great Smoky G~oup trend around the reentrant in the Cartersville fault into what is referred to as the Talladega belt. Units of the Talladega belt in this area are at least partially equivalent to the Ocoee Supergroup and therefore are late Precambrian in age.
Lithologic units of the Blue Ridge are separated from the rocks of the northern Piedmont by the Allatoona fault. The northern Piedmont can be divided into two major lithologic units, New Georgia and Sandy Springs Groups. The New Georgia Group is interpreted to contain the oldest units in this portion of the northern Piedmont and is characterized by a metamorphosed sequence of predominantly felsic and mafic volcanic and plutonic lithologies. The Sandy Springs Group is interpreted to conformably overlie the New Georgia Group and is composed dominantly of interlayered metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks with a decreasing metavolcanic component upward in the stratigraphic sequence. Eastern and western belts of the Sandy Springs Group are separated by the Chattahoochee fault, a major tectonic boundary in the northern Piedmont.
Northern Piedmont rocks are separated from similar lithologies and stratigraphic sequences in the southern Piedmont by the Brevard fault zone. In the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area, the Brevard zone is a zone of early ductile and late, brittle shearing that is interpreted to have formed, at least in part, as a result of high strain along the axial zone of a large F 1 isocline. No major vertical displacement is apparent along this segment of the Brevard zone.
South of the Brevard fault zone, units defined as Atlanta Group by previous workers are interpreted in this report to be exposed in a large-scale synformal anticline. The Atlanta Group is characterized by metamorphosed sedimentary and volcanic rocks that have many similarities to lithologies north

of the Brevard zone. Possible correlations between the Atlanta Group and the New Georgia and Sandy Springs Groups are presented in this report.
Paleozoic plutonic rocks present within the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area are divided into three major categories based upon chemical composition, depth of intrusion and time of intrusion relative to Paleozoic metamorphism. Earliest (category 1) intrusions were emplaced at shallow levels coincident with volcanism, are concordant to the regional trend, and are characterized by dacitic subvolcanic plutons and volcanics. Category 2 plutons were intruded syntectonically, at an intermediate level in the crust, and are characterized by moderately high concentrations of potassium, nearly concordant contacts with the country rocks and a lack of any association with volcanism. Both category 1 and 2 plutons have a metamorphic overprint. The final category of Paleozoic intrusive rocks present in the study area is dominantly granitic in composition, lacks a metamorphic overprint, is discordant to the regional trend and does not have a volcanic component. Plutons of category 3 are known to occur only south of the Brevard fault zone.
Two major regional progressive metamorphic events and seven deformational events have been recognized in the study area. The earliest deformation and metamorphism recognized occurred during the Grenville orogeny (approximately 1,000 m.y. ago) and is reflected only in basement gneisses of the Blue Ridge. The second metamorphic event is interpreted to have occurred approximately 365 m.y. ago and was associated with a major episode of isoclinal recumbent folding (F1). Axial planar foliation (S1) associated with this fold event represents the dominant planar feature in crystalline rocks of the area. Folds related to this deformation have not been recognized within the Valley and Ridge west of the Cartersville fault, partially supporting the existence of the fault east of Cartersville. F 2 folding postdated Paleozoic metamoq~hism and is respon~ible for the geometry Of outcrop patterns m the Greater Atlanta Region. Subsequent folding events (F3 and F4) interfere with earlier fold patterns and complicate outcrop patterns of map units.
Twenty-eightcommQdities have been mined or prospected within the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional -Map. Of these various commodities only barite, ocher, sand, granite (dimension stone and crushed), limestone, structural clays, and marble are still being mined. Areas of extensive mining and (or) prospecting include the limestone, bauxite, and shale deposits of Floyd and Polk Counties; barite, ocher, iron and manganese deposits of the Cartersville district; volcanogenic massive sulfide and gold -deposits in the northern Piedmont; and crushed and dimension stone from quarries in the Stone Mountain, Panola, Palmetto, and Ben Hill Granites and Lithonia Gneiss south of the Brevard fault zone and in the Austell, Sand Hill, Kennesaw and Dallas gneisses north of the Brevard zone.

1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Atlanta Regional Map project involved many former and present day members of the Georgia Geologic Survey. Special recognition should go to Samuel M. Pickering, Jr., former State Geologist, who originated the Atlanta Regional Map project and to Joseph B. Murray and David E. Lawton who supervised the initial stages of this investigation. Also, we would like to recognize several former members of the Georgia Survey who, since their departure, have given support and guidance in the various areas that they worked. These include John 0. Costello, Falma J. Moye, and Robert E. Dooley. In addition, we sincerely appreciate the support and assistance given to us by representatives of the mineral industry. In particular, the efforts of Randy Slater ofTennessee Chemical Corporation in gaining access to core from western Georgia was particularly helpful. Other members of the mineral industry who have assisted us through discussions and chemical analyses will, at their own request, remain anonymous. Outside technical review of the manuscript was by Robert D. Hatcher, Jr., James F. Tull, and James A. Whitney. Stan D. Bearden reviewed the mineral location map for the Cartersville district. Finally, we would like to express our appreciation to Gilles 0. Allard and Robert H. Carpenter for their reviews of the economic geology portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map report and for their assistance and guidance in our efforts to understand and promote the ore deposits of west Georgia.
INTRODUCTION
Purpose and Methods
This report presents results of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map project, an effort to develop a comprehensive geologic data base for the rapidly growing Atlanta metropolitan area. The primary objective of the Atlanta Regional Map project was to provide a compilation and synthesis of existing and newly derived geologic information for the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area for use by private industry, the general public, and the geological community. A secondary objective of this project was to compile a single-source listing and map of mines and prospects in the Atlanta area primarily for use by the mineral industry. When aspects of mapping related to the Greater Atlanta Regional Map project generated interest from within the mineral exploration community, the economic part of the project was expanded to include a detailed examination of the origin of base and precious metal deposits in the Atlanta area.
The base used for the above-mentioned compilations is the map of the Greater Atlanta Region. The Atlanta map was the first of a new series of 1:100,000 scale topographic maps produced by the U.S. Geological Survey. Unlike 1:100,000 scale maps that followed it, the Greater Atlanta Regional Map was not in the 1 of longitude format. The Greater Atlanta Regional Map encompasses 1 degree, 30 minutes longitude and 1 degree of latitude and is centered on the city of Atlanta (Fig. 1). Ninety-six 7.5-minute quadrangles are contained within the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map (Fig. 1) as are portions of three major geologic provinces (i.e., Valley and Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont).

To produce a geologic map of an area as large as that contained within the Greater Atlanta Regional Map requires an enormous amount of time and money. For that reason, existing geologic literature was reviewed in an effort to find suitable geologic mapping for compilation. Some information used in compilation of the geologic map of the study area (Plate I) was available as open-file maps at the Georgia Geologic Survey. Geologic information also was available from various hydrologic reports and nearly all of the Valley and Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map was compiled from these hydrologic maps.
At the start of this project much of the Blue Ridge and Piedmont contained within the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map lacked adequate geologic mapping. A major task of the Greater Atlanta Region project was to provide mapping for these areas. In a cooperative effort, members of the Georgia Geologic Survey, U.S. Geological Survey and the University System of Georgia performed detailed and reconnaissance geologic mapping on 7.5-minute base maps. Detailed mapping generally was reserved for those areas that were exceedingly complex structurally or were of potential economic significance. Detailed petrographic studies were limited to the formal definition of specific lithologic units. Many of these petrographic studies were included in derivative reports and investigations. Chemical analyses of rocks were restricted to selected units. Most of the analytical work reported in this investigation was performed in laboratories of the Georgia Geologic Survey and U.S. Geological Survey, although some analytical work on potentially economically significant units was provided by several mineral exploration companies.
Any compilation of data from multiple sources requires compromises in the handling of differing interpretations and mapping detail in adjacently mapped areas. Also, all areas could not be mapped to the degree that would provide a complete and solid data base for interpretation. This report contains examples of all of these compromises and constraints. In particular, all areas within the study area were not mapped to the same degree of detail (see Appendix D) and, therefore, some compromises regarding lithostratigraphic contacts were necessary. In addition, controversial areas for which more than one interpretation of the geology existed required a judgement as to which interpretation was to be used on the compilation. Justification for the interpretations used are included within the text of this report.
Belt Terminology
Any author of a regional report on the geology of crystalline rocks in the southeast almost immediately encounters the problems related to the "belt" terminology which is commonly used to define the major rock groupings as long, linear belts. Although there is almost universal dislike for the "belt" terminology, terms such as Blue Ridge, Inner Piedmont, Talladega, etc., have become entrenched in the literature and in the minds of Appalachian geologists. The use of these terms has almost become an obligatory part of any manuscript written on the southern Appalachian orogen. Faced with these entrenched terms, authors of reports on crystalline rocks in the southeast must select one of four alternatives when preparing a manuscript: 1) using the belt classification of either Crickmay (1952) or King (1955); 2) using a previously

2

35 ~-----
\o
\
\

Index to Greater Atlanta Region 1:24,000 Topographic Maps

SCALE

109- Rome North

132- Rome South

155- Cedartown East

11 0- Shannon

0

10

20

30

40 Miles 111 - Adairsvi lie

133- Wa x 134- Kingston

156- Rockmart 157- Taylorsville

112- White West

135- Cartersvil le

158- Burnt Hickory Ridge

113- White East

136- AIIatoona Dam

159- Acworth

114- Waleska

137 - South Canton

160- Kennesaw

11 5- Ba llgrou nd West

138- Canton

161 - Mounta in Par k

116- Ballground East

139- Birmingham

162- Roswell

117- Matt

140- Cumming

163- Duluth

11B- Coal Mounta in

141 - Bu ford Dam

164- Suwannee

119- Chestatee

142- Fiowery Branch

165- Hog Mounta in

120- Gainesville

143- Chestnut Mtn.

166- Auburn

179- Felton 180- Rockmart South 181 - Yorkville 182- Dallas 183- Lost Mounta in 184- Marietta 185- Sandy Springs 186- Chamblee 187- Norcross 188- Luxomni 189- Lawrenceville 190- Bold Springs

204- Buchanan 205- Draketown 206- New Georgia 207 - Nebo 208- Austell 209- Mableton
21 0- Northwest Atlanta 211 - Northeast Atlanta 212- Stone Mountain 213- Snellville 214- Loganville 215- Between

230- Bremen 231 - Temple 232- Villa Rica 233- Winston 234- Campbellton 235- Ben Hill 236- Southwest Atlanta 237- Southeast Atlanta 238- Redan 239- Conyers 240- Milstead 241 - Jersey

256- Bowden East 257 - Carrollton 258- Hulett 259- Rico 260- Pal metto 261 - Fa irburn 262- Riverdale 263- Jonesboro 264- Stock br idge 265- Kelleytown 266- Porterdal e 267 - Covington

284 - Roopville 285- Lowell 286- Whitesburg 287 - Newnan North 288- Madras 289- T yrone 290- Fayetteville 291 - Hampton
292 - McDonough 293- 0ia ( 15) 294 - Worthvi lle 295- Stewart

EXPLANATION
LJ Valley and Ridge
[]J] Blue Ridge

Figure 1.

Greater Atlanta Regional Map area with geologic provinces and index to 1:24,000 U.S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangles.

defined modification of these classifications (e.g., Hatcher, 1978a); 3) proposing a new modification of these classifications based upon local considerations; or 4) proposing an entirely new classification. All of the four alternatives listed above have drawbacks, and selection of any one alternative will not meet with universal acceptance. In the report on the Greater Atlanta Region, we have chosen to follow the third alternative and propose a modification of King's (1955) original classification. This modification of King's classification of geologic belts and the reasoning behind it are presented below.
In choosing the third alternative, we have eliminated the other three based on the following considerations. In the 30 years since Crickmay (1952) and King(1955) originally proposed their belt terminology, knowledge of the geology of the crystalline rocks in the southern Appalachians has increased substantially. Detailed mapping has shown that the belts as originally defined are too general, have little relation to physiographic provinces, and have poorly defined boundaries. Because of this, geologists in various parts of the orogen have modified the belt terminology to fit their own particular observations. Thus, Hatcher (1978a) modified King's Blue Ridge by separating it into three subdivisions: an eastern, a central and a western Blue Ridge belt, while Neathery and others (1974, 1975) termed part of what King called Blue Ridge as northern Piedmont. Belt modifications of neither Hatcher nor Neathery are appropriate when applied to major lithologic units of the Greater Atlanta Region. Lithologic units of the study area contain characteristics that lend support to both Hatcher and Neathery's belt modifications, but also do not completely fit either author's modification of King's belts. For the above reason we feel that alternatives 1 and 2 as presented above have more liabilities than good characteristics and therefore have not been used in this report.
The fourth alternative is to propose an entirely new classification based on local considerations. The problem with this alternative is that the terms Piedmont and Blue Ridge have become so entrenched in the literature that it is doubtful that any locally defined terminology proposed would ever reach any significant level of usage or recognition outside of the State of Georgia. An example of this is Crickmay's (1952) terminology which has been largely ignored outside of the state. We, therefore, conclude that the third alternative of proposing a new modification of preexisting terms based on local considerations is the most appropriate.
Rocks of the Atlanta Region in this report are divided into three major geologic provinces (Valley and Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont) as modified after King (1955). Physiographic terms used for the belt terminology are retained because they are so entrenched in the literature, but it must be emphasized that they have little or no relevance to the physiographic provinces.
In this report the Valley and Ridge geologic province is similar to the Valley and Ridge belt of King (1955). It is composed of the unmetamorphosed to weakly metamorphosed rocks of the foreland fold and thrust belt, but also includes the basal lower Cambrian clastic rocks of the Chilhowee Group (Unaka beltofKing, 1955). The SOl;lthern and eastern boundary of the Valley and Ridge geologic province is the Cartersville fault that separates the relatively unmetamorphosed lower Cambrian lithologies from late Precambrian Ocoee Supergroup lithologies.

The Blue Ridge geologic province as defined in this report bears little resemblance to the Blue Ridge belt as defined by King (1955). King (1955) recognized that the Blue Ridge belt included portions of the Blue Ridge and Piedmont physiographic provinces and generally defined it as comprising the area between the Unaka Mountains on the northwest and the Brevard fault zone to the southeast. King also recognized several less extensive belts in the Blue Ridge, namely the Dahlonega and Murphy belts. Other geologists have been troubled by the broadly defined Blue Ridge belt and have modified it into either several smaller belts (i.e., eastern, central, and western Blue Ridge belts of Hatcher, 1978a) or termed part of King's Blue Ridge belt, northern Piedmont (Neathery and others, 1974, 1975). Hatcher's eastern Blue Ridge belt roughly corresponds with the northern Piedmont as defined in Alabama, with one notable exception: the inclusion of the Talladega belt in the northern Piedmont of Alabama.
In this report on the Greater Atlanta Region we define the Blue Ridge geologic province as covering the area between the Cartersville and Allatoona faults, including rocks of the Talladega and Murphy belts. The Blue Ridge geologic province therefore coincides generally with the rifted continental margin where debris from the continent was deposited (miogeoclinal portion of the orogen).
Rocks lying between the Allatoona fault and Fall Line (Coastal Plain unconformity) are interpreted to lie in the Piedmont geologic province. Since the Brevard represents a prominent feature in this area and separates similar lithologies and stratigraphic sequences, the area north and west of the Brevard fault zone is termed northern Piedmont and that south and east of the Brevard is termed southern Piedmont. The northern Piedmont as defined in this report differs from the northern Piedmont as defined in Alabama in that the former does not include rocks of the Talladega belt. The boundary between Blue Ridge and Piedmont geologic provinces roughly corresponds to the transition from miogeoclinal to eugeoclinal deposition in the Appalachian orogen.
The southern Piedmont as defined in this report would cover the area between the Brevard fault zone and the Coastal Plain overlap. Rocks of the Charlotte and Carolina slate belts are interpreted as subdivisions of the southern Piedmont much as the Talladega and Murphy belts represent subdivisions of the Blue Ridge geologic province.
Previous Works
VALLEY AND RIDGE
As with most of northwest Georgia, earliest reports on the geology of that part of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area underlain by Valley and Ridge rocks were done by C.W. Hayes (1891, 1901, 1902). In these early reports, Hayes outlined the stratigraphy and structure of a major portion of the Valley and Ridge in Georgia, named and defined the Coosa, Rome, and Cartersville faults in this same area (1891, 1902), and set the stage for numerous subsequent arguments over the position of the Cartersville fault by moving the trace eastward from his original interpretation (Hayes, 1901). Although much of Hayes' work was modified later, the primary contributions of this exceptional pioneer in Georgia geology still remain intact. At about the same time as Hayes was publishing

4

his reports on the Valley and Ridge, Spencer (1893, p. 3) published a compendium on the "scientific, economic, and agricultural standpoints" of the Paleozoic Group in northwest Georgia. More specifically, Spencer (1893) described the geology and mineral resources of Polk, Floyd, Bartow, Gordon, Murray, Whitfield, Catoosa, Chattooga, Walker and Dade Counties.
For a short period of time following Hayes' and Spencer's work, advances in the knowledge of the geology of the Valley and Ridge followed the lines of individual economic mineral studies in a series of bulletins published by members of the Geological Survey of Georgia. Most of these reports covered the occurrence of economic minerals throughout the State with only a portion of the report covering northwest Georgia. Topics covered in these reports include: iron ores in Polk, Bartow, and Floyd Counties(McCallie, 1900); bauxite(Watson, 1904); ocher (Watson, 1906); fossil iron ore deposits (McCallie, 1908); limestones and cement materials (Maynard, 1912); slate (Shearer, 1918); and barite (Hull, 1920). In addition, two reports on manganese deposits of Georgia were produced (Watson, 1908; Hull and others, 1919) as well as a second report on iron ore deposits (Haseltine, 1924). Somewhat later, Smith (1931) published on shales and brick clays of Georgia and Furcron (1942) reported on dolomites and magnesium limestones.
In 1948, a revision of Valley and Ridge stratigraphy was published by Butts and Gildersleeve (1948). Much of these data were incorporated previously into the State Geologic Map of 1939 (Cooke and others, 1939). Butts and Gildersleeve (1948) provided some revisions to the 1939 map and included a section on the mineral resources of northwest Georgia. Kesler (1950) subsequently published his detailed report on the geology and mineral resources of the Cartersville area. In this report, Kesler disputed the existence of the Cartersville fault of Hayes (1901) and revised the Paleozoic stratigraphy in the Cartersville area. An important aspect of Kesler's stratigraphic revision is that he limited the Shady Dolomite to the stratigraphic zone containing interbedded hematite and dolomite. This aspect of Paleozoic stratigraphy will be discussed further in following paragraphs.
Croft (1963) produced the first of two reports on the hydrology of Bartow County in which he indicated that much of the Lower Cambrian sequence was overturned. Shortly after the publication of Croft's report, the Geological Society of Georgia made the Cartersville fault problem and associated Paleozoic stratigraphy the subject of a field trip. In the report published for the field trip, Bentley and others (1966) suggested that the Cartersville fault did not exist south of Bolivar and that quartzites unconformably overlying the Corbin gneiss are Weisner Formation (Chilhowee Group).
Cressler (1970) published a report on the hydrology of Floyd and Polk Counties and McLemore and Hurst (1970) reported on the carbonate rocks of the Coosa Valley area. Cressler and others (1979) published the second report on the geohydrology of Bartow County that also included the geohydrology of Cherokee and Forysth Counties, which lie east of the Cartersville fault. Cressler and others (1979) provided mapping in the Cartersville area and, like Butts and Gildersleeve (1948) and Croft (1963), expanded the limits of the Shady Dolomite to include dolomitic limestones that Kesler (1950) had placed in the Rome Formation. Included in the

report by Cressler and others (1979) were the results of mapping in southern Bartow County by Crawford (1977a, 1977b). This mapping outlined the trace of the Cartersville fault through southern Bartow County. Much of the information derived by Cressler and Crawford was presented on the Georgia Geological Society field trip in 1977 (Chowns, 1977).
The first detailed study of the stratigraphy and depositional environments of the lowermost Cambrian rocks in northwestern Georgia was carried out by Mack (1980). Mack's work established the internal stratigraphy for the Chilhowee Group just west of the Cartersville fault and related these findings to the better known Chilhowee Group in Tennessee.
Reade and others (1980) published the results of their investigation in the Emerson-Cartersville area. Most mapping done in that investigation took place in the barite pits of the Thompson-Weinman Corporation. In that report, usage of the term "Shady Formation" is restricted to a black dolostone directly above the ledge-forming quartzites of the Weisner Formation, whereas dolostones above this black carbonate are placed in the Rome Formation. Reade and others' (1980) definition of the Lower Cambrian stratigraphy, which is similar to that of Kesler's (1950) stratigraphy, is an indication of the problems involved with stratigraphic and structural interpretation in the Cartersville area.
BLUE RIDGE
In this report, the term Blue Ridge is limited to those rocks present between the Allatoona fault (McConnell and Costello, 1980b) and the Cartersville fault. As with the Valley and Ridge, the earliest work in the Blue Ridge was done by C.W. Hayes. In 1891, Hayes first reported on faulting in the Cartersville area and introduced the term "Cartersville fault." Hayes (1891) mapped the trace of the Cartersville fault directly through the city of Cartersville possibly coincident with "what is now referred to as the White fault. In a subsequent publication Hayes (1901) relocated the fault a few miles to the east. Much of Hayes' work in the Blue Ridge remains unpublished. In his unpublished Cartersville folio, Hayes (1895) outlined the stratigraphy and structure of the Blue Ridge just east of the Cartersville fault and pointed out the nonconformity between the Corbin Gneiss and its cover sequence. In addition, Hayes' map implied equivalence between those rocks overlying the Corbin Gneiss Complex and rocks that were later to be termed Talladega belt rocks (Crickmay, 1952). Hayes' early work and relocation of the trace of the Cartersville fault set the stage for an 80-year controversy over the existence of the fault and the stratigraphy of the sedimentary and crystalline rocks in the Cartersville area. This controversy persists today.
Shortly after Hayes' work, the series of publications by the Geological Survey of Georgia regarding various mineral commodities began. These publications specifically related to Blue Ridge geology include McCallie's (1907) report on the marbles of Georgia, Hull's (1920) report on barite, Prindle's (1935) report on kyanite and vermiculite, and Furcron and Teague's (1945) report on sillimanite and kyanite deposits. During this same period, Bayley (1928) published the geology of the Tate quadrangle and described in detail the various types of Georgia marble. Also, Crickmay (1936) reported on the Talladega Series in the southern Appalachians including that portion of the Blue Ridge in the Greater Atlanta Regional

5

Map. Crickmay (1936) indicated that the Talladega Series, originally defined in Alabama, extends across western Georgia to near Cartersville and then turns northward toward North Carolina and Tennessee. In that interpretation rocks of the Murphy belt group and parts of the Ocoee Supergroup were considered part of the Talladega series. With the publication of Crickmay's report, the controversy over the Cartersville fault problem began in earnest. In 1950, Kesler indicated that the Cartersville fault did not exist eastof Cartersville and that the Corbin Gneiss was a "static emplacement." Rocks overlying the Corbin were included in the Lower Cambrian Valley and Ridge sequence and amphibolites south of the Allatoona fault were considered to be para-amphibolites (i.e., metamorphosed Rome shale) Kesler (1950).
In 1964, Sever published a report on the geology and ground water in Dawson County in the extreme northeastern part of the study area, and Fairley (1965) revised the work of Bayley (1928) in the Tate Quadrangle. Smith and others (1969) published a listing of previous and new isotopic age dates and an isograd map of Georgia which included the Blue Ridge. Shortly before Smith and others' (1969) report, the Cartersville fault problem was addressed at the annual meeting of the Georgia Geological Society (Bentley and others, 1966). Bentley and others (1966) extended the Cartersville fault southward to near Bolivar, but questioned its existence east of Cartersville. They reassigned rocks defined by Hayes as Ocoee to the Weisner Formation of the Chilhowee Group (Bentley and others, 1966).
In 1970, Crawford and Medlin suggested that graphitic phyllites of the Talladega belt were equivalent to those in the Sandy Springs Group and Cressler (1970) described parts of the Talladega belt in his study of the geology and hydrology of Polk County. Hurst (1970, 1973) published regional reports that included what is here termed "Blue Ridge." Hurst (1970) outlined metamorphic isograds and indicated that the Cartersville fault was present east of Cartersville. Hurst (1973) interpreted the Cartersville fault to be absent east of Cartersville and equated rocks overlying the Corbin Gneiss with the Weisner Formation and Shady Dolomite. Crawford and Medlin (1973) suggested that Talladega belt rocks are equivalent to rocks exposed in the Austell-Frolona antiform to the southeast; Fairley (1973) equated members of the Murphy belt group with rocks south of the Allatoona fault (i.e., New Georgia Group of this report); and Power and Forrest (1973, p. 698) described the stratigraphy and paleogeography of the Murphy belt group suggesting it represented an "ancient transgressive linear shoreline."
During 1973, information regarding relative ages of rocks in the Blue Ridge also was published. McLaughlin and Hathaway (1973) described the occurrence of fossils in the Murphy Marble that suggested an early Paleozoic age for the marble, but Chapman and Klatt (1983) cast doubt on this interpretation by showing that fossils associated with the Murphy marble are within Quaternary sinkhole deposits. Odom and others (1973) reported a Pb-Pb age of 1000 m.y. from zircons extracted from the Corbin Gneiss. Dallmeyer (1975) confirmed a Grenville or Proterozoic Y age for the Corbin Gneiss using 40Arj39Ar techniques.
Since 1973, published work on Blue Ridge geology was related primarily to problems of the Cartersville fault east of Cartersville and the stratigraphy and structure of the rocks

southeast of Emerson (Plate I). Crawford (1976, 1977a, 1977b), in several open-file maps, outlined the lithologic characteristics of the northeastern portion of the Talladega belt. Crawford's interpretation of the western portion of the Cartersville fault was reported in the Georgia Geological Society guidebook prepared by Chowns (1977). Crickmay (1933) and Costello (1978) reported on ductile shear zones in the Corbin Gneiss; O'Connor and others (1978) reported on the stratigraphy and structure of the Salem Church anticlinorium; and McConnell and Costello (1979) indicated that large-scale crustal shortening had occurred in the southwestern Blue Ridge. Cressler and others (1979) and Crawford and Cressler (1981, 1982)suggested that the Talladega "Group" and associated lithologies overthrust the Great Smoky fault (an extension of the Cartersville fault in this report) and the southwestern terminus of the Salem Church anticlinorium along a low-angle fault termed the "Emerson (Cartersville) fault." McConnell and Costello (1980b, 1982a) disputed this interpretation and suggested that rock units of the Talladega belt bend around the Emerson reentrant in the Cartersville-Great Smoky fault (Cartersville fault in this report) and merge with rocks of the Ocoee Supergroup. McConnell and Costello (1980b) and Costello and McConnell (1980) outlined the basic stratigraphy of rocks nonconformably overlying the Corbin Gneiss equating them to the Ocoee Supergroup. Some of these units were later formalized (McConnell and Costello, 1984).
Other recent publications on the geology of the Blue Ridge include "Economic geology of the Georgia Marble District" (Power, 1978), a report on uranium in graphitic phyllites in this area (McConnell and Costello, 1980a), and an abstract on recumbent folding in rocks nonconformably overlying the Corbin Gneiss (Costello and McConnell, 1981). In 1982, a preliminary compilation of the geology in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area was published (McConnell and Abrams, 1982a).
NORTHERN PIEDMONT
The term northern Piedmont as used in this report includes those rocks northwest of the Brevard fault zone and southeast of the Allatoona fault. Although the problem of regional "belt" terminology was discussed in a previous section, it can be said here that rocks and stratigraphic successions of the northern Piedmont strongly resemble those south of the Brevard fault zone and differ from Ocoee Supergroup, Murphy belt group and Talladega "Group" rocks north of the Allatoona fault. These relationships as well as the fact that the area between the Brevard and Allatoona faults i~ physiographically Piedmont are the factors related to terming this area northern Piedmont.
Previous works on the geology of the northern Piedmon1 are bimodally split with regard to time. During the late 1800'~ and early 1900's, bulletins published by the Geological Surve~ of Georgia dealt with many economic minerals known to occm in the northern Piedmont. Early publications relating 1;( economic mineral and rock occurrences present in the northerr Piedmont include reports on corundum deposits (King, 1894) gold deposits (Yeates and others, 1896; Jones, 1909), granite: and gneisses (Watson, 1902), manganese (Watson, 1908) asbestos, talc and soapstone (Hopkins, 1914), pyrite deposit: (Shearer and Hull, 1918), manganese (Hull and others, 1919)

6

iron ore deposits (Haseltine, 1924), and aluminosilicate deposits (Prindle, 1935; Furcron and Teague, 1945).
In the years between 1945 and 1966, only two reports on the northern Piedmont were published: Crickmay's (1952) Geology of the crystalline rocks of Georgia and Hurst's (1955) geologic map of the Kennesaw Mountain-Sweat Mountain area. In his report, Crickmay coined the belt terminology for Georgia and included what in this report is termed northern Piedmont in his Wedowee-Ashland and Tallulah belts.
Publications relating to the geology of the northern Piedmont picked up again in the late 1960's with Higgins' (1966) report and map (Higgins,1968) on the Brevard zone. In these publications, Higgins outlined the general stratigraphy north of the Brevard fault zone near Atlanta and introduced the term SandySprings Sequence, which was subsequently revised to the Sandy Springs Group by Higgins and McConnell (1978a, 1978b). In the early 1970's Hurst published two regional studies (1970,1973) on crystalline rocks in Georgia. In the latter of these, Hurst(1973) used the term "Blue Ridge" for what in this report is referred to as northern Piedmont. In addition, Hurst (1973), using terms originally introduced in Alabama by Adams (1926), defined the Ashland Group and Wedowee Formation in Georgia. These terms, derived from rock units described in Alabama, were used to define rocks in the southwestern part of the northern Piedmont. The use of these terms and their applicability are discussed in detail in a later section.
Hurst and Crawford (1970) published a report on the sulfide deposits of the Coosa Valley area which included geochemical maps as well as reconnaissance mapping in Paulding and Haralson Counties and descriptions of cores from various sources. Similar compilations were published by Long (1971) and Hurst and Long(1971) for the ChattahoocheeFlint area. Crawford and Medlin (1970, 1971, 1973, 1974) and Medlin and Crawford (1973) described the stratigraphy and structure of the northern Piedmont in west-central Georgia. These reports presented interpretations regarding the stratigraphy and structure of the area between the Cartersville and Brevard fault zones. Additional publications from the mid-to-early 1970's are: the petrology and geochemistry of some of the felsic gneisses in west Georgia (Coleman and others, 1973; Bearden, 1976; Sanders, 1977); origin and strontium isotope composition of amphibolites in the Cartersville to Villa Rica area (Hurst and Jones, 1973; Jones and others, 1973); a geologic map of Forsyth and parts of Fulton Counties (Murray, 1973); open-file maps of an area along the northwestern border of the northern Piedmont (Crawford, 1976,1977a,1977b); and K-Ar dates of rocks on either side of the Brevard zone (Stonebraker, 1973).
In the late 1970's there was a revival of interest in publications regarding economic minerals and their occurrences. Cook (1978b, 1978c) reported on soil geochemistry in the area of the Franklin-Creighton gold mine and on several other massive sulfide deposits in western Georgia. Somewhat later Abrams and others (1981), Abrams and McConnell (1981a, 1982a, 1982b, 1982c) and McConnell and Abrams (1982b,1983) interpreted the massive sulfide and gold deposits in west Georgia to be volcanogenic in origin and showed the genetic and geographic relationship between banded iron formation and most of the major massive sulfide and gold deposits in west Georgia,

During the late 1970's and early 1980's the results of studies on stratigraphic and structural problems in the northern Piedmont on both local and regional scales were published. Higgins and McConnell (1978a; 1978b) revised and formalized the terminology of the Sandy Springs Group; Kline (1980, 1981) indicated that rocks of the Sandy Springs Group are present south of the Brevard fault zone; McConnell (1980a) described a metabasaltic unit with back-arc basin affinities (i.e., Pumpkinvine Creek Formation) on the northwestern border of the northern Piedmont; and Abrams and McConnell (1981a, 1981b) and McConnell and Abrams (1978) revised the stratigraphy and structural interpretations in the AustellVilla Rica area emphasizing the influence of multiple deformation in this area. Two regional studies were completed in this period. McConnell and Costello (1980b) led a field trip across the norther.n Piedmont and southwestern Blue Ridge and defined the major rock units and structural features in those two areas, and McConnell and Abrams (1982a) compiled the available data for the northern Piedmont onto one map.
SOUTHERN PIEDMONT AND BREVARD FAULT ZONE
The term southern Piedmont, as used in this report, consists of rocks southeast of the Brevard fault zone. This usage would include parts of King's (1955) Inner Piedmont belt and Crickmay's (1952) Dadeville belt.
As with all of the aforementioned geographic areas, some of the earliest work performed in the southern Piedmont was published in the form of bulletins describing economic mineral occurrences. Economic minerals and rocks that were discussed in this area include corundum (King, 1894); gold (Yeates and others,1896; Jones,1909); asbestos, soapstone and talc deposits (Hopkins,1914); granites and gneisses (Watson, 1902); kyanite and vermiculite (Prindle, 1935); sillimanite and kyanite (Furcron and Teague, 1945); and pyrite deposits (Shearer and Hull, 1918).
The first significant study of the geology of the southern Piedmont outside of economic reports was that done by Crickmay (1952) in his study of the crystalline rocks in Georgia. Crickmay (1952) termed rocks of the Brevard fault zone the Brevard belt and rocks southeast ofthe Brevard the Dadeville belt. Two observations in Crickmay's report are interesting in light of the current ideas regarding the nature of the Brevard fault zone. Crickmay commented on the "button" schist, suggesting that it resulted from the formation of a second cleavage, and also noted that rocks of the Dadeville belt were "essentially a repetition of the rocks of the Tallulah belt ..."(i.e., northern Piedmont) (Crickmay, 1952, p. 6).
Following the work of Crickmay, interest turned to the major post-metamorphic granite intrusives which are so prominent in the Piedmont southeast of the Brevard zone. Herrmann (1954) provided the first detailed mapping in the southern Piedmont in the Stone Mountain-Lithonia district. Herrmann (1954) described in detail the structure and petrography in this area as well as the aggregate industry that had developed. Beginning in 1957, a series of abstracts and articles was published regarding the age of some of the aforementioned granite intrusives. Pinson and others (1957) reported ages of approximately 280 m.y. for the Stone Mountain Granite, 290 m.y. for the Lithonia Gneiss, and 340 m.y. for the Ben Hill Granite. Subsequent publications by Pinson and others (1957a, 1958) and Grunenfelder and Silver

7

(1958) redefined the ages for the previously mentioned rock units and gave an age of approximately 295 m.y. for the Panola Granite. Interest in the age of these post-metamorphic intrusive rocks continued into the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's as the methodology of isotopic dating improved and the precision_ of the age determinations was refined. Although the exact ages for these intrusive bodies varied, the succeeding reports (i.e., Long and others, 1959; Whitney and others, 1976; Dallmeyer, 1978; Atkins and Higgins, 1980; Higgins and Atkins, 1981) essentially confirmed late Paleozoic ages for the postmetamorphic intrusive rocks. The results of investigations into the timing of metamorphism were being reported at the same time as ages for post-metamorphic intrusives. Initial K-Ar work on schists and gneisses in the southern Piedmont by Pinson and others (1957), Kulp and Eckelmann (1961) and Long and others (1959) indicated ages from approximately 350 m.y. to 250 m.y. with a distinct "younging" trend to the southeast from Atlanta. Kulp and Eckelmann (1961) suggested that these ages indicated two periods of regional metamorphism; one at approximately 350 m.y. and the second near 250 m.y. ago. Using the above ages, Hurst (1970) coined the term "hot belt" for the area containing the younger ages. Stonebraker (1973) provided additional K-Ar analyses on samples from traverses across the Brevard zone near Atlanta. Finally, Dallmeyer (1975) indicated that 40Arj39Ar ages suggested that the younger age-dates obtained by K-Ar methods are the result of differences in cooling and uplift rates. He suggested an age of 365 m.y. for peak metamorphism of the region described here as southern Piedmont(Dallmeyer, 1975).
Outside of isotopic dating efforts, geologic interest in the southern Piedmont during the late 1950's and 1960's was concentrated around the Stone Mountain Granite. Reports regarding mineralogical variation (Wright, 1966), weathering (Grant, 1963), and intrusion mechanics (Grant, 1969) of the Stone Mountain Granite were published during this time period.. Grant (1962) also led a field trip into the Stone Mountain-Lithonia district. The 1970's and early 1980's saw a continuation of geologic interest in the Stone Mountain Granite. Reports on the origin (Whitney and others, 1976) and geochemistry (Atkins and others, 1980b) of the Stone Mountain Granite as well as another field trip guidebook for the area (Grant and others, 1980) were published.
After a gap of over a decade, publication on the stratigraphy and structure of the southern Piedmont resumed in the mid-1960's with the publications on the Brevard zone by Higgins (1966, 1968). In the recent past, reports regarding the various aspects of stratigraphy and structure were published (i.e., Atkins and Higgins, 1978, 1980; Atkins and others, 1980a; Higgins and others, 1980a, 1980b; Higgins and Atkins, 1981; Kline, 1980, 1981).
Much of the preceding geologic information from all of the aforementioned geographic areas was included in the compilation of the 1976 State Geologic Map of Georgia. This map also included unpublished reconnaissance mapping by various geologists (Georgia Geologic Survey, 1976).

STRATIGRAPHY
Introduction
Detailed and reconnaissance geologic mapping has formed the basis on which stratigraphic successions for the Blue Ridge, northern Piedmont and southern Piedmont were developed. Much of this mapping expanded upon earlier reconnaissance mapping by many authors.
In the Blue Ridge, the proposed stratigraphic terminology and correlations are, to some degree, a return to those of C.W. Hayes (1895) in his unpublished report on the Cartersville 30-minute sheet. Although written nearly 100 years ago, Hayes' report on the Cartersville area, particularly the stratigraphic correlations and his interpretation of the relationship between the Corbin Gneiss Complex and its cover rocks, is consistent with our interpretations.
South of the Allatoona fault and north of the Brevard zone, imprecise and over-extended terms such as Ashland and Wedowee are abandoned in favor of two major groups (i.e., New Georgia and Sandy Springs Groups) that are distinguished on the basis of lithology, protolith, and depositional environment. Resolution of a recognizable stratigraphy in the northern Piedmont also has led to the recognition of stratigraphic indicators for massive sulfide and gold deposits (Abrams and McConnell, 1982a).
Southeast of the Brevard fault zone, Higgins and Atkins (1981) defined the Atlanta Group. In this report, we use units defined by Higgins and Atkins, but reinterpret the structural setting, redefining the major structural feature, the NewnanTucker synform, as a synformal anticline rather than a synformal syncline as originally proposed (Higgins and Atkins, 1981). The stratigraphic succession used in the Valley and Ridge is after Cressler (1970) and Cressler and others (1979), which were modified from Hayes (1902) and Butts and Gildersleeve (1948).
The following discussion describes in detail only those rock units that are in areas which have undergone substantial revision during this investigation. In this report capitalization of previously defined stratigraphic units follows the original author's usage unless otherwise defined in this text. For a description of all stratigraphic units within the Greater Atlanta Regional area see Appendix A of this report.
Stratigraphy of the Valley and Ridge
Rocks ranging in age from Lower Cambrian(?) to Pennsylvanian are present in the Valley and Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. Our work in the Valley and Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Region was directed at an area in the immediate vicinity of Cartersville (Fig. 2). For this reason we have limited our discussion of Valley and Ridge stratigraphy to rocks in that area. This means that only Lower Cambrian rocks (Chilhowee through Rome Formations) are discussed. The reader is referred to Appendix A for detailed descriptions of the Middle Cambrian through Pennsylvanian section in this area.

8

=...

= N

="'
3S"

NO RTH CA ROli NA
.J .!''_,- - - SOUTH CAROLiNA -
, ,.r '
,__., ,r-
34 "

\
\

"='

.=..

2'Sr4--Y--!----,21--5--i"S0_ _,7L5----.'100 KILO METERS

IS

15

30

45

60 MILES

Figure 2.

Regional location map showing boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map and regional setting of map area (modified after McConnell and Costello, 1982).

9

Chilhowee Group rocks are the oldest rocks present in the Valley and Ridge. The base of the Chilhowee is not exposed in this area because the Chilhowee occurs as the oldest unit in a series of imbricate thrust sheets along the trace of the Cartersville fault. Mack (1980) divided the Chilhowee Group in Georgia and Alabama into four formations, i.e., Cochran, Nichols, Wilson Ridge and Weisner Formations (Table 1). Of these, only the two uppermost units (i.e., Wilson Ridge and Weisner) are known to be present in the Greater Atlanta Region. Mack (1980) formalized the Wilson Ridge Formation and described it as fine- to coarse-grained, moderately wellsorted orthoquartzite. Overlying the Wilson Ridge Formation is the Weisner Formation (Mack, 1980). The Weisner is composed of very fine- to fine-grained orthoquartzite, varying to cross-bedded fine- to coarse-grained orthoquartzite, conglomerate, and greenish-gray mudstone (Mack, 1980). In light of the controversy over the existence of the Cartersville fault in

the vicinity of Cartersville and the equivalence of the Pinelog Formation and Chilhowee Group, it is interesting to note the lithologic differences between the two units. Mack (1980) suggested that the Wilson Ridge Formation was deposited in a nearshore, high-energy environment and the Weisner Formation was deposited in a beach or barrier-island environment. This differs sharply from the characteristics of the Pinelog Formation east of the Cartersville fault where the Pinelog consists oflocally, poorly sorted, graded conglomerates, diamictites, and black shales (graphitic phyllites) interlayered with fine- to medium-grained quartzites. These lithologies and textures in the Pinelog Formation are indicative, at least in part, of a high-energy deep-water environment in a rapidly subsiding basin. Previous attempts to equate the Pinelog with the Chilhowee and to deny the existence of the Cartersville fault are discussed in the Blue Ridge section.

Table 1. Stratigraphic successions in the Valley and Ridge. Capitalization of units follows original author's usage.

Hayes, 1902 Lookout sandstone

Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948
Pottsville formation

Bangor limestone Oxmoor sandstone
Floyd shale

"Bangor" limestone
Floyd shale Rockmart slate

Fort Payne chert

Fort Payne chert

J Chattanooga shale
FMroougntat.n Armuchee sandstone chert

Chattanooga shale ' Armuchee chert

Red Mountain

Rockwood formation

formation

seauatch1e formation

Rock~" ''"'I Maysville Iimestone Trenton Iimestone Lowville limestone Ottosee shale

Tellico formation

Athens shale

Holston marble

Chickamauga

Lebanon Iimestone Leno ir limestone

limestone

Mosheim limestone Murfreesboro limestone

---""'--- Newala limestone

Knox dolomite

Knox dolomite

KesIer, 1950
0
zw-
LL
w
0
1-
0 z

Cressler, 1970; and Cressler and others 1979 Pennsylvanian (undivided)
Bangor Limestone

Hartselle Sandstone Member
Floyd Shale

Fort Payne Fort Payne

Chert

Chert

Lavender Lavender

Shale

Shale

Member Member

Armuchee Chert

Red Mountain Formation

Upper and
Middle

Rockmart Slate

Ordovician

Lenoir

(undivided) Limestone

Mack 1980
0
zw-LL
LU
0
1-
0 z

Newala Limestone

....,

-

Knox Group

This Report (after Cressler,

., 1970; and Cressler and ., others 1979)

c
c:

Pennsylvanian (undivided)

>
~
c c

Bangor Limestone

tf.

Hartselle Sandstone Member
Floyd Shale

.c ,
cc..
;;;

;";';

Fort Payne Chert

~"'

(Includes Lavender Shale Member)

c

!!! c

Armuchee Chert

.~,

0

Red Mountain

.c ,

;:

Formation

:l

ci5

Upper and Middle

Ordovician

(undivided)
~-----
Rockmart Slate

c.,
c::;
s:
0

"0

0

Newala Limestone

Knox Group

I=

Conasauga formation Rome formation Beaver limestone
Weisner quartzite

Conasauga shale Rome formation Shady dolomite
Weisner quartzite

Conasauga formation Conasauga Formation

Conasauga Group

Rome formation Shady dolomite
Weisner formation

Rome Formation Shady Dolomite

Rome Formation

c

Shady Dolomite

~"'
.E,

- - - - - - Weisner Formation

(.)

f - - - - - - Wilson Ridge Formation

- - - - - - Chilhowee Group

Nichols Formation

Chilhowee Group

Cochran Formation 1-

10

Overlying the Chilhowee Group is the Shady Dolomite. The boundaries of the Shady Dolomite in the Cartersville area are subject to some disagreement (Table 1). Kesler (1950) and Reade and others (1980) believe that the Shady Dolomite should be r~stricted to a basal, thin, black or dark-gray, finegrained dolostone having paper-thin shale lamellae. In their interpretation, Reade and others (1980) place the overlying gray dolostone and interlayered dolostone and shale in the Rome Formation. In contrast, Cressler and others (1979) place all of the dolostones above the Chilhowee and below the Rome shales in the Shady Dolomite. Archaeocyathids were found in both the lower dark-gray unit and upper light-gray unit (Stan Bearden, personal commun., October, 1982). Costello and others (1982) note that the light-gray dolostones interfinger with shales that generally are assigned to the Rome Formation and indicate that they are time equivalents of the Rome Formation. This report follows the definition of the Shady Dolomite as reported by Cressler and others (1979) (Table 1).
The Rome Formation is composed of fine-grained, slightly calcareous, green to red sandstone (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Sandstone is interlayered with greenish shale that weathers to a gray, pinkish or yellowish shale. Thin layers of limestone also are present.

Stratigraphy of the Blue Ridge
The Blue Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map is dominated by two major structural features which lie adjacent to each other (Fig. 3), the Salem Church anticlinorium and Murphy synclinorium. The determination of a stratigraphic succession in these two structures is complicated by 1) lack of continuous exposures, 2) multiple fold events, 3) both brittle and ductile faulting, 4) sedimentary facies changes, and 5) internal unconformities. The combination of the five above-mentioned factors has resulted in numerous, often conflicting, interpretations regarding the stratigraphic sequence. Generally, inte.rpretations of the stratigraphic sequence in this area were dependent on whether or not the Corbin Gneiss Complex was considered as intrusive into the Blue Ridge sequence and if the Cartersville fault was interpreted to be present east of Cartersville. A brief summary of the various interpretations was presented in the Previous Works section of this report and will not be repeated here, but investigations related to this report (McConnell and Costello, 1980b, 1982a) have shown that Hayes' original work in the area, with minor modifications, is correct. Hayes' observations regarding the presence of a nonconformity between the

Figure 3. Major structural features of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. 11

Corbin Gneiss and its cover sequence were confirmed in an investigation by Costello(1978). While the presence or absence of the Cartersville fault may never be proven to everyone's satisfaction, evidence seems to support its existence as Hayes (1901) proposed.
In the Blue Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, the Corb in Gneiss Com plex represents the so uthweste rnmostexposures of Grenville (Proterozoic Y) basement in the Blue Ridge por tion of the Appalachian orogen. The Corbin Gneiss is nonconformably overlain by a thick succession of predominantly clastic rocks interpreted to be lithostratigraphic equivalents of the Ocoee Supergroup as defined in Great Smoky Mountains National Park by King and others (1958). The Ocoee, in tu rn, is overlain conformably by rocks of the Murphy belt group.
CORBIN GNEISS COMPLEX
Rocks of the Corbin Gneiss Complex occur in the core of the Salem Church anticlinorium (Fig. 4). The term Corbin Gneiss Complex was informally introduced by McConnell and Costello (1980b) to describe rocks previously defined as Corbin granite (Hayes, 1901) and Salem Church granite (Bayley, 1928). This term was subsequently formalized in a paper by McConnell and Costello (1984). Although areally separated within the Salem Church anticlinorium, the Corbin and Salem

Church lithofacies of the Corbin Gneiss Complex are believed to be exposed parts of a single basement complex (McConnell and Costello, 1982b, 1984). Th is conclusion is based not only on apparent sim ilarities in mineralogy and texture, but also on similarities of stratigraphic sequence overlying both gneisses. One lithofacies of the Corbin Gneiss Complex was dated isotopically by Odom and others (1973) yielding an age in excess of one bi llion years on the basis of a lead-lead zircon age. Later work by Dallmeyer (1975) using 40Ar/ 39Ar techniques reaffirmed a Grenville age for the Corbin.
Rocks comprisi ng the Corbin Gneiss Complex represent
a a n intricate association of ortho- and paragneisses with the
dominant lithofacies being coarse-grained quartz-monzonitic r thognei ss with megacrystsof microcline. Samples from this lithofacies were used in isotopic age determinations of Odom and others(1973). However , this rock crosscuts small bodies of paragnei ss composed of graphite-bearing meta-arkose (Costello, 1978) (F ig. 5). The age of these paragneisses is unknown , but they may represent remnants of an earlier orogenic belt largely remobilized during the Grenville event. All of these lithofacies underwent granulite facies metamorphism during the Grenville. Compositions within the metaigneous lithofacies of the Corbin vary from granite to granodiorite (Table 2; Fig. 6). Variation diagrams of weight percent silica versus weight percent of other oxides (Harker

Va ll ey and Ri dge
(modi fi ed afl er Cress ler and o thers , 1979)

/

con 1ac 1

:z::
a:
[!}
f ::; u <

-

ROME FORMATION

~

SHADY DOLOMI TE

~ .

/

laull

0

/

lhrusl laull

MINERAL BLUFF FORMAT ION
MURPHY MARBLE AN D MARBLEH ILL HORN SCH IST UND IFF .
BRASSTOWN FORMATION

NANTAHALA FORMATION

a

:J

0
(5

DEAN FORMATION

>-

"0 "

SWEETWATER CREEK

E

FORMAT ION

(j)

o.{{m (""5''
c""a ~"' :o
c;; ~ 2
:;:uo ~

pewg
""'

ETOWAH FORMATION
WILH ITE FORMA fiON : includes Wi11111e Fo rmali on undifferenlia led ,(pCwu) ca rb onaceous phy flil e (pCwg), and sandy carbon ale (pCwc).

.c:J

~ 2

PINELOG FORMATION

go

(/)

~

~ CORB IN GNEISS ~ COMPLEX

Figure 4. Geologic map of the Blue Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map.

12

Figure 5. Photograph of paragneiss crosscut by igneous phase of the Corbin Gneiss Complex.

I

I

nf 0"' coo0co

,3

l 1:r

9

Figure 6.

Plots of normative analyses of the Corbin Gneiss Complex ,classification modified after Streckeisen (1976) modal diagram with quartz monzonite field added. !=Quartz-rich granitoids, 2=Aikali-feldspar gran ite, 3=Two feld spar granite, 4=Quartz monzonite, 5=G ranodiorite, 6=Quartz diorite, 7=Alkali-feldspar-quartz yenite, 8=Quartz syenite, 9=Quartz-rich monzonite, lO=Quartz monzodiorite, 11= Tonalite, 12=Alkali-feldsparsyenite.13=Syenite, 14=Monzonite, 15=Monzodiorite, 16=Diorite.

diagrams) are given for analyses presented in this report (Fig. 7). They show well-defined relationships with silica for Ti02 and FeO, while the relationships between silica and other oxides are more diffuse. However, Martin (1974) reports a differentiation trend is apparent for all oxides except CaO and A1 20 3 when analyses are plotted on Larson-type variation diagrams.
Parts of the Corbin Gneiss Complex contain a significant amount of pyroxene. This lithofacies was described originally as an augite granite by Hayes (unpublished data, 1895) and as an andesine-augite gneiss by Kesler (1950). Most recently this same facies was mapped as a metagabbro by Crawford (in Cressler and others, 1979). In this report this rock is referred to as a granulite facies gneiss. The granulite gneiss lithofacies is composed of graphite, ilmenite, microcline, blue quartz, biotite, pyroxene, and andesine. Microprobe analyses of pyroxenes indicate that ferrohypersthene dominates over augite (K. Gillon, written commun., 1980).
An additional lithofacies of the Corbin Gneiss Complex consists of a white to light-gray, medium- to coarse-grained rock that Kesler (1950) originally described as an oligoclasemica gneiss. Kesler (1950) estimated the composition of this facies to be almost wholly plagioclase (An 10to An 15) and blue quartz with minor amounts of orthoclase, muscovite and biotite. This rock is compositionally similar to the Salem Church gneiss lithofacies and field relationships suggest that it is the same lithologic unit as the Salem Church (McConnell and Costello, 1984).

13

Table 2. Whole-rock chemistry and normative analyses for thirty samples from the Corbin Gneiss Complex.

SAMPLE NO. 19 25 28 30 34 40 49 51 53 58 628 64A 67 68 76

Si02 A120 3 F~03 FeO
MgO
CaO
N~O
K20 H20 Ti02 MnO

69.12 68.90 67.80 70.14 73.60 70.60 63.46 68.60 69.00 71.60 66.20 62.24 71.80 57.84 68.00 15.00 15.80 15.00 15.30 13.00 14.30 14.50 14.80 13.80 12.50 14.80 15.50 13.80 17.40 14.80
1.13 1.46 1.88 0.89 1.09 1.38 1.15 0.47 1.76 0.99 1.18 1.65 0.79 1.58 1.26 2.04 2.11 2.99 2.26 1.09 1.82 5.98 2.55 2.92 2.62 4.88 6.70 2.62 7.58 2.92 0.40 0.77 0.83 0.68 0.24 0.20 0.60 0.25 0.35 0.40 0.75 1.00 0.30 1.45 1.00 1.72 1.00 1.16 1.62 2.04 1.84 4.06 2.80 2.60 3.04 2.60 3.10 2.10 4.50 0.76 2.56 2.70 2.00 3.37 2.63 2.70 3.64 2.96 2.63 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.00 3.10 2.70 6.00 5.06 4.82 4.10 5.42 5.30 3.00 6.00 5.06 4.02 4.22 3.97 4.82 2.77 5.42 0.88 1.10 2.07 0.56 0.40 0.83 0.13 0.45 0.58 0.28 0.43 0.25 0.85 0.34 1.30 0.70 0.78 1.10 0.80 0.30 0.78 1.75 0.80 1.00 0.80 1.60 2.00 0.60 2.50 1.50 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.02 0.09 . 0,04

TOTAL

99.59 99.72 99.69 99.74 99.73 99.77 98.32 99.70 99.74 98.97 99.41 99.19 99.70 99.15 99.70

Q

26.20 29.88 33.00 29.39 33.08 29.94 19.17 21.65 27.61 30.69 25.18 19.66 35.31 13.46 27.56

co

1.17 4.06 4.38 2.37 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.06 1.13 1.47 1.12 3.11

z

OR

35.46 29.90 28.48 24.23 32.03 31.32 17.73 35.46 29.90 28.48 24.92 23.46 28.48 16.37 32.03

AB

21.66 22.85 16.92 28.52 22.25 22.85 30.80 25.05 22.25 22.85 22.85 22.85 16.92 20.56 22.85

AN

8.53 4.96 5.75 8.04 7.66 9.13 14.37 9.38 10.91 7.75 12.90 15.38 10.42 22.32 3.77

DI

2.04

5.01 3.92 1.70 6.26

NE

EN

1.00 1.92 2.07 1.69 0.10 0.50 1.05 0.27 0.63 0.13 1.87 2.49 0.75 3.61 2.49

FS

1.73 1.45 2.20 2.13 0.11 0.95 5.08 1.33 1.70 0.37 5.44 7.79 3.20 8.65 1.92

MT

1.64 2.12 2.73 1.29 1.58 2.00 1.67 0.68 2.55 1.44 1.71 2.39 1.15 2.29 1.83

IL

1.33 1.48 2.09 1.52 0.57 1.48 3.32 1.52 1.90 1.52 3.04 3.80 1.14 4.75 2.85

SAMPLE NO. 78 79 81 82 88 92 94 95 97 99 104 108 110 112 113

Si02 A120 3 F~03 FeO
MgO
CaO
N~O
K20 H20 Ti02 MnO

68.40 68.36 65.20 69.60 67.80 67.20 63.20 67.20 66.40 63.54 70.80 68.64 68.02 66.16 73.26 15.30 16.00 14.30 14.20 12.80 14.80 14.20 13.50 15.00 16.70 14.70 15.00 15.80 16.00 13.50
1.67 1.09 2.73 1.16 0.85 0.78 1.00 1.35 1.10 1.98 0.92 2.01 0.97 0.80 0.68 2.55 1.90 5.10 2.92 4.37 3.35 7.29 4.00 4.23 4.52 1.60 1.97 2.55 3.06 1.82 0.58 0.87 1.95 0.72 0.98 1.45 0.98 1.52 1.16 0.54 0.94 1.30 0.72 0.80 0.33 1.76 0.50 2.66 1.86 3.36 2.56 3.44 2.96 4.66 3.88 0.10 1.60 1.74 2.44 2.08 2.43 2.00 2.43 2.17 2.70 2.96 2.70 2.70 2.83 2.43 1.62 2.00 2.83 2.96 2.00 5.30 6.62 2.65 5.30 4.58 5.06 4.34 4.22 3.61 3.73 6.50 4.58 5.90 6.26 5.06 0.90 1.54 0.62 0.48 0.45 0.44 0.29 0.75 0.43 0.64 1.80 1.59 0.24 0.30 0.22 0.80 0.80 1.75 1.32 1.50 1.00 1.66 1.32 1.00 1.50 0.80 1.09 0.90 0.78 0.80 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03

TOTAL

99.71 99.70 99.47 99.75 99.43 99.62 99.19 99.56 99.56 99.55 99.78 99.80 99.69 99.58 99.78

Q

28.43 28.43 30.33 30.55 25.26 21.32 18.21 25.38 23.20 24.03 34.50 34.02 23.07 16.92 36.63

co

2.37 4.64 2.60 1.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.61 4.82 3.84 1.59 0.00 0.95

z

OR

31.32 39.12 15.66 31.32 27.06 29.90 25.65 24.94 21.33 22.04 38.41 27.06 34.86 36.99 29.90

AB

20.56 16.92 20.56 18.36 22.85 25.05 22.85 22.85 23.95 20.56 13.71 16.92 23.95 25.05 16.92

AN

8.73 2.48 13.20 9.23 9.28 12.15 13.81 12.25 17.56 19.25 0.50 7.94 8.63 11.88 10.32

DI

6.26 0.45 2.81 2.02 4.69

0.19

NE

EN

1.44 2.17 4.86 1.79 1.39 3.50 2.16 3.31 2.05 1.34 2.34 3.24 1.79 1.96 0.82

FS

2.02 1.30 4.37 2.39 2.80 3.78 8.82 3.60 3.75 4.35 0.86 0.19 2.43 3.65 1.50

MT

2.42 1.58 3.96 1.45 1.23 1.13 1.45 1.96 1.59 2.87 1.33 2.91 1.41 1.16 0.99

IL

1.52 1.52 3.32 2.51 2.85 1.90 3.15 2.51 1.90 2.85 1.52 2.07 1.71 1.48 1.52

Data modified after Martin (1974). Analyses by J.R. Landrum in the laboratories of the Georgia Geologic Survey. Silica, calcium, and magnesium by wet chemical methods; water determined
by loss on ignition; titanium oxide and iron oxide determined calorimetrically; other elements AA and flame photometry.

14

3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 10.00
8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 18.00 17.00 16.00 15.00 14.00 13.00 12.00
50.00

MgO

+

+

+ + +

++ + t

+

t +*+ ++

:t:

+

t +
+ + + ++

+ +
+

FeO

+

+ ++ + + +
* +
+ ....++ ++
\-ft.+++ +

+

+

Fe20 3

+

+

+

+

+ + +

+

+

+

+ +

++ ++++

+ +++

+++ +

+

+

+

Al20 3
+

+ ..+.

+
+ +

+ + + +++ + + ++ +

+

++

+ +

+ +

+ +
+

6o:oo

70.00

Si02

80.00

4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00

Ti0 2

+

+

++ +

+

+

...

+ +

++ +++ + ~ ++++ +

+

+

+ + +
+++

K20

+ +
+

+

++....+
+

+

+ +

++

++ + +

+

+

+

+

+

+

Na20

+

++ + +

++

1 ++ ..

++ +

-+ +

+ + + +

+

0.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00
50.00

+ +
+ +

CaO

+

+

+

+

+

+

+~+ +

+ ++ +++++++

60.00

+ + + +
+
70.00
Si02

80.00

Figure7.

Variation diagrams showing the relationship of Si02 to other oxides, Corbin Gneiss Complex (after McConnell and Costello, 1984).
15

OCOEE SUPERGROUP
Hayes (1895) included rocks above the Corbin Gneiss Complex in the Ocoee series and termed them the Pinelog conglomerate and Wilhite slate. Hayes described the Pinelog conglomerate as consisting of a basal arkosic layer which so closely resembled the underlying granite and augen gneiss that "it is difficult to determine the exact limits of the igneous and sedimentary rocks" (Hayes, unpublished manuscript, 1895, p. 28). This unit is overlain by beds of quartzite, conglomerate and black slate. Hayes believed the Pinelog was a basal conglomerate overlying his Corbin granite.
With minor modifications, McConnell and Costello (1980b) redefined Hayes' Pinelog conglomerate and Wilhite slate as Pinelog Formation and Wilhite Formation. In a subsequent report, McConnell and Costello (1984) formalized these terms for this area. The Pinelog Formation is composed of an interlayered sequence of meta~onglomerate, metasandstone, and locally carbonaceous metasiltstone and metashale. Basal units that lie nonconformably on the Corbin Gneiss Complex consist of poorly sorted quartz-pebble metaconglomerates, metasandstone, and graphitic phyllite. These, in turn, are overlain by thickly bedded and graded metaconglomerates, cross-bedded metasandstone, graphitic phyllites and relatively thin lenses of immature, poorly sorted lithic metaconglomerates (diamictite). The lithic metaconglomerate is a distinctive lithofacies within the Pinelog Formation and is observed in a similar stratigraphic position north of the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map (McConnell and Costello, 1984). Metasandstones of the Pinelog Formation are composed of quartz and muscovite with traces of epidote, hornblende, biotite, zircon, and various opaques. Locally, the Pinelog contains flaggy quartzites and structures described as worm burrows (O'Connor and others, 1978).
The greatest portion of the Pinelog Formation probably was derived directly from the Corbin. This was noted by Hayes who stated: "This area of Corbin granite at one time probably formed an island, since it is surrounded, in part at least, by rocks derived from its waste" (Hayes, 1901, p. 406). Exposures documenting the relationships between the Corbin Gneiss Complex and its cover rocks are present along the western limb of the Salem Church anticlinorium. Although stratigraphic relationships along this limb were overturned by later folding, an erosional unconformity is observable along Lake Arrowhead in western Cherokee County and along the shores of Lake Allatoona north of Bethany Bridge Road, southeastern Bartow County (Costello, 1978; McConnell and Costello, 1980b, 1982a).
Above the Pinelog Formation is a relatively thin sequence of metasandstone, sandy marble and carbonaceous and noncarbonaceous, locally calcareous metasiltstone termed the Wilhite Formation. The lithologic character of this unit led Hayes (1895) to equate it with the Wilhite slate that he mapped in the Cleveland, Tennessee, area (Hayes, 1901). According to Hayes (1895), of the units mapped in the Cleveland area, only the Wilhite retains its lithologic characteristics toward the south. In later reports on the geology of the Great Smoky Mountains, King and others (1958), Hamilton (1961), Hadley and Goldsmith (1963), King (1964), and Newman and Nelson (1965) redefined stratigraphic relationships of the Ocoee Supergroup and included the Wilhite Formation in their Walden Creek Group. In order to conform to King and others' (1958) stratigraphy, McConnell and Costello (1980b) modified

Hayes' Wilhite slate in the Salem Church anticlinorium and

renamed it the Wilhite Formation. Wilhite Formation in the

study area, like Wilhite defined in the Great Smoky Mountains,

contains most of the carbonate rocks in the Ocoee Supergroup.

On the southeastern limb of the Salem Church anti-

clinorium, the Pinelog and a large part of the Wilhite

Formation are truncated by a series of en-echelon faults

grouped together into the Lost Town Creek fault zone

(McConnell and Costello, 1982b, 1984). In this area, rocks of

the Wilhite Formation lie in fault contact with Corbin Gneiss

Complex and structually are overlain by rocks of the Great

Smoky Group. The Great Smoky Group is the uppermost

subdivision of the Ocoee Supergroup as defined by King and

others (1958). On the northwestern limb of the Salem Church

anticlinorium, rocks of t'he Wilhite Formation are overlain in

apparent stratigraphic conformity by rocks of the Great

Smoky Group.

Lithostratigraphic equivalents of the Great Smoky Group

were mapped in Fannin, Union and Towns Counties, Georgia,

by Hurst (1955) and Dallmeyer and others (1978). In the

Greater Atlanta Region, McConnell and Costello (1980b; 198{

subdivided rocks that were previously interpreted to be Great

Smoky equivalents (Hadley, 1970; Dallmeyer, 1975; Power

and Forrest, Sweetwater

1973) Creek

iFnotormtharteieonfo, ramnadtiIollnisn:oEistoCwreaehkFFoorrmmaattiioon~

(Dean Formation in this report). These formations, in a

general sense, can be correlated with formations of the Great

Smoky Group defined to the northeast (Table 3), although part

of the section apparently is missing.

The Etowah Formation is the oldest unit of the Great

Smoky Group in the study area and is named for exposures ir

the confluence of the Etowah and Little Rivers in southwesterr

Cherokee County (Fig. 8). In the Greater Atlanta Region th~

Etowah Formation is the basal unit exposed in the Murph.}

synclinorium. It lies in apparent conformity above the Wilhiu

Formation northwest of the axial trace of the Salem Churd

anticlinorium (Fig. 4), but is overthrust by rocks of th~

northern Piedmont on the southeastern limb of the Murph)

synclinorium. The Etowah is composed of a monotonom

sequence of interlayered metasandstones and meta-argilliu

(sericite phyllite) with small lenses of calc-silicate granofeh

locally present. The lack of carbonate and graphite in th~

bedded units of the Etowah Formation separates this uni1

from the underlying Wilhite Formation. The Etowah grade!

upward into the Sweetwater Creek Formation.

The Sweetwater Creek Formation is named for exposure!

along Sweetwater Creek on Lake Allatoona in westerr

Cherokee County (Fig. 9). Dominance of coarse metaclasti1

rocks and presence of graphitic phyllite in the Sweetwate1

Creek Formation distinguishes it from the underlying Etowal
Formation. The boundary between the two units is difficult u

define, but generally is placed at a point where coarse clasti1

material constitutes more than 50 percent of the unit. Th1

Sweetwater Creek Formation is characterized by poorl~

sorted, blue quartz-bearing conglomeratic metasandstone

Monomineralic pebble-sized clasts within the conglomerau

are dominantly quartz and feldspar. Lithic clasts, i.e., slat<

chips, also are common. Slate chips ranging from 1 to 12 in. ir

length, are similar to dark phyllites in other parts of th1

formation suggesting that the conglomerate is intraforma

tional. Interlayered with the conglomeratic sandstone ar1

thick layers of graphitic and sericite phyllite.

16

Table 3. Regional correlation chart for rocks in the Blue Ridge.

LAFORGE AND PHALEN (1913)
Ellijay Quadrangle
Not! ely Quartzite Andrews Schist Murphy Marble
Valleytown Formation
Brasstown Schist Tusquitee Quartzite

BAYLEY (1928) Tote
Quodronale
Nottely Quartzite Not Present
Murphy Marble Valley town Formation
Not Present

HURST (1955)
Mineral Bluff Quodranale
Mineral Bluff Fm.
Nottely Quartzite
-.. Andrews Fm. Murphy Marble m

Brasstown

~ ~

:ll ~

Formation

Tusquitee Quartzite

MOHR ( 1973)

DALLMEYER AND OTHERS (1978)

Mineral Bluff Fm .

NottE"Iy Quartz lte

une)(posed
Cl.

Andrews Fm .

:::J

0

0.. :::>

.,< ....

!

i

i

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

0 '(.!)

m

Brasstown

..>c::.

0..

...>c:: .
Q.

Formation

':::->
:::E

Murphy Marble Brasstown Formation

:::J
:::E

Tusquitee Member Tusquitee Quartzite

THIS PAPER

(Modified after McConnell and Costello, I 980b)

Mineral Bluff Fm. Not Present

0.. Marble Hill HbS .

:::J 0 '-

Murphy Marble

(.!)

~

m"'

Brasstown

>.

..c::

0..
'-

Formation

:ll

:::E

Not Present

i

Nontaholo Slate

Nantohala Schist

Nantahala Slate

Nantahala Fm.

Nantahala Fm.

Nantahala Fm.

......
-.J

Great Smoky Formation

Great Smoky Formation

Dean

Cl.
e:::J

Formation Hothouse

(.!)

Formation

a.

a.

::l 0

:ll ....

e.Ot!>

~
0

Hughes Gop

~ :"g"'

E
(/)
......
0
l5

Formation Transition
Zone Copperhill Fm.

...., -E :ll
(/) (/)

0

0 u

.....,.

0 (!)

-'----------

T Dean Fm.

Dean

Dean Formation

!Horse Br.Member Cl.

Ammons

e Q. :ll
~

Formation Hothouse

.0.
:::J 0

Not

Formation

.. (.!) 01

Formation

(.!)

Present

Grassy Branch Formation Anakeesta Formation Thunderhead Formation
FAULT

.. >.

.g. .

-><
0

E (/)

II)

Q)

.. .., u0

0
....

- - - - - - J. 0 (.!)

Hughes Gap Formation Wehutty Formation
Copperhill Formation

a
:::J

.

>~ -

0,_ 0E

~(/)

Q)
0.
0 ::J
(/) Q)
Q) l5

Q)

0 u

Sweetwater Creek
Formation
Etowah 1ormation

0

Wilhite Fm .

. ,

............... ~

Hiwassee schist

Pineloo

Gneisses

Snowbird Fm. ?
~-------

Not

Grenville Age

Not

Formation

~

...,. ~~

and Granite

Carolina Gneiss

Ellp osed

Basement

Exposed

Corbin Gneiss Complex

yl-..&.'-L-.L-1~-'op.__o __2oo1_,o Feet N
1

Figure 8.

Type locality of the Etowa:1 Formation of the Great Smoky Group (U.S. Geological Survey, South Canton, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

II 11
r Fields Landing

Figure 9.

Type locality of the Swee1water Creek Formation of the Great Smoky Group (U.S. Geolog-ical Survey, South Canton, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

18

The uppermost unit of the G;eat Smoky Group in the

Ft dy area is the Dean FormatiOn (Table 3). The Dean u mation was formally designated by Hurst (1955) for 0~ures along the west side of Dean Ridge, Fannin County.
~e Dean lies gradationally above the. S~eetwater Creek

Formation and is best exPQ~t.ed along Illm01s Creek at Lake

Allatoona in western Cherokee County and eastern Bartow

County (Fig. 10). The Dean Formation in this area. is

~ihfafrearcstferroimzedthabtyinqtuhaertSzw-peeebtwblaetemr CetraeceoknFgolormmeartiaoten

wh1ch in that

conglomerate of the Dean contains lesser amounts of. dark

minerals and is somewhat b~tter so~ted. Con_glomerate m ~~e

Dean Formation also contams detntal plagiOclase, perth1tJc

microcline and tourmaline. Associated with the conglomerate

are thick beds of metasandstone and sericite phyllite.

Staurolite, garnet and chloritoid are common metamorphic

accessory minerals in the phyllites. The Dean Formation

conformably underlies the Nantahala Formation of the

Murphy beltgroup. McConnell and Costello(1980b) informally

designated this unit as the Illinois Creek Formation and noted

its similarity to the Dean Formation.

MURPHY BELT GROUP
The Dean Formation of the Great Smoky Group is conformably overlain by metasedimentary rocks of the Murphy belt group. Murphy belt group rocks are exposed in the axial portion of the Murphy synclinorium which terminates in the studyarea(Figs. 3 and 4). Keith(1904)firstdescribed Murphy group rocks, including seven units: Nantahala slate, Tusquitee quartzite, Brasstown schist, Valleytown formation, Murphy marble, Andrews schist, and Nottely quartzite. Later work by LaForge and Phalen (1913) and Bayley (1928) extended Keith's original stratigraphy into Georgia. Hurst (1955), Fairley (1965, 1973), and Power and Forrest (1973) subsequently refined Murphy belt group stratigraphy.
The basal unit of the Murphy belt group is Nantahala Formation (Fairley, 1965). It lies conformably on the Dean Formation in the study area and is perhaps the most continuous unit in the Murphy belt group. Extending southward from the Georgia-North Carolina line, Nantahala Formation defines the western limb ofthe Murphy synclinorium through Georgia; however, continuity of this unit on the eastern limb of the synclinorium is disrupted by faulting (Bayley, 1928). The Nantahala Formation characteristically is a carbonaceous phyllite to laminated, dark argillite and fine- to mediumgrained metasandstone. While Hurst{1955, p. 57) interpreted Nantahala to represent a deep-water, euxinic environment, Power and Forrest (1973, p. 706) interpreted it to represent a tidal-flat or lagoonal environment.
The Brasstown Formation overlies the Nantahala Formation. The Tusquitee Quartzite, which occurs between the Brasstown and Nantahala Formations to the north, is not present in the southwestern Blue Ridge, presumably because of nondeposition (LaForge and Phalen, 1913). Recent mapping by R.D. Hatcher, Mark Ausburn, and students of Hatcher has shown that the Tusquitee is not a separable unit and should be mapped as part of theNantahala (Robert D. Hatcher, written commun., 1983). Recent workers were unable to separate Keith's (1907) Valleytown formation from the Brasstown and the two units were subsequently combined into the Brasstown Formation (Hurst, 1955; Fairley, 1965; Power and Forrest,

i

Figure 10.

Location of exposures of Dean Formation of the Great Smoky Group in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area (U.S. Geological Survey, Allatoona Dam, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

1973). The Brasstown Format;on is a sequence of interlayered gray schists and micaceous quartzites that weather to buff to orange saprolite. To the north near Jasper, Georgia, the Brasstown is well exposed and, owing to its slabby character, is quarried locally for flagstone. West of Canton (Plate 1), the Brasstown is only exposed in small fault slices along the southeast limb of the Murphy synclinorium. Power and Forrest (1973) noted the presence of local beds and lenses of calc-silicate granofels as a characteristic of the Brasstown.
Overlying the Brasstown Formation is the well-known Murphy marble, a fine- to medium-grained calcite and dolomite marble. Bayley (1928), Fairley (1965) and Power and Forrest (1973) noted that the outcrop belt of the Murphy Marble is discontinuous with the latter suggesting that this argued for a reef or carbonate bank origin (Power and Forrest, 1973, p. 707). Murphy Marble is easily the most economically significant commodity in the Murphy belt group

19

and is quarried for dimension and crushed stone as well as fillers and extenders in both Georgia and North Carolina. The marble is quarried extensively at Tate, Whitestone, Marble Hill, Jasper, and Ball Ground, Georgia, where it is best exposed. Smaller,discontinuous outcrops occur from Waleska, Georgia, to Wesser, North Carolina.
Keith (1907) originally described a thin calc-schist overlying the Murphy Marble that he termed Andrews schist. In the Tate-Marble Hill area, Murphy Marble grades upward into a calcareous, hornblende-bearing schist that Fairley (1965) termed Marble Hill Hornblende Schist. The transition zone between these units is approximately 50 ft. thick in the Tate-Marble Hill area (Power, 1978). Fairley (1965) interpreted the hornblende schist to be of sedimentary origin and assigned it to a stratigraphic position between the Murphy Marble and Andrews Formation. Power and Forrest (1973) disagreed with Fairley's stratigraphic interpretation of the hornblende schist and concluded that, in keeping with Keith's (1907) original interpretation, the Marble Hill and Andrews Formations are stratigraphic equivalents.
Although Bayley (1928) showed a small outcrop of Nottely Quartzite on his map, other workers in the Tate area (Power and Forrest, 1973; McConnell and Costello, 1980b) have not observed the Nottely in this area. Occurring above the Marble Hill Hornblende Schist is a thick sequence of pelitic rocks, which includes garnet-quartz-sericite schist and, locally, pure sericite schist that is mined as a talc substitute. These schists are believed to be equivalent to the Mineral Bluff Formation (Fairley, 1965; Power and Forrest, 1973; McConnell and Costello, 1980b) as defined by Hurst (1955) in the Mineral Bluff quadrangle. Fairley (1965) pointed out the fact that the Mineral Bluff has numerous intercalations of calc-schist in the Tate area, a factor used by Power and Forrest (1973) to suggest that the Mineral Bluff represented open-marine shelf conditions during deposition.
REGIONAL CORRELATIONS
As stated previously, the lack of fossiliferous horizons and favorable units for isotopic dating (excluding the Corbin Gneiss Complex), and the questions regarding the nature of the Cartersville fault have led to many different interpretations of the age and correlation of major lithologic units in the Blue Ridge portion of the study area. In light of several recent reports on the subject (McConnell and Costello, 1980b, 1982a, 1984; Cressler and others, 1979; Sears and others, 1981; Sears and Cook, 1982; Costello and others, 1982), a discussion of the correlations is warranted.
In general, interpretations regarding the age and correlative rock units for rocks which lie unconformably on the Corbin Gneiss Complex (i.e., Pinelog and Wilhite Formations) may be split into two broad categories. Hayes (1901) concluded that the Cartersville fault exists east of Cartersville and that it separates lower Paleozoic sediments in the Valley and Ridge from metamorphosed, Precambrian sediments unconformably overlying or intruded by the Corbin Gneiss. With minor modifications, this general interpretation was subscribed to by many subsequent workers (Crickmay, 1936; Cressler and others, 1979; Hadley, 1970; McConnell and Costello, 1980b; this report). The second interpretation began with LaForge (in Hull and others, 1919) and was later emphasized in

Kesler's report on the Cartersville district in which he
suggested that the Cartersville fault does not exist east of Cartersville and that rocks overlying the Corbin Gneiss are equivalent to lower Paleozoic Weisner and Shady Formations (Kesler, 1950). Workers wholly or in part subscribing to this interpretation include Bentley and others (1966), Fairley (1973), Hurst (1973) and Sears and others (1981). With the above-outlined interpretations in mind, an examination of the lithology and depositional environment of the various sequences is necessary.
We suggest that the controversy over the stratigraphic position of rocks nonconformably overlying the Corbin Gneiss Complex results, at least if} part, from an oversimplification of lithology and structure. We believe this is the case where rocks nonconformably overlying the Corbin were interpreted to be Weisner Formation (Kesler, 1950; Hurst, 1973; Sears and others, 1981). While lithologic differences between rocks of the Chilhowee Group and Pinelog and Wilhite Formations can be attributed to facies changes within a single unit, the Chilhowee Group represents an easily recognizable, regionally continuous rock sequence in the southern Appalachians. King and others (1958) and King (1964) noted these characteristics of the Chilhowee Group in discounting correlations between Chilhowee Group and Great Smoky Group rocks. Significant lithologic differences do exist between the Chilhowee Group near the Cartersville fault (i.e., Weisner Formation after Mack, 1980) and Pinelog and Wilhite Formations. As defined, the Weisner Formation consists predominantly of vitreous quartzite with lesser amounts of conglomerate, sandstone and sandy shale (Hayes, 1902). The Weisner Formation generally is believed to be equivalent to the Hesse Sandstone of the Chilhowee Mountain belt of east Tennessee (Whisonant, 1974; Mack, 1980). Whisonant(1974) interpreted the Hesse-Weisner units to represent a thin sheet of "clean, well-sorted orthoquartzite" (Whisonant, 1974, p. 238) that was deposited during a period of relative tectonic stability. In contrast to the wellsorted and relatively mature character of the Weisner Formation, rock units lying nonconformably on the Corbin Gneiss Complex (i.e., Pinelog and Wilhite Formations) locally are poorly sorted and immature. The Pinelog and Wilhite Formations form a heterogeneous assemblage of polymictic metaconglomerates, sandstones, and carbonaceous and noncarbonaceous siltstones. Interlayered with the above rocks are thin lenses of siliceous marble and diamictite. In general, individual units within the Pinelog or Wilhite do not show extensive lateral continuity. The immaturity of sediments in the Pinelog and Wilhite as well as their poorly sorted character suggest that they were deposited, at least partially, in an environment where rapid subsidence and rapid deposition were common. While not conclusive, these lithologic differences should not be overlooked, particularly when the Weisner Formation is such a distinctive unit.
Additional doubts are raised about correlating Chilhowee Group rocks with those rocks nonconformably overlying the Corbin Gneiss Complex, when relationships between the Chilhowee Group and Ocoee Supergroup in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park are studied. In the foothills area of the Great Smoky Mountains, King and others (1958) and King (1964) have reported that rocks of the Chilhowee Group unconformably overlie Walden Creek Group rocks. Walden

20

Creek Group rocks are interpreted to rest conformably {King, 1964) on Snowbird Group which, in turn, overlies Grenville
basement. East of the Greenbrier fault, the stratigraphic sequence is basement-Snowbird Group-Great Smoky Group {King and others, 1958). Thus, in areas where the Ocoee Supergroup is present, it has been shown to lie between rocks of the Chilhowee Group and Grenville basement. In eastern Tennessee the Ocoee Supergroup is approximately 50,000 ft. thick {King, 1964), whereas it is considerably thinner in the Greater Atlanta Region {16,000 ft. thick, McConnell and Costello, 1984). The correlation of rocks nonconformably overlying Corbin Gneiss Complex with the Chilhowee Group in an area where Ocoee Supergroup rocks are known to be present would seem to require a very large erosional unconformity in a very limited area. We believe that the simpler and more geologically feasible interpretation that does not require an erosional unconformity and takes into account the lithological differences is to equate rocks of the PinelogWilhite sequence to the Ocoee Supergroup.
The most compelling evidence for a fault separating the Ocoee Supergroup rocks and Chilhowee Group rocks in the Cartersville area is the difference in deformation observed on opposite sides of the trace of the fault. While at least three major fold events are recognized in rocks east of the fault {McConnell and Costello, 1982a; Costello and others, 1982), only the last two of these fold events are observed in rocks to the west of the fault {Reade and others, 1980).
A second problem regarding correlation of units in the Blue Ridge as defined in this report is the relationship between rocks of the Ocoee Supergroup and Talladega belt rocks. This problem is due, in part, to a lack of quadrangle mapping in the Talladega belt in Georgia. Interpretations as to the age of rocks in the Talladega range from middle to upper Paleozoic, based on reported fossils in the Jemison Chert and Erin Shale{Smith,1903; Shaw,1970,1973; Gilbert, 1973; Gastaldo and Cook, 1981), to at least partially Precambrian, based on lithologic similarities and areal continuity with Ocoee Supergroup rocks exposed along strike with the Talladega in north-central Georgia {Hayes, 1901; Prouty, 1923; Stose and Stose, 1944; McConnell and Costello, 1980b; Crawford and Cressler, 1981, 1982). The Talladega "problem" in Georgia has involved two questions: whether or not the Cartersville fault exists southwest of Cartersville and, assuming it does, what part of the Ocoee Supergroup makes up the Talladega in Georgia. With regard to the first question, Hurst {1973) questioned the need for the Cartersville fault southwest of Cartersville suggesting that the Talladega in Georgia was lying unconformably on lower Paleozoic sedimentary rocks. Hurst {1973) indicated that the age of the Talladega in Georgia was post-Early Ordovician. This interpretation, which depends upon an unconformable contact at this boundary, is questionable in light of a recently published report by Crawford {1977c), who reported that, west of Emerson {Fig. 4), the Cartersville fault thrust Talladega rocks over Cambrian to Mississippian-age Valley and Ridge rocks. With the evidence that the Cartersville fault is present southwest of Cartersville, the question then arises as to which units in the Ocoee Supergroup trend into the Talladega at Emerson. Cressler and others {1979), Cressler and Crawford {1976) and Crawford and Cressler {1981, 1982) suggested that

the Talladega "Group "1 and associated lithologies overthrust the Great Smoky fault and the southwestern terminus of the Salem Church anticlinorium along a low-angle fault termed the "Emerson {Cartersvhle) fault." In their interpretation, Crawford and Cressler {1981, 1982) limit rocks comprising the Talladega at Emerson to the Great Smoky Group. McConnell and Costello {1980b; 1982a) disagreed with Crawford and Cressler {1981,1982) and suggested that rocks nonconformably overlying the Corbin {Pinelog and Wilhite Formations) as well as Great Smoky Group rocks trend into the Talladega belt. This bulletin follows the interpretation of McConnell and Costello {1980b; 1982a).
Confusion regarding the geology of the Talladega at Emerson results from a complex interplay of faulting, folding and depositional environments. The importance of the Emerson (Cartersville) fault {Cressler and Crawford, 1976; Crawford and Cressler, 1981, 1982) and the fault's impact on the stratigraphic relationships are here considered minimal. In order to understand the relationships that exist at Emerson, it is necessary to establish a reference point from which to correlate Ocoee lithologies across the area east of Emerson into what has been defined as Talladega belt. Such a reference point exists in the stratigraphic sequence present on the western limb of the Salem Church anticlinorium east of Cartersville. The transition from basement gneiss upward into a high-energy clastic sequence {Pinelog Formation) and then into a sequence that represents a lower energy, more restricted depositional environment (Wilhite Formation) is of paramount importance in efforts to decipher relations east of Emerson. This same lithologic succession can be traced from the northeastern terminus of the Salem Church anticlinorium approximately 15 mi. to the northeast of Emerson, southward to Interstate 75 just east of Emerson. At the southwestern terminus of the Salem Church anticlinorium, the Corbin Gneiss Complex and Pinelog Formation plunge beneath the surface, but the overlying Wilhite Formation continues to the southwest uninterrupted and therefore forms part of the Talladega belt in this area. In conjunction with the plunging out of competent lithologies like the Corbin Gneiss and quartzites of the Pinelog Formation, faulting associated with transposition during F 2 folding becomes less apparent. Rocks of the Great Smoky Group, in fault contact with graphitic phyllites of the Wilhite Formation to the northeast near Waleska, are believed to conformably overlie the Wilhite to the southwest of Emerson and, therefore, also compose part of the Talladega in this area (Fig. 2). All of this, with the exception of some revision of stratigraphic nomenclature, is similar to what Hayes proposed nearly 90 years ago. His Wilhite slate, Pinelog conglomerate, and Gilmer formation are stratigraphic equivalents with the Wilhite Formation, Pinelog Formation and Great Smoky Group of this report (Table 3).
1 Smith (1888) originally defined the Talladega Group for exposures along Talladega Creek in Alabama. Tull (1982) interprets these rocks at the type locality as lying above the pre-Lay Dam Formation unconformity and of middle Paleozoic age. Present usage in Alabama follows Smith's original definition, but other rocks in the Talladega belt stratigraphically below those exposed along Talladega Creek do not belong to the Talladega "Group" as defined by Smith (Tull, 1982).

21

Stratigraphy of the Piedmont
NORTHERN PIEDMONT
Rocks lying between the Allatoona fault and the Brevard fault zone (Fig. 2) are defined in this report to be in the northern Piedmont. This usage diverges from common terminology used in Alabama, South Carolina and Georgia (i.e., Tull, 1978; Hurst, 1973; Hatcher, 1978a). In several recent reports (McConnell and Costello, 1980b; 'Abrams and McConnell, 1981a; McConnell and Abrams, 1982a, 1982b) the regional stratigraphy and structure in the northern Piedmont has been revised. These reports resulted from detailed and reconnaissance mapping carried out as part of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map project. A conclusion reached as a result of this mapping effort was that some names previously used to describe major rock units are no longer suitable. Prior to the studies mentioned above, major rock units in western Georgia were either assigned a numerical classification (Crawford and Medlin, 1973) or correlated with the Ashland and Wedowee units in Alabama (Hurst, 1973). The numerical classification used by Crawford and Medlin (1973) is inappropriate due to its dependence on a single major fold event as its basis. Multiple deformation and its influence on the local stratigraphy in the northern Piedmont is documented in many recent reports (Hatcher, 1977, 1978a; McConnell and Costello, 1980b; Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). The numerical designation therefore is abandoned in this report. Relating rocks of the northern Piedmont with the terms Ashland and Wedowee also is not appropriate. Ashland Mica Schist and Wedowee Formation are somewhat ambiguous field terms used by Prouty (1923) and Adams (1926) to describe major rock units in Alabama. Since its introduction, the name Ashland has held several different stratigraphic ranks including group status (Hurst, 1973) and supergroup status (Tnll, 1978). Neathery and Reynolds (1973) suggested that the term "Ashland Mica Schist" be abandoned because they believe that units of the Wedowee Formation are traceable across metamorphic boundaries into rocks that were previously assigned to the Ashland Mica Schist. Also, theWedowee Formation as defined by Bentley and Neathery (1970) contains units defined as part of the Ashland Supergroup by Tull (1978). To add to the confusion, rocks of the Ashland Supergroup as defined by Tull (1978) are present only in the Coosa block and rocks of the Wedowee are present only in the Tallapoosa block. Thomas and others (1979) indicate that only Tallapoosa block rocks (i.e., Wedowee Group and Emuckfaw-Heard sequence) are present in west Georgia north of the Brevard fault zone. However, Hurst (1973) has defined rocks of both Wedowee Formation and Ashland Group in the northern Piedmont of Georgia.
Due to their ambiguous original definition, their subsequent accumulation of several different stratigraphic ranks, and confusion over their boundaries, McConnell and Costello (1980b) suggested that both Ashland and Wedowee be dropped as stratigraphic names in Georgia. To replace Ashland and Wedowee in Georgia, McConnell and Costello (1980b) informally introduced the names Dallas group and Roosterville group. These two groups together with the Sandy Springs Group (Higgins and McConnell, 1978a, 1978b) encompassed all major rock units in the northern Piedmont of Georgia. In a

subsequent report, Abrams and McConnell (1981a) revised the boundary between the Dallas and Roosterville groups and changed the name of the .Dallas group to New Georgia Group (Fig. 11). As a result of the boundary change, sequences of rocks of dominantly volcanic origin comprise theNew Georgia Group.
Although areal separation and apparent lithologic differences prohibit any direct correlation with rocks in Georgia, we speculate that rocks of theNew Georgia Group are, at least in part, equivalent to rocks of the Ashland Supergroup (Table 4). This is based primarily on the fact that both the New Georgia Group and Ashland Supergroup contain a large proportion of metavolcanit! rocks and similar types of ore deposits. In addition, we also suggest that rocks defined as Wedowee Formation in Alabama (Tull, 1978) are equivalent to rocks of the Sandy Springs Group, particularly rocks of the Sandy Springs Group western belt. This correlation is based on lithologic similarities and the association of both Sandy Springs Group and Wedowee Formation with major volcanicbearing rock groups (i.e., New Georgia Group and Ashland Supergroup, respectively).
In their preliminary report, McConnell and Costello (1980b) indicated that the Sandy Springs Group was the oldest rock sequence in the northern Piedmont. This interpretation was based on lithologic similarities between the Sandy Springs Group and Tallulah Falls Formation (Hatcher, 1974), the latter of which lies, at least in part, nonconformably on Grenville basement in northeast Georgia (Hatcher, 1977, 1978a). Hatcher (1978a) also speculated, however, that a large part of the Tallulah Falls Formation was deposited on oceanic crust. Recent mapping in western Georgia supports the oceanic crust hypothesis. Rocks of theNew Georgia Group are interpreted to represent back-arc basin volcanics that formed on attenuated (rifted) continentia! crust. This interpretation is based on chemistry of the volcanic rocks in the New Georgia Group which is bimodal and suggests back-arc basin or ocean ridge tholeiite affinity (McConnell, 1980a; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). The presence of attenuated and, possibly, largely engulfed continental crust is postulated to provide a source for the large volume of felsic volcanic rocks in the New Georgia Group and to provide a mechanism for the presence of Grenville basement unconformably beneath the Tallulah Falls Formation. We further speculate that as volcanic activity decreased in the basin, it was infilled by flysch facies greywackes, argillites and subordinate volcanic rocks of the Sandy Springs Group.
Another result of the detailed mapping in western Georgia is the confirmation of lithostratigraphic equivalence between rocks of the Roosterville group and Sandy Springs Group. McConnell and Costello (1980b) suggested the possible equivalence of the two units in their report. In this bulletin, we propose that the term "Roosterville group" be dropped and rocks previously within the Roosterville be considered to be the western belt of the Sandy Springs Group (Fig. 11). This proposal is based on lithologic similarities between units of the Sandy Springs Group and Roosterville group as well as on the presence of similar stratigraphic sequences in both groups.
In the following discussion an interpretation of the stratigraphic sequence in the northern Piedmont is presented. Due to a lack of definitive isotopic ages, regionally significant

22

,-'

N

I

I

VALLEY

S

AND

!

RIDGE

r.J

I
I
I
~-L__r-i__-----..

':-..;::. '00
._t::,0
..._e'~>"'
~q 0

."1/f!

II ./ I (
.""'.\...

\

A.

I

,-

1

I

I

I

~~' --/ I

/ "'

-......._

/

!\:) Col)

~q

//

0

~

I

~

Atlanta . 1

Soapstone Ridge

r--~~~

i~-<... 't-
'i
' \'Vj _
't-- \

1 ~

Panola Granite

.?ATLANT A'
~.1 GROUP

."-
y
/
I
/

//

"-..._

~
r-

\_j'-

.

,.

"-..._
.

J ""'"-.._

/ )

."-..._ .

/
/
EXPLANATION

Q..J.. ,.~
"'

_r - -

.\ .~.\

rI. I .
.

/
/ . / Group Boundary - Dashed where approximate.

r t

"/,/-'Formation Boundary

'-..

~

/Fault

Figure 11. Group and formation boundaries of the crystalline rocks of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map.

Table 4. Proposed correlation chart of lithologic units in the Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina Piedmont.

Alabama

Modified after Tull

(1978)

west

Georgia lthis report)

Northeast Georgia a.nd South Carolina

Georgia

east

Hatcher (1974)

Modified after Hurst*
(1973)

Emuckfaw Formation

c.
e:J
(!)

Wedowee

!9.
c:

Group

~

CJ)

>
"0
c:
c?!

c. Mad Indian

e:J
~"'
"CJ)

and Hatchet Creek
- -G-rou-ps Higgins Ferry

"c0:

and

:"c' Poe Bridge

.'! Mountain

Formations

'-- --Fault---

Hillabee Chlorite

Schist

Bill Arp Formation
Andy Mountain Formation
Dog River Formation

Factory Shoals

Formation

.,c:
. 0

"E ' 0
lL

-~

l"L'

Chattahoochee

.r:

Palisades Quartzite ....=.!.!.:l

I-

Powers Ferry Formation

Greywacke, schist Quartzite, schist
Aluminous schist
not present
Greywacke, schist, amphibolite

New Georgia Group

Hornblende gneiss, amphibolite
VBasement\

Wedowee Formation
Ashland Group

"Hurst (1973) interpreted the Wedowee to be older than Ashland.

facing criteria, and (or) fossils, this interpretation relies in part on the lithologic similarities between rocks of the Sandy Springs Group and Tallulah Falls Formation defined in northeastern Georgia by Hatcher (1971a). The similarities between these two sequences have been noted by many geologists (Hatcher, 1974, 1975; Higgins and McConnell, 1978a; Gillon, 1982). The stratigraphic interpretation presented herein is also in part dependent on Hatcher's (197la, 1974) interpretation of an unconformable contact between Grenville basement and the Tallulah Falls Formation.
New Georgia Group
Rocks of theNew Georgia Group (Abrams and"McConnell, 1981a) form an irregular belt that extends from the Bremen area on the west northeastward to Canton where the belt narrows considerably and continues northeastward to at least the Dahlonega area, forming the "Dahlonega gold belt" (Fig. 11). The outcrop belt of the New Georgia Group, which is at least 130 mi. long and, at its widest, is 17 mi. wide, contains most of the base and precious metal deposits in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area. New Georgia Group rocks are exposed in the core of a large-scale second-generation synform that plunges to the northeast. The base of the New Georgia Group is not exposed and its exact thickness is unknown. Sandy Springs Group (eastern belt) rocks are in fault contact with the New Georgia Group along the Chattahoochee and Blairs Bridge faults in the eastern and northern part of the belt (Plate I and Fig. 11). The contact between the Sandy Springs Group (western belt) and New Georgia Group near Villa Rica is gradational and this gradation is expressed by the apparent waning of volcanic activity as time progressed.

TheNew Georgia Group is characterized by the dominance of metavolcanic rocks over metasedimentary rocks. On the other hand, the Sandy Springs Group is dominantly metasedimentary and contains a steadily decreasing volcanic component upward.
That part of theNew Georgia Group that is exposed In the study area is composed of an intermingled sequence of metamorphosed felsic and mafic volcanic and subvolcanic rocks, plutonic rocks and a proportionally smaller amount of sedimentary rocks. At least two cycles of volcanism are recognizable in the New Georgia Group, but the scarcity of distinct volcanic textures due to metamorphic overprinting and deformation limits the accuracy of estimates regarding the exact proportions of felsic to mafic volcanic material in these cycles. The obliteration of original sedimentary or volcanic textures during metamorphism and intense deformation and complexities within the original volcanic pile combine to make definition of internal stratigraphy in the New Georgia Group very difficult. However, portions of the New Georgia Group are relatively well known and provide some understanding of the stratigraphy of the group. Two areas studied in detail occur on the borders of theNew Georgia Group outcrop belt. Lithologic units in these areas are the Mud Creek Formation in the Villa Rica area to the southwest and the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation to the northeast. A third formation in which some idea of internal stratigraphy of the New Georgia Group can be ascertained is in the Univeter Formation located near the center of the outcrop belt of the New Georgia Group (Fig. 11).
In the vicinity of Villa Rica, Abrams and McConnell (1981a) were able to define the Mud Creek Formation of the

24

Georgia Group (Fig. 11). The Mud Creek Formation is

Newposed predominantly of locally garnetiferous, equi-

com ular hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite and hornblende

Jl1l?ss interlayered with garnet-biotite schist and gneiss,
=~~ed iron formation (~agn~ite qu~rtzite), an~ metadacite

(eiImx0c"pe,olplroetatnantstssithuromartiiozgorrtnha pomghniceriesmgs)aa. rrBdkaentroduebdma.Istreoanasfnowdrme IpaIrteiaOcswn bufeos m.rmmgse

an an taI

deposits (Abrams and others, 1981; Abrams and McConnell,

t98la. 19 2a). For that reason , banded iron formation in the

Villa Rica area was designated a member of the Mud Creek

Formation and termed the Cedar Lake Quartzite (Abrams

and McConnell , 1981a).The dominant f~cies o~the Cedar_Lake

Quartzite is composed of layers and dissemmated grams of

magnetite and specular hematite in a coarse to micro-crystal-

line quartzite (Fig. 12). Manganese (weathered spessar ti ne

quartzite), sulfide and aluminous facies iron formation also

are common in the Villa Rica area.

A distinctive structural feature of the Villa Rica area is

the Villa Rica antiform (Fig. 13). This antiform is a parasitic

Figure 12. Photograph of Cedar Lake Quartzite (banded iron formation) from the type locality.

D SAND HILL GNEISS
(arranged 10 stratigraphic order)
f.;.:/;.J AUSTELL GNEISS
SANDY SPRINGS GROUP (Western Belt)
D BILL ARP FORMATION m:l ANDY MOUNTAIN FORMATION
E23 DOG RIVER FORMATION

/

Contacl

NEW GEORGIA GROUP

IZZA MUD CREEK FORMATION

0

VILLA RICA GNEISS (MET ADACITE l MEMBER

/ / Gradat1onal contact
/
/ / Faull
/
_..)\ Axis ol ma1or fold



CEDAR LAKE QUARTZITE (Banded ~ron forma loon)

N
I
4 K1lome 1ers
GEOLOGY OF THE NORTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE
AUSTELL-FROLONA ANTIFORM

Figure 13.

Geologic map of the northeastern portion of the Austell-Frolona antiform (modified after Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). Cross section A -A' is shown in Figure 26.

25

upwarp on the southern limb of the large synform cored by the New Georgia Group. Exposed in the crest of the Villa Rica antiform is an equigranular biotite-quartz-oligoclase (An26 to An30) gneiss that is characterized by low concentrations of K20 (Sanders, 1977). Although originally termed a granite (McCallie, in Yeates and others, 1896), it is now believed to be dacitic to rhyodacitic in composition (Fig. 14) (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). Abrams and McConnell (1981a) formally termed this unit the Villa Rica Gneiss for exposures in and around the city of Villa Rica. The Villa Rica antiform plunges beneath the surface just east of Villa Rica (Fig. 13). Eastnortheast of where the Villa Rica antiform plunges out, another gneiss very similar to the Villa Rica Gneiss is exposed in the crest of another elongate antiform. Sanders (personal commun., 1981) found that this gneiss is chemically dissimilar to the Villa Rica Gneiss and contains slightly higher concentrations of K20, MgO, total Fe, and CaO and slightly lower values for Si02 and Na20. Abrams and McConnell (1981a) and Abrams (1983) suggested that the two gneisses were equivalent based on their similar structural and stratigraphic position. In

this report, we consider the chemical variations to be minor facies variations within a single lithostratigraphic unit and interpret this body to be equivalent to the Villa Rica Gneiss. Interference as a result bf second-generation folding (F28) is responsible for the separation of the gneiss in map view. Contact relationships between these two felsic bodies and the surrounding rocks, and examination of core from several mines and prospects in the Villa Rica area suggest that the Villa Rica Gneiss is interlayered with mafic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks. These factors are interpreted to indicate that the Villa Rica Gneiss, at least in part, is a metamorphosed dactic subvolcanic intrusive.
On the northwestern herder of the New Georgia Group, a sequence remarkably similar to the Mud Creek Formation was recognized by McConnell (1980a). This sequence includes the Canton Formation and the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation, of which the Gaits Ferry Gneiss is a member. Th~se units are exposed in the limbs and crest of an antiform much like the Mud Creek Formation (Fig. 15). The Gaits Ferry Gneiss, like the Villa Rica Gneiss, is exposed in the crest of the fold and is

Quartz

POST - METAMORPHIC
o Stone Moultail Granite
a Ben Hill Granite Boat Rock Granite P Palmetto Granite PA Panola Granite
SYN - METAMORPHIC D AusteU Gneiss
" Sand Hin Gneiss 6 Lithonia Gneiss Mulberry Rock Gneiss
PRE - METAMORPHIC Villa Rica Gneiss A Acworth Gneiss
G Gaits Ferry Gneiss

Alkali

Plagio-

l

Feldspar'-'-~-__L__~---------'-.:....:....---------L-=--------~=---~clase

l

I

Figure 14.

Plots of modal analyses of felsic igneous rocks in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area, classification modified after Streckeisen (1976) modal diagram with quartz monzonite field added. Analyses after Grant and others (1980), Cofer (1958), Abrams (1983), Abrams and McConnell (1981a), Dooley (in Atkins and others, 1980a), Herrmann (1954), Sanders (unpublished data), and this report. !=Quartz-rich granitoids, 2=Alkali-feldspar granite, 3=Two-feldspar granite, 4=Quartz monzonite, 5=Granodiorite, 6=Quartz diorite, 7=Alkalifeldspar-quartz syenite, 8=Quartz syenite, 9~Quartz-rich monzonite, lO=Quartz monzodiorite, ll=Tonalite, 12=Alkali-feldspar syenite, 13=Syenite, 14=Monzonite, 16=Diorite.

26

EXPLANATION
(no stratigraphic order implied)

Canton Formation - graphitic phyllite, garnet-muscovite phyllite, metagraywacke, and sericite Quartzite.

D

Pumpkinvine Creek Formation - chlorite-hornblende amphibolite, hornblende-chlorite schist, quartzplagioclase gneiss, and banded iron formation (bill.

Galls Ferry Gneiss Member (metadacite) - biotitemuscovite-plagioclase gneiss and hornblendequartz-plagioclase gneiss.

lithologic contact, approximately located. Probable fault, approximately located. _____,. Axis of major fold.

N
5 MILES
~~---L--~--J_~
8 KILOMETERS
Figure 15. Geologic map of the Pumpkinvine Creek and Canton Formations.

characterized by low concentrations of K20 (Table 5). Although McConnell (1980a) recognized and mapped the Gaits Ferry, it was not formally designated. This report serves to formally name the Gaits Ferry Gneiss Member of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation for exposures near Gaits Ferry Landing on Lake Allatoona (Fig. 16). The Gaits Ferry Gneiss is a hornblende-quartz-plagioclase gneiss that shows distinct mesoscopic banding due to variation in hornblende content (Fig. 17). Hornblende gneiss is interlayered with a biotite-muscovite-plagioclase gneiss with 12 to 18 in. layers of hornblende gneiss and actinolite-chlorite schist (Crawford, 1976). Locally, the Gaits Ferry Gneiss contains ellipsoidal quartz phenocrysts and subhedral feldspar grains in a finegrained matrix. Gradationally above the Gaits Ferry Gneiss in the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation is fine- to medium-grained

amphibolite with interlayered garnet-quartz-albite gneiss, sericite phyllite and mylonite gneiss (McConnell, 1980a). Since McConnell's initial study, a discontinuous, but regionally mappable, banded iron' formation was recognized to be interlayered with amphibolite of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation. Whole-rock, trace element, and rare-earth element analyses from amphibolites of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation (Tables 6, 7 and 8, Fig. 18a-e) suggest that they were derived from tholeiitic, possibly ocean-ridge basalts (McConnell, 1980a). Relict volcanic textures within the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation (Hurst and Jones, 1973; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b) (Fig. 19) confirm that amphibolites are of volcanic origin. Structurally above the Pumpkinvine Formation is the Canton Formation. Bayley (1928) originally defined the Canton schist as being composed

Table 5. Chemical and normative analyses of the Gaits Ferry (GF), Villa Rica (VR), and Dallas (DA) Gneisses. (Oxides in weight percent)

SAMPLE NO. GF-1*

GF-2*

GF-3*

GF-4*

GF-5*

VR

DA

Si02 A1 20 3 Fe20 3 FeO
MgO
CaO
Na20 K20 Ti02 MnO

60.0

70.1

74.7

76.9

72.6

68.8

71.1

16.3

13.5

13.3

14.3

13.2

17.1

14.9

3.1

3.0

1.0

0.3

3.2

.7

2.0

4.2

1.9

1.5

0.7

1.8

1.3

3.5

1.4

0.8

0.3

0.7

.9

0.6

6.5

4.5

3.2

2.1

2.5

4.1

2.8

4.2

4.3

4.5

4.5

4.3

5.7

5.8

0.3

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.6

1.0

0.7

0.9

0.5

0.3

0.1

0.2

.4

0.3

0.1

0.1

0.0

0.0

_Q1._

. 0.0

0.0

TOTAL

99.1

99.4

99.3

99.7

99.2

100.0

98.2

CIPW NORMS

qz

15.14

33.91

39.82

45.57

38.66

20.99

co

.08

3.08

.93

or

1.77

.59

5.91

ab

35.54

36.39

38.08

38.08

36.39

48.23

an

24.74

17.24

15.88

10.42

12.40

18.12

ne

WO

3.14

2.12

1.07

en

2.03

1.70

.66

fs

.90

.18

.35

en

6.69

1.99

1.99

.75

1.74

1.65

fs

2.96

.19

1.43

.46

.52

.87

fo

fa

mt

4.49

4.35

1.45

1.16

4.64

1.04

il

1.71

.95

.57

.19

.38

.72

hm

pf

ru

ap

cc

TOTAL

99.11

99.40

99.30

99.71

99.21

99.61

*Analysis performed in the laboratory of the Georgia Geologic Survey; Roger Landrum, Analyst.

28.17 4.14
49.08 12.55
.17 .15 1.22
.04 1.99
.61 .02
98.14

28

bonaceous or graphitic, garnetiferous mica schist.

revfiY o)ffacpa~~endgtrhealtattehdesteogthaernGetriefaetreoruAs,tglarnaptahRitiecgisocnhaisltMs oacpcpurroojnelcyt

and )Ocaywacke.

Tthhaetsethienyteirnltaeyrefrin~guenritws iathndqtuhaerltozcitael

and metaoccurrence

::eJ.raphite schist suggest that the term Canton "schist" as

:!"an~e.dIbnythBisaryelepyor(t,19w2e8p) roispotoseo

restric~ive and should to redefme the Canton as

be the

Canton Formation including within the Formation other rock types and lithofacies equivalents. The Canton Formation is named for exposures near Canton in southeastern Cherokee County (Fig. 20). The Canton Formation crops out continuously on the southeastern limb of the major fold containing the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation and Gaits Ferry Gneiss (Fig. 15), but occurs only in fault slices along the northwestern limb, which is marked by the trace of the Allatoona fault.

2000 Fee t I
Atlanta acht Club
~,
..:~:.: ";, IBM: 859 "'!, :

N

BM

1

R I VER

.

Gaits Feuy 0 Land1ng

Q \.

Etowah

Yacht Club
~
a6t

0

Figure 16.

Type locality of the Gaits Ferry Gneiss Member of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation (U.S. Geological Survey, Allatoona Dam, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

Figure 17. Photograph of the Gaits Ferry Gneiss from the type locality. 29

Table 6. Chemical and normative analyses of amphibolites from the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation (after McConnell, 1980a). (Oxides in weight percent)

SAMPLE NO. AClOB

Si02 Al20 3 Fe20 3 FeO
MgO
GaO
N~O
K20 H20 Ti02 P20s MnO
Ce02
TOTAL

46.46 14.50 4.83 7.85 7.50 11.30 2.35 0.22
1.34 1.25 0.10 0.19
99.89

AC-10
49.86 14.50 5.14 8.70 7.20 6.90 3.80 0.12
1.68 1.30 0.30 0.22
99.72

104-1
48.64 15.50 4.00 8.05 7.80 8.62
3.28 0.25 1.36 2.00 O.Ql 0.22
99.73

CHE-240
47.50 17.50
5.11 7.59 7.20 7.06 3.28 0.25 1.92 1.60 0.10 0.24
99.35

CA-l
50.80 14.30 2.90 8.50 6.90
9.50 3.70 0.16 0.90 1.40 0.17 0.21 0.36
99.80

CA-4
46.60 12.30 2.30 8.20 7.50 13.40 2.80 0.08
1.50 1.00 0.12 0.23 4.00
100.03

CA-6
49.00 15.10 2.30 8.90 9.00
9.30 3.10 0.11 1.80 1.10 0.11 0.20
100.02

CA-10
48.60 15.20
3.10 7.50 8.60 11.10 2.60 O.lQ 1.40 0.96 0.10 0.19
99.45

CA-12
46.50 13.00 3.50 8.40 5.50 15.00
1.70 0.12 1.20 1.40 0.16 0.27 3.20
99.95

CA-14
46.90 15.30
1.80 8.40 8.40 10.10 3.30 0.15 2.20 0.87 0.10 0.21 2.20
99.93

qz co or ab an ne
WO
en fs en fs fo fa mt il hm pf ru ap cc
TOTAL

CIPWNORMS

0.710 0.262

0.184

5.661

1.301 19.907 28.397

0.711 32.245 22.215

1.481 27.830 26.904

0.778 29.131 26.153

0.947 31.371 21.982

0.473 23.686 20.751

0.650 26.226 26.956

0.594 22.122 29.672

0.709 14.392 27.500

0.887 27.943 26.510

11.303 18.699 8.723

4.237 17.982 10.020

6.643 14.596
6.450

8.008 12.534 5.646

9.123 15.107 9.927

8.202 18.673 11.930

7.705 12.166
7.055

10.457 15.598 7.268

10.717 13.705 10.729

3.783 10.329 6.365

7.011 2.377

7.473 2.476

3.422 1.666 5.815 3.809

4.117 2.044 6.313 3.269

1.480 1.071 4.213 2.664

3.334 1.899

7.178 4.588 3.334 2.089

4.161 2.137 4.520 1.833

5.077 2.660

7.432 5.047 2.612 1.653

0.237 98.666

0.713 98.334

0.024 98.640

0.456 0.046
98.494

0.403 0.820
99.110

0.284 9.094
98.510

0.260 98.209

0.238 98.600

0.379 7.281
98.811

0.237 5.007
97.806

Table 7. Partial trace element analyses of amphibolite of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation (in ppm).

SAMPLE NO. AC-lOB AC-10 104-1 GHE-240 CA-l CA-4

Cr

580 340

680

440

200

230

Ni

130

91

170

150

68

68

Analyses performed in the laboratories of the U.S. Geological Survey.

CA-6
420 120

CA-10
450 110

CA-12
110 56

CA-14
450 120

30

Table 8. Rare-earth element concentrations from amphibolites of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation (after McConnell, 1980a).

SAMPLE NO. AC-lOB

La

13.42

Ce

11.03

Nd

19.79

Sm

16.77

Eu

13.94

Gd

Tb

15.50

Ho

8.18

Tm

17.59

Yb

14.17

AC-10
15.90 18.90 19.25 21.39 17.31
19.67 10.78 26.56 18.67

104-1
25.46 12.76 29.01 26.19 19.76
25.66 12.44 21.43 13.74

CHE-240
26.86 21.16 27.58 25.76 19.68
20.21 10.84 22.51 14.64

CA-l
12.61 13.67 16.85 16.52 10.72 12.98
6.53 11.63

CA-4
9.27 9.28
11.71 10.88 8.84 16.28
5.66 7.23 12.50

CA-6
9.27 9.12 15.67 12.15 11.65 7.63 12.13 3.14 7.77 11.55

CA-10
8.97 8.30 10.50 10.33 11.35 7.23 12.77 5.46 6.43 11.20

CA-12
11.48 16.67 16.19 16.23 8.47 18.11
6.63 10.40

CA-14
8.42 8.11 10.50 10.33 11.01 10.44 10.85 5.57 6.00 10.95

100 90 80
70

.~ .~..\. '\.. \.

60

.............. l .
.. ...*'~ ..

50

.-~::~~---....

40

-~&' -~"

30

>~*"'"-__,'"- \.\.

20

UJ
~~l~i 10

. .

:r 9

0 8

7

6

5

4

2

LA CE

NO

SM EU GO TB

IONIC RADIUS

HO

TM YB

Figure 18a.

Rare-earth element data for the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation plotted against chondrites (after McConnell, 1980a). NASC= composite of North America shales (Haskin and others, 1968); PAC= para-amphibolite composite; and AVG=average of four samples of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation. Region between hatchured lines is the field for modern oceanic tholeiites (Bryan and others, 1976).

31

0.0
1.0
Ti0 2

Abyssal tholeiite field

0 0 0 0
0

0 '

o Pumpkinvine Creek Formation o Hillabee Chlorite Schist
(Tull and others, 1978)
(CJ

.....

0

'

(A)

' .....

FeO./MgO
Figure 18b. Discrimination of volcanic rock types based on Ti02 vs. FeO*/MgO (after Miyashiro, 1975). A= Calc-alkalic series; B =Calc-alkalic and tholeiitic series; and C =Tholeiitic series (after McConnell, 1980a).

000 400 300
200
Nippm

Abyssal tholeiite field

o Pumpkinvine Creek Formation
o Hillabee Chlorite Schist
(Tull and others, 1978)

\

100

\

90

\

BO 70 60

o):_\

Field of volcanic rocks of island arcs

active continental margins

oo

\

\

oa

\

0 0 00

\

30

\ 0

\
\

0 0 0

\ \ \

20

\

\

\

\

\ \

\

0

\

\

IOL-----~~--~~------~------'~---------------------

FeO./MgO

Figure 18c. Discrimination of volcanic rock series based on the Ni vs. FeO*/Mg) relationship (after Miyashiro and Shido, 1975; McConnell, 1980a).
32

1000

,-,

900

BOO

I '

700 600

II ' ' o

500

400

300

200

Cr ppm
100 90 80 70 60 50 40
30
20

0 0 0
0 0
0
I I
\ \
\

\

o Pumpkinvine Creek

\
\

Formation

\

\

o Hillabee Chlorite Schist

\

(Tull and others, 1978)

\

0

'' '' ' ' '

I I
IOL------,----~I -.------,3-------4r---------------------
FeQ'/MgQ

Figure 18d. Discrimination of volcanic rock series based on the Cr vs. FeO*/MgO relationship {after Miyashiro and Shido, 1975; McConnell, 1980a).

2.5

0 ~

2 .0 0

0"'
f=

0

D

0

1.5

0 0

D

~

D

D D

0
:I

D

0

0

1.0

0

0'

0.5

D

0
0 0 Pumpkinvine Creek Formation o Hillabee Greenstone <Tull and others, 1978)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Crppm

Figure 18e. Discrimination of ocean floor basalts (OFB) vs. low potassium tholeiites (LKT) on the basis of Cr vs. Ti02 (after Pearce, 1975; McConnell, 1980a).
33

Figure 19. Photograph of relict pillows in the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation at the type locality.

....
g:; :~;.::~: ::
.:........:.....:.:.-........:.:...c.m..-\.

.;
" "'\.tospital Wa ~ r
Ta nk
N
.

<ro :
Q:-0

2000 Feet C::. '~

~~_LL__ __ J I

~~ ~

' I

Figure 20.

Type locality of the Canton Formation (U.S. Geological Survey, Canton, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

Centrally located in the New Georgia Group outcrop area is a sequence of amphibolite, hornblende gneiss, garnetbiotite-muscovite schist, banded iron formation , and garnetchlorite schist termed the Univeter Formation (this report). The Univeter Formation was informally termed the Interstate formation by McConnell and Abrams (1982a, 1982b). This report serves to formally define the Univeter Formation for exposures at Univeter, southern Cherokee County (Fig. 21). The Univeter Formation is traceable from Dallas on the southwest, through the Dahlonega area, to at least as far northeast as Nacoochee in White County (Ken Gillon, 1982). The Univeter Formation is composed of hornblende-andesine gneiss (amphibolite/ hornblende gneiss) with an intervening thin, garnet-biotite-muscovite schist amphibole. Also present locally is a thin (less than 5 ft.) banded iron formation and coarsely garnetiferous chlorite schist(F ig. 22). The association of banded iron formation and chlorite schist with base and precious metal deposits in the Uni veter Formation wi ll be described in detail in a subsequent section. The hornblendeandesine gneiss in the Univeter Formation is interpreted to form two limbs of a fold . This unit is here termed the Lost Mountain Amphibolite Member of the Univeter Formation for exposures on Lost Mountain in western Cobb County (F ig. 23). The intervening schist member is termed the Rose Creek Schist Member for exposures near Rose Creek Church in southwestern Cherokee County (Fig. 24). A typical charac teristic of this member is the presence of biotite grains crossing the regional foliation in the rock (i.e., cross-biotite schist).
Although locally cut out by faulting, the Lost Mountain Amphibolite-Rose Creek Schist sequence is traceable for a distance of over 80 miles. This sequence also lies along a major tectonic boundary for most of its length. Northeast of Kennesaw (Plate I) the Univeter Formation is in contact with a high grade migmatitic terrain to the southeast (i.e., Sandy Springs

34

I

. N

0IL..IL.JI.....LI ..1LI .o..JI.o_o_ _.2_Jo-po Fee t ~/

Figure 21.

Type locality of the Univeter Formation (U.S. Geological Survey, Canton a nd South Canton , Georgia. 1:24.000 topographic quadrangles).

Figure 22. Photograph of t he ga rn et-c hlorite sc hi st (alter ation zone) south of the Little Bob mine.

Figure 23.

Type locality of the Lost Mountain Amphibolite Member of the Univeter Formation (U.S. Geological Survey, Lost Mountain, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

Figure 24.

Type locality of the Rose Creek Schist Member of the Univeter Formation (U.S. Geological Survey, Kennesaw , Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

35

Group), while in the Univeter Formation and rocks northwest of it no migmatization is apparent. The southeastern boundary of the Univetermarksamigmaticfrontand is interpreted as a fault. McConnell and Abrams (1982a) interpreted this fault as an extension of the Chattahoochee fault as modified from Hurst (1973) (Fig. 11).
The largest part of theNew Georgia Group is made up of an intermixed sequence of amphibolite, hornblende gneiss and felsic gneiss (Plate I). Within this intermixed sequence, several rock units are important with regard to both the igneous and economic history of this area. In regard to the intrusive/extrusive units, four are definable: Acworth Gneiss, Villa Rica Gneiss, Dallas gneiss, and Gaits Ferry Gneiss. All of these gneisses show the effects of metamorphism and deformation. The Acworth Gneiss occurs in eastern Paulding and western Cobb Counties (Plate I). The Acworth Gneiss is a medium-grained, biotite-quartz-plagioclase (An31) gneiss with accessory muscovite and epidote. No potassium feldspar is apparent (Table 9). Mafic xenoliths are found in the Acworth Gneiss which crops out in a complex faulted fold that now has the appearance of a teardrop (Plate I).
The Villa Rica, Gaits Ferry and Acworth Gneisses represent a large portion of the felsic rock in the New Georgia
Group. All are dacitic in composition and have interfingering relationships with the country rock. We interpret these gneisses to represent a period of dacitic volcanism in the New Georgia Group. In this interpretation, felsic rocks in and around Dallas (Dallas gneiss, Table 9) also are believed to be shallow intrusive rocks with apophyses into the country rocks rather than the result of partial melting of the country rock (i.e., migmatites).
One of the most distinctive and stratigraphically important lithologies within the northern Piedmont is banded iron formation. Banded iron formation is present throughout the outcrop belt of the New Georgia Group (Abrams and McConnell, 1982a, 1982b; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b), and was described in detail in the Villa Rica area (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). Banded iron formation forms a distinct stratigraphic marker horizon in an area where there are few, and, therefore, is a valuable aid in deciphering the deformational history of the northern Piedmont. In addition, it is apparent that iron formation has a distinct genetic relationship

to massive sulfide and gold deposits in this area (Abrams and McConnell, 1982b, 1982c; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). Banded iron .formation in the New Georgia Group occurs as relatively thin layers (1 to 6 ft.) of thinly banded magnetite quartzite intercalated with amphibolite. Banded iron formation also is present in both belts of the Sandy Springs Group where it occurs as thin layers (1 to 6 in.) in amphibolite of the basal units (Powers Ferry Formation and Dog River Formation) and as an approximately 6 ft. thick section (possibly repeated by folding) in carbonaceous schists interpreted to be Andy Mountain Formation. Estimating the exact number of different layers and individual thicknesses of units is made difficult by isoclinal folding and thickening of iron formation in hinges and thinning on the limbs of folds. Magnetite and/or specular hematite occur as distinct layers and disseminated grains in a matrix of quartz with accessory garnet and epidote. Individual layers of concentrated iron oxide vary in thickness from .1 to 3 in. The dominant facies of banded iron formation in western Georgia is an oxide facies composed of hematite, magnetite, various unidentified manganese oxides and quartz. Gradational with the oxide facies are aluminous and sulfide facies. An associated facies of iron formation is composed predominantly of epidote, garnet, and quartz with minor magnetite and biotite. Abrams and others (1981) reported that garnet makes up as much as 25 percent of the rock in this facies of iron formation. Sulfide facies iron formation is composed dominantly of pyrite and pyrrhotite interlayered with quartz.
Sandy Springs Group
The Sandy Springs Group originally was termed the Sandy Springs Sequence by Higgins (1966, 1968) and was redefined as the Sandy Springs Group by Higgins and McConnell (1978a, 1978b). In their reports, Higgins and McConnell indicated that rocks termed Andy Mountain Formation (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a) adjacent to the Austell Gneiss northwest of the Austell-Frolona antiform were equivalent, in part, to the Sandy Springs Group. This correlation was based primarily on lithologic similarity and preliminary mapping in the area by McConnell. In subsequent reports, McConnell and Costello (1980b) and Abrams and

Table 9. Modal analyses of felsic igneous rocks northwest of the Brevard fault zone.

Points Counted Quartz Plagioclase Microcline Biotite Muscovite Epidote Chlorite Garnet Amphibole Opaque
TOTAL

Mulberry Rock Gneiss (1020) 36% 38% 16%
9% 1%
tr
tr 100.00%

Villa Rica Gneiss
(Visual Estimate) 24% 60% 3% 4% 3% 5%
1%
100.00%

Acworth Gneiss (1031) 25% 50% 19% 2% 4%
100.00%

Gaits Ferry Gneiss (972) 32% 51.5%
2% 4% 2% 7.5% 1% 100.00%

Dallas Gneiss
(1311) 23% 63%
1% 7% 2% 3%
tr
2%
100.00%

36

McConnell (1981a) also considered these rocks as well as most rocks in the Austell-Frolona antiform to be equivalent to the Sandy Springs Group, but tempered this interpretation due to the still preliminary mapping in the area. The term Roosterville group was informally introduced to define these rocks present in the Austell-Frolona antiform (McConnell and Costello, 1980b). In this report, we consider rocks present in the Austell-Frolona antiform and conformably above the New Georgia Group as equivalent to the Sandy Springs Group and have abandoned the term Roosterville group. These rocks are now interpreted as a western belt of the Sandy Springs Group due to lithologic and stratigraphic similarities. The eastern belt of the Sandy Springs Group is that defined by Higgins and McConnell (1978a, 1978b). These units are separated by the Chattahoochee-Blairs Bridge fault system.
The Chattahoochee fault was originally defined by Hurst (1973) as marking the western contact of the Sandy Springs Group. In subsequent reports, McConnell and Abrams (1978, 1982a) redefined the trace of the Chattahoochee fault, but still recognized it as representing the western and northern boundary of the Sandy Springs Group (eastern belt) for most of its length (Plate I). From a point just north of Austell, northward and then northeastward through the northeastern part of Greater Atlanta Region (Plate I), rocks of the Sandy Springs Group are thrust over New Georgia Group rocks along the Chattahoochee fault (McConnell and Abrams, 1982a).

The outcrop pattern at Austell was interpreted to indicate that the Chattahoochee thrust plate was overridden by rocks on the Blairs Bridge thrust plate (McConnell and Abrams, 1978).
Sandy Springs Group (eastern belt). The Sandy Springs Group is the most areally extensive rock group in the northern Piedmont. In his report, Higgins (1966) indicated that the Sandy Springs sequence terminated at the Brevard fault zone. However, in recent years it has become apparent that Sandy Springs Group rocks occur on either side of the Brevard zone (Kline, 1980, 1981; McConnell, 1980b; McConnell and Abrams, 1982a). This interpretation is consistent with the observations of Crawford and Medlin (1974) to the southwest and Hatcher (1972, 1978b) .to the northeast.
As defined by Higgins and McConnell (1978a), the Sandy Springs Group consists of four formations (Table 10): Powers Ferry Formation, Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite, Factory Shoals Formation, and Rottenwood Creek Quartzite. Subsequent work in the type area of the Sandy Springs Group indicates that the Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite and Rottenwood Creek Quartzite are exposed parts of a single unit that is repeated by folding. Minor lithologic variations between the two units are attributable to facies changes within the unit. Therefore, the upper quartzite unit (Rottenwood Creek Quartzite) of the Sandy Springs Group is abandoned in this report and those rocks previously defined as Rottenwood Creek are correlated with the Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite.

Table 10. Correlation chart of the Sandy Springs Group, eastern and western belts.

Rocks in the Austell Rocks in the Austell- Sandy Springs Group Sandy Springs Group Sandy Springs Group

Frolona Antiform

Frolona antiform

(western belt)

(eastern belt)

Hurst (1973)

Crawford and Medlin (1974)

this paper

this paper

Higgins fnd McConnell 19781

Not defined

Not defined

Tallulah Falls Formation
Hatcher (19741
Not defined

"Sandy Springs sequence"
Crawford and Medlin (1974)
Mt. Olive Church (schist)

Bill Arp Formation Bill Arp Formation

Rottenwood Creek Quartzite

Quartzite-schist member and greywackeschist member (?)

Adamson quartzite

Wedowee Formation

Factory Shoals Formation

Backbone schist

Factory Shoals Formation

Garnet-aluminous- Anneewakee graphitic

schist member

schist-quartzite

Frolona formation

Andy Mountain Formation

Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite

Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite

Not defined

Sparks Reservoir (schist and gneiss)
Dry Creek Quartzite

Dog River Formation

Powers Ferry Formation

Powers Ferry Formation

Chapel Hill Church (gneiss and schist)

Greywacke-schistamphibolite member

Mt. Vernon Church graphitic schistquartzite

Mt. Vernon Church schist

37

The Powers Ferry Formation is the oldest unit in the Sandy Springs Group. The base of the Powers Ferry is not present in the eastern belt of the Sandy Springs Group, but the base of an equivalent unit (i.e., Dog River Formation?) in the western belt is exposed to the northwest where it is gradational with rocks of the New Georgia Group. In general, the Powers Ferry Formation is composed of intercalated gneiss, schist, and amphibolite. Biotite-quartz-plagioclase gneiss ("metagreywacke") occurs locally within the formation. Within the lower part of the Powers Ferry Formation, layered amphibolite is mappable for short distances. One such amphibolite layer was termed the Mableton Amphibolite Member by Higgins and McConnell (1978a).
Overlying the Powers Ferry Formation is the Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite. This quartzite was originally interpreted to unconformably overlie the Powers Ferry Formation (Higgins, 1966), but is now interpreted in this report to be gradational with the more siliceous members of the Powers Ferry (i.e., metagreywacke). The Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite, although locally absent due to nondeposition or tectonic thinning, is commonly exposed as a massive, white, yellowish, or bluish, sugary to vitreous quartzite containing accessory mica and elongate garnets. Locally, graded bedding is present; but transposition of original layering has limited the usefulness of this feature as a stratigraphic indicator. Interlayered with the above are feldspathic quartzite and muscovite schist.
Gradationally above the Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite is the Factory Shoals Formation (Higgins and McConnell, 1978a). The Factory Shoals Formation is composed predominantly of a light-gray, lustrous, garnet-biotite-oligoclase or muscovite-biotite-plagioclase metagraywacke that varies to a kyanite-quartz schist or staurolite-muscovitequartz schist. This schist unit grades laterally into a graphitemuscovite schist. An important characteristic of the Factory Shoals Formation is the almost complete lack of amphibolite.
Sandy Springs Group (western belt). Just to the northwest of the Chattahoochee fault is a major northeast-trending antiform termed the Austell-Frolona antiform. As originally defined by Medlin and Crawford (1973) and Crawford and Medlin (1974), the Austell-Frolonaantiform is traceable from near Roanoke, Alabama, to Austell, Georgia. Rocks in the Austell-Frolona antiform (Fig. 13) were previously correlated with the Wedowee Formation (Hurst, 1973) or termed Unit II (Crawford and Medlin, 1973). All of the above authors based their stratigraphic interpretations on the assumption of the occurrence of only one major folding event in the northern Piedmont. Wrapping of the regional foliation around the noses oflarge second-generation folds (i.e., Austell-Frolona antiform; Abrams and McConnell, 1981a) and the effect of multiple deformation on the stratigraphic sequence in this area were not recognized.
McConnell and Abrams (1982a) revised the stratigraphy of the northeastern part of the Austell-Frolona antiform. In general, rocks of the Austell-Frolona were divided into four formations: an unnamed lower unit(i.e., Dog River Formation of this report), Andy Mountain Formation, Bill Arp Formation and Austell Gneiss (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). In their report, Abrams and McConnell (1981a) interpreted the Austell-Frolona to represent an antiformal syncline. This

interpretation was based on similarities between the Sandy Springs Group and the rock sequence observed in the AustellFrolona antiform. The Sandy Springs Group, as already outlined, is composed of a basal gneiss-schist-amphibolite unit with significant amounts of amphibolite and banded iron formation in the lower part of the unit. This is overlain by a quartzite that, in turn, is overlain by a metagraywacke with little to no amphibolite but substantial amounts of graphitic phyllite. This sequence is very similar to the Dog River-Andy Mountain-Bill Arp sequence in the Austell-Frolona antiform.
Rocks lying gradationally above the Mud Creek Formation on the northwestern limb ofthe Austell-Frolona antiform herein are termed the Dog River Formation for exposures near and along Dog River in northeastern Douglas County (Fig. 25). The Dog River Formation is composed of an intercalated sequence of muscovite-biotite-quartz-feldspar gneiss (metagraywacke), garnet-muscovite schist, amphibolite and thin (1 to 3 in.) layers of banded iron formation. The presence of this banded iron formation and the lithologic similarity of this unit to upper parts of the underlying New Georgia Group suggest that the contact with the New Georgia Group is gradational and represents a gradual waning of volcanism in this area.

~ 1058
,..v~'G1-1
' Cem c.
\
;:. ~'
~ ;.<;-~ <-

Figure 25.

Type locality of the Dog River Formation of the Sandy Springs Group, western belt (US. Geological Survey, Villa Rica, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

38

Conformably above the Dog River Formation is the Andy Mountain Formation (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). Based on the stratigraphic succession observed in the Sandy Springs Group, eastern belt, rocks of the Andy Mountain Formation are interpreted to stratigraphically underlie rocks of the Bill Arp Formation, but, due to refolding, now structurally overlie them (Fig. 26). In the crestal portion of the Austell-Frolona antiform is a unit termed the Frolona formation by Crawford and Medlin (1974). They defined the Frolona formation as containing layered graphitic staurolite-kyanite-garnet-feldspar-quartz-mica schist, non-graphitic mica schist, feldspathic micaceous quartzite, clean quartzite and quartz-pebble conglomerate. The Andy Mountain Formation is composed of garnet-muscovite-quartz-schist staurolite, graphitic garnetmuscovite-quartz schist and clean, sugary quartzite. Abrams and McConnell (1981a) interpreted the Frolona and Andy Mountain Formations to be lithostratigraphic equivalents of each other and dropped the term Frolona formation. Rocks of the Andy Mountain Formation occur both in the crest of the

Austell-Frolona antiform (Plate I) and as a tectonically thinned unit on its northwestern limb (Plate I, Fig. 13). These two occurrences define the limbs of the antiformal syncline that is the Austell-Frolona fold (Fig. 26). Crawford and Medlin (1970) traced graphite-bearing rocks northwest of the Austell-Frolona antiform (Plate 1). These rocks are the continuation of the Andy Mountain Formation which occurs on the northwestern limb of the antiform. The outcrop pattern of the Andy Mountain Formation defines the limbs of a regional second-generation synform conjugate to the AustellFrolona. Mapping related to the Greater Atlanta Regional Map project has shown that rocks of the Dog River Formation trend around this fold and the stratigraphic sequence in this area is complete with respect to the sequence of units defined in the Sandy Springs Group, eastern belt. These units, with the New Georgia Group forming the core of this second-generation fold, define a major first-order nappe structure that was subsequently refolded by later deformational events (Fig. 27).

EXPLANATION
(arrang d in stratigraphic Ofdr)
8 AUSTEll GNEISS
SAND Y SPRI NGS GROUP (Western Belt)
D BILL ARP FORMATION
- ANDY MOUNTAIN FORMATION ~DOG RIVER FORMATION
NEW GEORGIA GROUP
EZJ MUD CREEK FORMATION c:J VILLA RIC A GNEISS (METADACITE) MEMBER

SC ALE 0 I 2 3 4 5 Miln

Figure 26. Cross section throqgh the Austell-Frolona antiform (modified from Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). See Figure 13 for trace of cross section.

-----

/

' / /

NW

MET AVOLCANIC ROCKS

" " '

NEW GEORGIA GROUP

' '

' ' ' '

/

''METASEDIMENTARY ROCKS __..--"'

---- ------/

METAVOLCANIC ROCKS NEW GEORGIA GROUP

8

Austell Gneiss (Of"lhogneiss)

Figure27. Diagrammatic cross section through the northern Piedmont.

39

Stratigraphically overlying the Andy Mountain Formation are rocks of the Bill Arp Formation. The Bill Arp Formation was introduced informally by Crawford and Medlin (1974) to refer to rocks that structurally underlie the Austell Gneiss and structurally overlie their Frolona formation. Abrams and McConnell (1981a) formalized the Bill Arp Formation in their revision of the stratigraphy in this area. Abrams and McConnell (1981a) indicated that rocks of Crawford and Medlin's (1974) Union Grove Church schist were petrographically indistinct from the Bill Arp Formation and , thus, included them within the Bill Arp. This portion of the Bill Arp Formation was interpreted as either a roof pendant of Bill Arp Formation within the metaigneous Austell Gneiss or the result of interference between F 1 and F 2 folds. The Bill Arp Formation consists dominantly of interlayered mica schists and metagraywacke. Rock types include garnet-biotite-muscovite-plagioclase-quartz schist, muscovite schist, quartz-muscovite-biotite schist, muscovite-biotite-quartzplagioclase schist and "metagraywacke" (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). Metamorphosed calcareous lenses, possible original limy lenses, locally occur as elongate structures parallel to the plane of foliation in the metagraywacke. These lenses have a concentrically zoned mineralogy with calcite and quartz as the dominant minerals (Sanders and others, 1979). The calc-silicate lenses are best observed in exposures on Interstate 20 just east of the intersection with Georgia Highway 5. The Bill Arp Formation was intruded semi-concordantly by the Austell Gneiss. Xenoliths of the Bill Arp Formation within the Austell Gneiss are common, but are best exposed in a road cut on the eastbound lane of Interstate 20, 1.25 mi. west of its junction with Highway 5 (Fig. 28). Many of the xenoliths are characterized by a hornfels texture that is not obscured by the regional metamorphic fabric (Fig. 29).
Unclassified stratigraphic units.. The Long Island Creek Gneiss (Higgins and McConnell, 1978a, 1978b) is separated from the Sandy Springs Group to the northwest and Brevard fault zone rocks to the southeast by faults (Higgins, 1966,

1968). The gneiss is composed of epidote, biotite, quartz and plagioclase with accessory sphene, hornblende and g~rnet

(Higgins and McConnell, 1978a, 1978b) and is typically coarse

grained with a mylonitic overprint present adjacent to th

faults (Higgins, 1966, 1968). The stratigraphic po ition ofthe
gneiss is unknown due to its fault relationship with surround~

ing lithologies. For this reason Higgins and McConnell (1978a,

1978b) excluded the Long Island Creek Gneiss from the actual

Brevard fault zone, but in earlier work by Higgin (1966

1968) the unit was included in the Brevard zone.

'

The Yellow Dirt Gneiss is also associated with the

Brevard fault zone. The Yellow Dirt Gneiss was originally

named by Crawford and Medlin (1974) for exposure of the

unit that they were able to map from Randolph County

Alabama, to Douglas County, Georgia. Higgins and McConneli

(1978a, 1978b) later formalized the name proposed by Craw-

ford and Medlin (1974). The Yellow Dirt Gneiss is a "fine-to

medium-grained, biotite-epidote-muscovite-quartz-plagio-

clase-microcline rock that has strong cataclastic mylonitic

textures" (Higgins and McConnell, 1978a, p. 54). Crawford

and Medlin (1974) found the effects of shearing to be variable

along the strike of the unit with deformation more severe in

Carroll County, Georgia. A similar textural variability was

noted by Abrams (1983) in Douglas County where the Yellow

Dirt Gneiss varies from a blastoporphyritic gneiss with

rotated microcline grains to a silicified and strongly sheared

mylonite. Higgins(1966, 1968) included portionsofthe Yellow

Dirt Gneiss in his Brevard zone mylonite gneiss unit, but

Crawford and Medlin (1974) suggested that the gneiss was

partofthe Sandy Springs Group. Higgins(1968) placed a fault

on the southeast side of his mylonite gneiss uni t while

Crawford and Medlin (1974) extended the Long Island fault of

Higgins (1968) to form the northwest boundary of the Yellow

Dirt Gneiss. The fault-bounded nature of the Yellow Dirt

Gneiss makes the stratigraphic position of this unit, like that of

the Long Island Gneiss, uncertain.

Figure 28. Xenoliths of Bill Arp Formation within Austell Gneiss, Interstate 20 west of Douglasville, Georgia. Photograph B is detail from center of photograph A.
40

Figure 29. Xenolith of Bill Arp Formation displaying hornfels texture.
Jlelional Correlations
Prior to revisions ofstratigraphy of the northern Piedmont presented in this report, rocks of the New GeorgiaGroupwere termed upper Ashland Group (Hurst, 1973) and the western belt of Sandy Springs Group rocks was considered to be a combination of the Wedowee Formation and lower part of the Ashland Group (Hurst, 1973). Reasons for abandoning the terms Ashland and Wedowee have been previously presented, but it is useful to review these terms because of the regional correlations that were previously suggested. Hurst (1973) proposed that rocks of the Ashland Group were equivalent to rocks of the Ashe Formation in North Carolina as defined by Rankin and others (1973). Wedowee Formation rocks, believed by Hurst (1973) to underlie the Ashland Group, had no apparent equivalent to the northeast. However, Hatcher and Butler (1979) have indicated that rocks of the Sandy Springs Group and its probable northeastern Georgia equivalent, Tallulah Falls Formation, are equivalent to Ashe Formation. Although Hurst (1973) suggested that part of what is now called Sandy Springs Group could be equivalent to part of the Ashland Group, he questioned the equivalence of the Sandy Springs and Tallulah Falls Formation. In this report, we agree with the interpretation expressed in Hatcher (1975) and Hatcher and Butler (1979) that the Sandy Springs Group, Tallulah Falls Formation and portions of the Ashe Formation are equivalent. New Georgia Group rocks are interpreted to lie conformably beneath rocks of the Sandy Springs Group in the Greater Atlanta Region. We speculate that they may represent lithostratigraphic equivalents to the amphibolitedominated portion of the Ashe near Jefferson, North Carolina (Rankin and others, 1973). While the apparent lack of felsic to intermediate volcanics in the Ashe Formation (Rankin and others,1973) casts doubt on such a correlation, metamorphosed felsic volcanic rocks are more easily erroneously classed as having sedimentary protoliths than are metamorphosed mafic volcanics. An alternative interpretation of the New Georgia Group equates it with the Mt. Rogers volcanics as described by Rankin and others (1973). Volcanic rocks of the Mt. Rogers

Formation are chemically bimodal like those present in the New Georgia Group, but Mt. Rogers lithologies are exposed only on the northwestern limb of the Blue Ridge anticlinorium (Rankin and others, 1973). New Georgia Group rocks do not occur along trend with Mt. Rogers Group rocks and, therefore, direct correlation between the two groups is not possible.
BREVARD FAULT ZONE
The Brevard fault zone is a distinct linear zone of ductile shearing that is traceable from the Coastal Plain onlap in Alabama, northeastward through Georgia, South Carolina and most of North Carolina (Hatcher, 197lb, 1978a; Hurst, 1973). Interpretations regarding the nature of movement and the extent of displacement along the Brevard fault zone are varied. Some workers have suggested that the Brevard zone represents a left-lateral strike-slip fault with a thrust component (Reed and others, 1970), while others have interpreted the Brevard to be a right-lateral strike-slip fault (Reed and Bryant, 1964) with a thrust component (Higgins, 1966). Hatcher (1971a, 1978a) interpreted the Brevard zone to be a reactivated backlimb thrust on the Blue Ridge thrust sheet and Burchfiel and Livingston (1967) have suggested that the Brevard is a linear root zone similar to alpine-type root zones. Many other interpretations have been proposed for the Brevard zone, but they are too numerous to list in this report. The reader is referred to several summary articles (Roper and Justus, 1973; Hatcher, 1978a) for a more complete listing of the various interpretations.
In the Greater Atlanta Region the Brevard fault zone separates the northern Piedmont from the southern Piedmont. The Brevard fault zone is bounded on the southeast by rocks of the Atlanta Group (Higgins and Atkins, 1981) and on the northwest by rocks of the Sandy Springs Group (Higgins and McConnell,1978a,1978b). Crawford and Medlin (1973)denoted the boundaries of the Brevard fault zone by the presence of a well-developed secondary foliation that they termed a "cataclastic foliation." This secondary foliation (S2) is axial-planar to second-generation folds (F2) and is present in the areas outside of the Brevard fault zone; therefore, the presence of a second foliation is not a criterion for inclusion in the Brevard zone in this report. Only those rocks that have undergone intense ductile shearing are included in the Brevard zone. Rocks present in the Brevard zone include protomylonite, mylonite, blastomylonite, button schist, and phyllonite. Occurring in association with the phyllonites are muscovite aggregates (Higgins, 1966) and zones of flattened and poikiloblastic garnets (Abrams, 1983). Textures indicative of late, local normal faulting are also recognized along the trace of the Brevard zone in this area.
The interpretation used in this report for at least the postmetamorphic history of the Brevard fault zone involves little vertical displacement along the Brevard in the Atlanta area. The lack of major vertical displacement is supported by the fact that equivalent lithologies and stratigraphic successions are observed to be present on opposite sides of the Brevard fault zone (Hatcher, 197lb, 1972, 1978b; Kline, 1980, 1981; this report). Also, if significant post-metamorphic vertical displacement had occurred along the Brevard fault zone, metamorphic grade on opposite sides of the Brevard wne should be substantially different. This is not the case in the Greater Atlanta Region.

41

Stratigraphic control is another aspect to the Brevard fault zone. Hatcher (1975, 1978a) indicated that the Brevard fault zone was stratigraphically controlled for at least part of its length and is bordered by several equivalent rock units (i.e., Heard group, Sandy Springs Group, Tallulah Falls Formation, Ashe Formation) for most of its length. In the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area, the stratigraphic distinction is not as clear as it is to the northeast. Although the Sandy Springs Group is present along the northwestern boundary of the Brevard zone in the Greater Atlanta Region, the absence of units defined as Chauga River Formation (Hatcher, 1969) south of Flowery Branch complicates the issue of stratigraphic control of the Brevard zone. In this area, rocks of the Sandy Springs Group occur on both sides of the Brevard fault zone (Kline, 1980, 1981). However, the Wolf Creek Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981), a unit composed of thinly laminated amphibolite interlayered with "button" schist, is lithologically and texturally similar to and in the same relative tectonic position as the Poor Mountain Formation in northeastern Georgia where the Poor Mountain Formation borders on the Alto Allochthon (Hatcher, 1978b). The Wolf Creek Formation may represent the lithostratigraphic equivalent of a portion of the Poor Mountain Formation and the stratigraphic association of the Brevard fault zone readily apparent to the northeast would be present at least as far southwest as Atlanta. A speculative extension of this correlation would be that the rocks exposed in theNewnan-Tucker synform may represent another allochthon resting on Poor Mountain Formation equivalents.
SOUTHERN PIEDMONT
In the recent past, the so-called "belt" terminology or geographic separation of rocks (i.e., northern and southern) was criticized for its ambiguity and in some cases its inapplicability (Crawford and Medlin, 1970; Medlin and Crawford, 1973; McConnell, 1980b). However, no suitable replacement was proposed to enable geographic placement of various rock sequences within the regional geologic framework. In the Atlanta area, rock sequences north of the Brevard fault zone were redefined by one set of workers (McConnell and Costello, 1980b; Abrams and McConnell, 1981a; McConnell and Abrams, 1982a, 1982b; this report), while south of the Brevard, another set of workers has redefined stratigraphic relationships (Atkins and Higgins, 1980; Higgins and Atkins, 1981). Although similar rocks and stratigraphic sequences exist on both sides of the Brevard zone, little effort has gone into relating the two areas. Thus, the geologic distinction between rocks on either side of the Brevard zone is more apparent than real.
Atlanta Group
Studies of stratigraphic relationships within that portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map southeast of the Brevard zone generally are limited to two reports (Atkins and Higgins, 1980; Higgins and Atkins, 1981). These reports define a stratigraphic succession of rocks (Atlanta Group, Fig. 11) that occurs in either a synformal anticline or a synformal syncline (Higgins and Atkins, 1981). Higgins and Atkins (1981) interpret this structure as a syncline, but indicate that the stratigraphic sequence they propose is inverted ifthe alternative hypothesis is correct. Many rock units defined by Higgins

and Atkins (1981) are lithologically similar to units defined northwest of the Brevard fault zone (Appendix A gives a brief description of all rock units in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map south of the Brevard fault zone). In the Atlanta area, Kline (1980, 1981) and McConnell (1980b) indicated that rocks of the Sandy Springs Group are present on both sides of the Brevard fault zone. This is consistent with observations farther northeast (Hatcher, 1978b), as well as those related to this report (Plate Ia). The recognition that similar rock sequences exist on both sides of the Brevard zone opens the way for a reinterpretation of stratigraphic relationships within Higgins and Atkins' (1981) Atlanta Group using age and structural relationships established north of the Brevard zone. Rocks northwest of the Brevard zone can serve as a guide for stratigraphic interpretation because ofthe nonconformable relationship between Grenville basement and Sandy Springs Group equivalent Tallulah Falls Formation in northeastern Georgia (Hatcher, 1974, 1977). Therefore, some indication of stratigraphic "up" is available northwest of the Brevard zone. Comparing mineralogical characteristics of some units in the Atlanta Group with those defined in the northern Piedmont also allows for the reinterpretation of the origin of several rock units defined by Higgins and Atkins (1981), in particular, the Intrenchment Creek Quartzite. The Intrenchment Creek Quartzite is defined as a spessartine-bearing quartzite (coticule rock) and mica schist unit that is composed locally of 15 to 30 percent spessartine garnet and 70 to 85 percent quartz (Higgins and Atkins, 1981). The chemical composition of this rock is attributed to be the result of "halmyrolytic alteration" of oceanic sediments associated with mafic volcanic rocks by Higgins and Atkins (1981, pg. 20). However, spessartinebearing quartzites are common in the predominantly volcanogenic New Georgia Group northwest of the Brevard zone and in volcanogenic sequences elsewhere (John Slack, personal commun., 1982). In the New Georgia Group spessartine quartzites are associated with banded iron formation. In addition, manganiferous quartzites are a facies of banded iron formation in the Draketown area and contain up to 53 percent manganese (Abrams and McConnell, unpublished data). We suggest that a more likely origin for the Intrenchment Creek Quartzite is derivation from exhalative processes and deposition as a siliceous chemical sediment within a volcanic terrain. The aluminous nature of the quartzite may suggest inclusion of a clay fraction (Abrams and McConnell, 1982b). The presence of garnet facies iron formation in association with mafic and felsic volcanics (i.e., Camp Creek and Big Cotton Indian Creek Formations; Higgins and Atkins, 1981) southeast of the Brevard fault zone is similar to relationships observed in the New Georgia Group northwest of the Brevard zone. The fact that similar stratigraphic sequences are present on both sides of the Brevard zone (Hatcher, 1972, 1978b; Crawford and Medlin, 1973; Kline, 1980, 1981; McConnell, 1980b) and that lithologic similarities exist between the New Georgia Group and the Intrenchment Creek Quartzite, Camp Creek Formation, Big Cotton Indian Creek sequence suggest that they formed in similar environments, possibly contemporaneously. If the above-mentioned stratigraphic sequences are coeval, a basis for reinterpreting the character of the Newnan-Tucker synform (Higgins and Atkins, 1981) exists. In this report, the Camp Creek Formation, Big Cotton Indian Creek Formation and Intrenchment Creek Quartzite

42

are interpreted as the oldest units in the Atlanta Group (analogous to the New Georgia Group northwest of the Brevard fault zone) and the Newnan-Tucker synform, therefore, is a synformal anticline with stratigraphically younger units occurring on limbs of the structure (Plate 1). Sandy Springs Group rocks and their probable equivalents! in the Atlanta Group (Table 11, Plate lb) are present on the limbs of the synform and stratigraphically overlie New Georgia Group equivalents (Plate 1).
We also suggest that the relationship of Snellville Formation rocks to the Lithonia Gneiss is more likely a fault than an unconformity as previously suggested by Atkins and Higgins (1980). Atkins and Higgins (1980) interpreted this contact as an unconformity, but also gave evidence for characterizing this contact as a fault. This bulletin favors the latter interpretation of this contact primarily because of evidence cited by Atkins and Higgins (1980). Also, the "unconformity" interpretation requires a second Paleozoic metamorphic event for which, in the Greater Atlanta Region, there is a lack of strong evidence. However, due to a lack of detailed mapping in the area by the authors of this bulletin, the contact is expressed as a stratigraphic contact on Plate I.
Outside of the area mapped by Higgins and Atkins (1981) little to no data are available for compilation. Information that does exist is in the form of open-file maps. Other areas (i.e., the easternmost part of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map) where no detailed data are available for compilation are left blank
1 Lithologic descriptions of rocks in theWolf Creek Formation. Norcross Gneiss and. in part, the Promised Land Formation (Atkins and Higgins, 1980) resemble lithologies in the New Georgia Group and may represent New Georgia equivalents. This correlation would require thatothermembersofthe Atlanta Group be part of an allochthonous sheet resting on the Wolf Creek Formation, etc. as was previously proposed in the Brevard Fault Zone section.

(Plate 1). Open-file mapping of Crawford and Medlin (Georgia Geologic Survey, 1976) was used in the southwesternmost portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map.
Regional Correlations
The similarity between rock units and stratigraphic sequences across the Brevard fault zone was previously discussed in this and previous reports (Crawford and Medlin, 1973; Hatcher, 1972, 1978b). In general, correlatives of the Sandy Springs and New Georgia Groups are believed to occur southeast of the Brevard fault zone in rocks defined as Atlanta Group. We speculate that, although complicated by intrusion of late Paleozoic plutons and the presence of large migmatitic terranes such as the Lithonia Gneiss, rocks defined as Atlanta Group by Higgins and Atkins (1981) probably were deposited in similar environments and had similar provenance to the New Georgia and Sandy Springs Group rocks. Therefore, correlations made in a previous section for rocks of the New Georgia and Sandy Springs Groups (i.e., equivalent to Ashe Formation) may be applicable for rocks of the Atlanta Group.
PLUTONIC ROCKS
Post Grenville-age intrusive rocks generally are limited to the Piedmont portion of the Greater Atlanta Region, although numerous pegmatites occur in the Blue Ridge (Galpin, 1915). In the Greater Atlanta: Regional Map area, plutons of known Grenville and possibly older age are restricted to the Corbin Gneiss Complex east of a Cartersville in the Blue Ridge province (Fig. 4) where a 1,000-m.y.-old, coarse, megacrystic facies crosscuts a metasedimentary precursor (Costello, 1978; McConnell and Costello, 1984).

Table 11. Proposed correlation chart of northern and southern Piedmont lithologic units.

Atlanta Group modified after Higgins and Atkins, 1981

Snellville Formation Inman Yard Formation

Norris Lake Schist
Lanier Mountain Quartzite Member
Promised Land Formation

Norcross Gneiss

Wolf Creek Formation

Clairmont Formation

Senoia Formation

Wahoo Creek Formation

Stonewall Formation

Clarkston Formation

Fairburn Member Tar Creek Member

Big Cotton Indian Formation

Intrenchment Creek Quartzite

Camp Creek Formation

Sandy Springs and New Georgia Groups this paper
Factory Shoals Formation Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite
Powers Ferry Formation Undifferentiated
New Georgia Group

43

.

PaleozO.I~.~'tcr:t!

. e rocks in the Piedmont may be ;ories. These general categories

divided include

mmw_p1"_laoe0us0trtapiotm"nmnhstoercnr,rn~pp~amhrnrel.dpcterede3vt)teeonpdhtoaaissnvtmet1h)oeeptcaPrcmeiumerodreremptdahomm.t.ncot.ttrhTspenth.mPoicttm.e,edxg2ma)ocpoftrn1eytt-hdsetooeufps'mtyahneleemdao,zseb0tt1uao.c-ft

the Brevard fault zone 365 m.y. ago by Dallmeyer (1975).

Abrams and McConnell (1981b) suggested that the age of peak

metamorphism in the northern Piedmont also is approximately

365 m .y. ago. An upper limit on the timing of metamorphism

in Georgia may be assumed to be 350 m.y. based on the age of

Elberton Granite (Whitney and Wenner, 1980). The three

main categories of plutons have distinct chemical signatures.

These signatures characterize the evolutionary changes which

this portion of the Appalachian orogen has undergone.

Premetamorphic Intrusives (Category 1)
Intrusive rocks in the Piedmont portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map that were emplaced prior to major metamorphic and deformational events often have their original character masked by these subsequent events. In particular, it is difficult to distinguish between a fine-grained metaplutonic rock and a metavolcanic rock due to obliteration of most igneous textures by subsequent recrystallization. However, several premetamorphic plutons are recognizable in this area. Most of the plutons of this category are in close proximity to extrusive rocks of similar composition. Because of this association we have termed these intrusive and extrusive rocks, intrusive-extrusive complexes. Other characteristics of plutons in this category are general concordance with regional trends, low potassium concentrations in felsic units and moderately high Ti02 concentrations in mafic units.
In the northern Piedmont, intrusive-extrusive complexes are recognized only in the New Georgia Group where they are associated with numerous volcanogenic massive sulfide and gold deposits (Abrams and others, 1981; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). Intrusions of this category also have been affected by all major episodes of penetrative deformation to have affected the Piedmont. The Villa Rica Gneiss, Laura Lake Mafic Complex, Acworth Gneiss, Kellogg Creek Mafic Complex and Gaits Ferry Gneiss are members of the preme~a morphic category north of the Brevard fault zone, whtle biotite-plagioclase gneisses in the Big Cotton Indian, Camp Creek, and possibly Promised Land Formations as well as the Norcross Gneiss may represent premetamorphic intrusive extrusive complexes south of the Brevard zone.
One of the characteristics of premetamorphic felsic to intermediate intrusive rocks in the New Georgia Group is the low concentration of potassium in these rocks. This characteristic is documented by major element analyses of the Gaits Ferry Gneiss, Villa Rica Gneiss and Dallas gneiss (Table 5; Fig. 30) and modal analyses of the Villa Rica, Dallas, Galts Ferry and Acworth Gneisses (Table 9; Fig. 14). At this stage, some consideration must be given to the fact that potassium, due to its high mobility during metamorphism, may have migrated out of the felsic gneisses of this category (James Tull, personal commun., 1983). However, we find no evidence for this migration and feel that it would be fortuitous for potassium migration to occur preferentially in one rock unit in the northern Piedmont (New Georgia Group) with respect to another (Austell Gneiss). While we believe that potassium,

sodium, aluminum, and magnesium alteration has affected many of the rocks in the New Georgia Group as seen in the coarse garnet-chlorite schists and coarse kyanite-quartz granofels, we interpret these as primary features formed largely by the hydrothermal plumbing system present when volcanic rocks of the New Georgia Group were being deposited.
Mafic intrusive complexes of category 1 in the northern Piedmont are the Laura Lake and Kellogg Creek Mafic Complexes. The Laura Lake and Kellogg Creek Complexes are apparently associated with mafic extrusives and with rocks of dacitic composition (i.e., Acworth Gneiss in association with the Kellogg Creek, see Plate I; and felsic components in the Laura Lake Complex).
The Laura Lake Mafic Complex is the largest intrusiveextrusive complex (approximately 80 sq. mi.) in the Piedmont portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map (Plate I). The term Laura Lake Mafic Complex was introduce(! informally by McConnell and Costello (1980b) to describe a large body of amphibolite, metagabbro and meta-ultramafic rocks in eastern Cobb and southern Cherokee Counties (Plate I). We propose to elevate the term to formal status. The Laura Lake Mafic Complex is named for exposures near Laura Lake in eastern Cobb County (Fig. 31).
The areal extent and mafic character of the Laura Lake Mafic Complex should result in a significant aeromagnetic signature; however, aeromagnetic maps currently available characterize the Laura Lake Complex as a series of elongate highs and lows (Higgins and Zietz, 1975). The composite mass of Laura Lake Complex is not distinguishable on aeromagnetic maps. This contrasts with iron formations associated with the Pumpkinvine Creek and Lost Mountain Formations (Higgins and Zietz, 1975) that form linear aeromagnetic highs in western Cobb County. Very high magnetic anomalies noted as Kennesaw Mountain by Higgins and Zietz (1975) probably are either an expression of iron formation known to be near this area or magnetite porphyroblasts present in t[te amphib~lite and leucocratic gneiss (Fig. 32). Although Higgins and Ztetz (1975) suggested that the gneiss at Kennesaw Mountain was allochthonous,lack of a significant aeromagnetic signature for the entire Laura Lake suggests that the complex is thin and probably rootless.
Chemically, the Laura Lake Complex bears some similarity to amphibolites in the New Georgia Group. The Laura Lake is separated from the outcrop belt of the New Georgia Group by a thin strip of Sandy Springs Group rocks. The outcrop pattern of the Laura Lake Complex suggests that it crosscuts stratigraphy in the Sandy Springs Group, particu larly in central Cobb County where the Laura Lake Complex lies structurally beneath the Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite at Sweat and Blackjack Mountains (Plate I). The aforementioned relationships suggest that the Laura Lake may have intruded rocks of the Sandy Springs Group. Due to lithologic similarities between the New Georgia Group and Laura Lake Complex, an alternative interpretation, which is favored by this report, is that the Laura Lake represents a slice of theNew Georgia Group that, along with the Sandy Springs Group, was thrust over units of the New Georgia Group along the Chattahoochee fault (Plate I). Local faulting along the eastern margin of the Laura Lake Complex cuts out portions of the Sandy Springs Group. Rock exposuresand(or)mapping are not extensive enough to conclusively prove one interpretation over another.

44

Quartz

POST - METAMORPHIC
Pametto Granite R Ben Hill Granite 0 Stone Mountain Granite SYN - METAMORPHIC 0 Austell Gneiss l!. Sand Hil Gneiss u Union City Complex PRE - METAMORPHIC Gaits Ferry Gneiss c Camp Creek Formation

Alkai

Plagio-

Feldspar L..!..:...__ L.2.-"-- ----__j'----'--2_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___,_,_,"---- -- - - -l..!.-"'------'Ciase

Figure 30.

Plot of normative analyses of felsic igneous rocks in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area, classification modified after Streckeisen (1976) modal diagram with quartz monzonite field added. Analyses after Grant and others (1980); Abrams (1983); this report. 1=Quartz-rich granitoids, 2=Aikali-feldspar granite, 3=Two-feldspar granite, 4=Quartz monzonite, 5=Granodiorite, 6=Quartz diorite, 7=Alkali-feldspar-quartz syenite. 8=Quartz syenite, 9=Quartz-rich monzonite, 10=Quartz monzodiorite, ll=Tonalite, 12=Alkali-feldspar syenite, 13=Syenite, 14=Monzonite, 15=Monzodiorite. 16=Diorite.

wpo ?I I I :opo

' (
Feet

5 9
N

>.r

1)'1(
-;-

/

'/ ,

... 4

,f.., .

., I : f:"

I'

I

./'"''10\

1_. ~,

..1

\
.\ .
-

Figure 3t

Type locality of the Laura Lake Mafic Complex Fig-ure 32. (U.S. Geological Survey, Kennesaw , Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).
45

Photograph of magnetite porphyroblasts in exposure of the Laura Lake Mafic Complex, Interstate 575 at Bells Ferry Road exit.

The Laura Lake Mafic Complex is composed predominantly ofmigmatitic garnet amphibolite with smaller amounts of clinopyroxene (relict, altering to amphibole)-bearing metagabbro, felsic gneiss, meta-ultramafic lithologies and banded iron formation. Magnetite occurs as medium to coarse grains in felsic members and in grains as large as ~ in. across as common porphyroblasts in amphibolite. Leucocratic neosome in the Laura Lake is composed of very coarse-grained amphibole-quartz~plagioclase (An32) rock. Amphiboles in the neosome were observed to reach 1Yz in. across (Fig. 33). A distinct and mappable unit of intermediate gneiss is present along the western margin of the Laura Lake Mafic Complex (Plate 1). This gneiss is locally quarried for aggregate near Kennesaw and has a quartz diorite composition (Sample 6, Table 12). Hurst(1952) informally termed this rock Kennesaw gneiss. This report proposes to formally designate the Kennesaw Gneiss Member of the Laura Lake Mafic Complex for exposures east of the town of Kennesaw (Fig. 34).
Another premetamorphic mafic complex is present west of the outcrop area of the Laura Lake Complex, in the New Georgia Group in southern Bartow, northeastern Paulding and northwestern Cobb Counties (Plate 1). McConnell and Costello (1980b) informally termed this unit the Kellogg Creek metagabbro. Crawford and Medlin (1970) described this rock as being sheared and concordant with the regional trend . Like the Laura Lake Complex, the Kellogg Creek is co~posed of garnet amphibolite, metagabbro and Jesser amounts of metaultramafic rocks. Although no direct evidence for an extrusive facies were observed, amphibolites associated with the metagabbro may possibly represent an extrusive component. The variety of rock types associated with the Kellogg Creek suggests that "gabbro" is not an appropriate term to describe this unit. In this report, therefore, the Kellogg Creek metagabbro is formally designated the Kellogg Creek Mafic Complex for exposures along Kellogg Creek in southern

Figure 33.

Photograph of coarse amphiboles in the Laura Lake Mafic Complex, Interstate 575 just east of Interstate 75.

Cherokee County (Fig. 35). Chemically, rocks of the Kellogg

Creek Complex are distinct from either the Laura Lake Mafic

Complex or other amphibolites in the New Georgia Group

(Table 12, samples labeled KC; Fig. 36). The gabbroic facies of

the Kellogg Creek generally is higher in aluminum and lower

in Ti may

0ha2 vt he aannoatshseorcmiaatefdic

rocks in this area (Fig. 36). While it extrusive facies , the Kellogg Creek

Complex may not be related to documented mafic volcanic

rocks in the New Georgia Group.

', ,

-',\. '

.::...

.. t. .. :

I.
oo
I

N
I

1 ~s

- - -/,

l('l't.~
j..\,.

'-.-I

-- /
;

u..tr

...

-,- ../. '

"??"""

/

0

"o.,.

,Q

.(

169

. :..

0
I I

- 1000 2000 Feet
I I ': I

-~

Figure 34. Type locality of the Kennesaw Gneiss Member of the Laura Lake Mafic Complex (U.S. Geological Survey, Kennesaw, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

46

-1/!nt,,,,,o
'.... !.rtf,,

~ ' 00L ELE'i 8 0.0

.....
.
f

1 \.."f;J
'

'

10

' 1000

: . ;_. ,,.. I(I.J..~

/ I I I I I I

/

J

t

Figure 35.

Type locality of the Kellogg Creek Mafic Complex (U.S. Geological Survey, Kennesaw, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

Figure 37 shows the compositional variation of the magmatic liquid in igneous rocks of the New Georgia Group. The trend given by advancing crystallization suggests that the intrusives of Category 1in the New Georgia Group most likely formed from a tholeiitic magma.
Pre- to Synmetamorphic Intrusives (Category 2)
Pre- to synmetamorphic intrusive rocks ofthe Piedmont, like those intrusives in the premetamorphic category, retain penetrative deformation fabrics associated with Paleozoic metamorphism. However, unlike those intrusives in category 1, pre- to synmetamorphic intrusives show no direct relationship to any extrusive rocks. While premetamorphic intrusiveextrusive complexes (category 1) show some characteristics common to Buddington's (1959) epizone, pre- to synmetamorphic intrusives show more characteristics of the mesozone (Buddington, 1959). Intrusives of category 2 are distinctly more potassic than category 1 intrusives and generally are peraluminous to meta-aluminous. The Austell, Sand Hill, and Mulberry Rock Gneisses are examples of pre- to synmetamorphic intrusives northwest of the Brevard fault zone while only the Union City Complex and possibly the Lithonia Gneiss fit category 2 characteristics southeast of the Brevard. Other examples both northwest and southeast of the Brevard zone no doubt exist, but, at this time are not defined. The Lithonia Gneiss is not considered further in this report because of its complex migmatitic character and the fact that it is believed, at least in part, to have originated by incipient melting of country rock (Grant and others, 1980).

Table 12. Chemical analyses of mafic to intermediate rocks of the northern Piedmont.

SAMPLE NO. LL1* LL2* LL3* LlA* LL5* LL6* LL7* LLS* LL9* LL10* LL11*

Si02 A120 3 Fe20 3 FeO MgO CaO
N~O
K20 Ti02 MnO
TOTAL
SAMPLE NO.

53.6 15.0 3.2 9.2
7.7 6.3 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.3
99.0
KC1

51.5 17.3 3.6
9.4 5.9 6.9 3.5 0.3 0.4 ...Q1__

48.0 21.7
4.8 7.1 4.5 9.1 2.2 0.4 1.1 __Q,g__

49.4 9.7 3.2 6.8 18.0 10.4 0.8 0.4 0.2 __Q,g__

99.1 99.1 99.1

KC2.. KC38" KC4"

48.8 18.4
3.1 7.3 8.4 10.2 1.6 0.4 0.5 __Q,g__
98.9
KC6"

61.2 17.7
3.5 2.2 2.7 5.9 3.5 1.4 0.5
...Q:L
98.7
KC7"

48.4 13.4 8.7 4.9 6.1 11.4 3.2
0.2 1.4
...Q:L
97.8
KC8"

51.6 52.3

17.0 16.5

7.4

5.0

5.8

7.4

4.6 4.2

6.9 8.1

4.6

3.4

0.2 0.2

1.2

1.1

0.0 __Q,g__

99.3 98.4

KC12.. KC12

53.0 15.4 4.7
8.6 4.9 7.5 2.8 0.1 0.9 __Q,g__
98.1
KC13

53.4 14.8 6.4 6.7 4.5 6 .6 4.5 0.1
1.1
...Q:L
98.2
KC14 KC15 KC16

KC17

Si02 A120 3 Fe 2 0~ FeO
MgO
CaO
N~O
K20 Ti02 MnO

46.00 46.00 47.00 46.00 50.50 47.00 46.00 50.00 45.8 41.8 56.1 49.5 51.2 51.9

26.20 22.50 19.90 19.90 17.50 22.50 22.50 16.30 17.4 16.7 11.6 11.0 11.5 18.2

2.95 3.40 4.10 4.10 7.40 4.20 3.75 9.60 4.1

5.7

2.8

2.3

2.4

3.1

7.6 12.7 5.8 7.4 7.6 7.2

4.60 5.62 7.10 7.60 7.40 5.90 6.00 4.40 7.9 8.7 10.8 14.2 14.6 6.4

14.00 14.00 15.00 15.00 11.00 15.50 16.20 11.00 14.1

9.6 10.7 11.5 10.5

9.1

1.65 1.65 1.48 1.45 2.80 1.05 1.35 3.00 1.2

1.6

0.8

0.8

0.2

1.4

0.19 0.11 0.13 0.13 0.40 0.13 0.11 0.23 0.3

0.3

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.9

0.13 0.18 0.24 0.20 0.28 0.20 0.15 0.73 0.3 1.9 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.6

O.Q7 0.08 O.Q7 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.12 0.2 0.2 _Q:.?_ 0.2 0.2 0.2

TOTAL

95.79 93.54 95.02 94.46 97.40 96.58 96.14 95.38 98.9 99.2 99.2 97.7 98.9 99.0

*Analyses performed in the laboratory of the Georgia Geologic Survey; Roger Landrum, Analyst. **After Wallace (1978) unpublished senior thesis.

47

20 .0

18.0

16.0

14 .0
0
Ol 12 .0 ~
10 .0

.

.

I

I

I

8 .0

6 .0

-.......

4.0

18.0 :o..

16.0
..
14.0

\
\
\
\ \

e;l
/

..

/ /

-.....c-;;.:c:.:'.o:_ /.. /

~

2.5

2 .0

0

N 1.5
0
1- 1.0

0.5

0

18.0

1 6 .0

14 .0

..--a

12.0

12 .0

*0 10.0 Q)
lL 8.0

..
.... ____ _9:

0 10.0 '._o
(1j
0 8.0

6 .0

6 .0

4 .0

4.0

2 .0

2 .0

0 27 .0

o~~~~~~~~~~~~--~--~--_J
40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58
Si02

25 .0

23.0
21.0
0 (")
19.0
N
<( 17 .0 \0
15.0

EXPLANATION

- O Kellogg Creek Mafic Complex

-- -6 Laura Lake Mafic Complex

.

- - o Pumpkinvine Creek Formation

13.0

--- Univeter Formation

0 i 11 .0

9 ~o 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 Si0 2

Figure 36.

Variation diagrams of mafic rocks of the New Georgia Group. Superimposed symbols (e.g.,) refer to superimposed points. FeO* = FeO + .9Fe20a.

Feo
Irvine and Baragar, 1971 Tholeiitic

*e Dalla s Gneiss Villa Rica Gneiss D. Laura Lake Mafic Complex
o Kellogg Creek Mafic Complex
D Pumpkinvine Creek Formation Lost Mountain Amphibolite
.a. Gaits Ferry Gneiss

0
8
Calc-alkaline
.a.

Na 2o K 20L---------------------------------------------------------------~ Mg0 Figure 37. (Na2 + K20), (FeO + .9Fe20 3), (MgO) plot showing the iron enrichment trend of metaigneous rocks of theNew Georgia Group.

y ~opQ 1 1 1

2opo Fee t

l'iaure 38.

Type locality of the Sand Hill Gneiss (U.S. Geological Survey. Villa Rica, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).

The best-defined member of pre- to synmetamorphic intrusive rocks is the Austell Gneiss in Douglas and southwestern Cobb Counties (Plate 1). Abrams (1983) described the Austell Gneiss as a fine- to coarse-grained blastoporphyritic to nonporphyritic gneiss composed of muscovite, biotite, oligoclase, quartz and microcline. The intrusive character of the Austell is well documented by exposures of xenoliths and hornfels textures along Interstate 20 west of Atlanta (Figs. 28 and 29). The Sand Hill Gneiss is compositionally similar to and is located just to the southwest of the outcrop area of the Austell Gneiss in eastern Carroll County (Fig. 11). This gneiss is herein formally termed the Sand Hill Gneiss for exposures near Sand Hill, eastern Carroll County (Fig. 38). Although the Sand Hill is texturally similar to the Austell, it contains greater amounts of muscovite, quartz and plagioclase and lesser amounts of microcline than the Austell. A third felsic gneiss defined in the northern Piedmont that fits the characteristics of the pre- to synmetamorphic category is the Mulberry Rock Gneiss. The Mulberry Rock Gneiss occurs in western Paulding County, at the Allatoona fault, the boundary between the Blue Ridge and northern Piedmont. The Mulberry Rock Gneiss is named here for exposures at Mulberry Rock, a prominent exposure of the Gneiss in western Paulding County

49

(Fig. 39). As the trace of the Allatoona fault is somewhat uncertain in this area, the Mulberry Rock Gneiss could lie in either Blue Ridge or Piedmont. If the former is correct, then the possibility exists that the Mulberry Rock could represent basement in this area. Data are limited on the Mulberry Rock Gneiss, but a single modal analysis shows the gneiss to be composed predominantly of muscovite, microcline, quartz, and plagioclase. Modal biotite is notably absent (Table 9). The gneiss is present in the core of a large fold that bends the regional northeast-southwest foliation to a north-south trend (Plate 1).
Common to all three intrusives(i.e., the Austell, Sand Hill and Mulberry Rock Gneisses) is that they are compositionally granite to quartz monzonites, lie in the crestal areas of regional folds (see next section), retain the regional foliation, and show distinctly elevated potassium concentrations relative to pre-metamorphic intrusives. Whole-rock chemical analyses of the Austell and Sand Hill Gneisses are presented in Tables 13 and 14. Plotted in relation to silica, other oxide concentrations show a distinct differentiation trend, notably for FeO*, MgO, CaO, and Ti02 (Fig. 40). Total alkalies remain relatively constant with respect to increasing silica content. The differentiation trend shown in Figure 40 is derived primarily from data on the Austell Gneiss. The fact that samples of the Sand Hill Gneiss plot along the same trend suggests that the Austell and Sand Hill might have a common parent. Also plotted on Figure 40 is a single whole-rock analysis from the Union City Complex (UC2 , Table 15). This sample of the Union City Complex plots on or near the AustellSand Hill trend. While not conclusive, this suggests that the Union City Complex, at least partially, may have a common parent with the Austell and Sand Hill.

Postmetamorphic Intrusives (Category 3)
Postmetamorphic intrusive rocks in the Greater Region can be divided into two subdivisions: those approximately 300 to 325 m.y. ago, and tho e approximately 180 to 230 m.y. ago. The older of the subdivisions of Category 3 is represented by large plutons such as the Stone Mountain and Palmetto t.r,,.,.;,,_ Intrusives of this older subdivision generally are limited to area southeast of the Brevard fault zone. The younger of two subdivisions of Category 3 is represented by Triassic diabase dikes. In the Greater Atlanta Region, d dikes occur predominately in the southern Piedmont, but least one small diabase dike is reported from eastern Cn~>-ru.- County (Lester and Allen, 1950). All intrusives in vateg,n.., lack evidence of penetrative deformation associated Paleozoic metamorphism, although, following peak morphism , ductile shearing along the Brevard zone affected two intrusives in this category (i.e., Palmetto and Hill Granites). Other than geologic mapping, little work done on intrusives of this category during this inv~;::;~g;u10a. However, published data as well as a small number of whole-rock analyses provide an opportunity to compare contrast rocks of the postmetamorphic category with the twt categories previously described.
The Stone Mountain Granite is the most comprehensivelJ studied rock unit in the Piedmont portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. Many investigations over the put thirty years (Herrmann, 1954; Wright, 1966; Whitney and others, 1976; Dallmeyer, 1978; Grant and others, 1980; and Whitney and Wenner, 1980) have studied chemical, textural, and mineralogical aspects of the Stone Mountain Granite.

128<
Mulberry Q Rock

N
t
h

. 12<6

1156

P1 ne Log Cern

?L. LI~IL.L;00..J..I_o_ _2...JOF Feet

Figure 39. Type locality of the Mulberry Rock Gneiss (U.S. Geological Survey, New Georgia, Georgia, 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle).
50

Table 13. Chemical and normative analyses of the Austell Gneiss. (Oxides in weight percent.)

Table 14. Chemical and normative analyses of the Sand Hill Gneiss. (Oxides in weight percent,)

SAMPLE NO.
Si02 A120 3 Fe20 3 FeO MgO CaO
N~O
K20 Ti02 MnO
TOTAL

--
18** 19** 20** 21** 22* 23* 24* 25* 26* 27* 28* 29* 30** 31* 32**
77.1 76.8 77.6 73.0 73.2 71.4 71.0 68.6 76.2 68.7 74.8 77.1 69.8 76.1 72.2 12.1 12.1 12.7 15.9 14.2 13.7 13.2 14.2 12.3 14.7 12.8 12.2 14.5 12.7 13.6 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.5 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.2 0.7 1.3 1.1 0.2 1.4 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.6 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.4 2.0 0.8 2.0 0.7 0.6 1.7 0.8 2.0 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.8 0.8 1.1 0.6 1.3 0.5 0.4 0.9 0.2 0.9 1.2 1.0 0.6 1.0 1.3 2.1 1.9 2.9 1.1 3.0 1.6 0.9 3.0 1.4 2.4 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.9 3.5 3.3 3.8 3.8 3.4 4.5 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.5 4.8 4.9 3.8 3.7 4.8 4.4 5.0 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.4 4.6 3.8 4.4 3.6
0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.1 6.6 0.2 0.4
_QJ _QJ_ 0.0 _QJ_ ...Q,Q_ JU_ JU_ JU_ _QJ_ JU_ JU_ ...Q,Q_ JU_ JU_ JU_
100.2 99.4 100.2 99.8 99.0 98.3 98.6 97.9 100.30 99.7 99.8 99.6 99.5 99.9 99.3

SAMPLE NO.
Si02 A1 20 3 Fe20 3 FeO MgO CaO Na20 K20 Ti02 MnO
TOTAL

33**
69.9 16.3 1.1 1.4 0.6 2.2 4.4 3.1 .05 __,QQ_
99.5

34**
73.1 13.7 0.4 1.4 0.6 1.2 3.2 4.7 0.3
_u_
98.7

35**
72.6 13.4 0.4
1.6 0.7 1.5 3.2 4.4 0.4
_u_
98.3

36**
68.8 14.1
1.0 2.1 1.0 2.2 3.3 4.6 0.6
_u_
97.8

CIPWNORMS

qz

co

or

.c.:....n.

ab an

ne

WO

en

fs en

fs fo

fa mt

il

hm pf

ru

ap

cc

TOTAL

35.92 35.66
28.36 28.96 28.77 29.62 3.58 2.83

39.90 32.91 31.54 30.27 25.58 25.34 1.41 3.66 1.12 .28 22.46 21.86 28.36 26.00 29.55 20.68 31.31 33.00 29.62 27.92 32.15 32.15 2.98 4.96 5.80 8.81 4.19 11.35

34.57 21.39 33.98 36.27 26.12 34.88 30.66
28.96 20.68 26.00 27.18 22.46 26.00 21.27 28.77 38.08 29.62 29.62 31.31 30.46 29.62 3.83 9.57 6.22 3.99 11.73 5.50 10.77

.99 .66 .39 .25 .61 .42 .35 .55

.50 1.00 .11 1.11

1.07 .67 .61 .38 .41 .26 .72 1.89 1.41 2.36 .36 .94 1.66

.46 1.75 .34 1.08 .08 .56 1.38 2.16 .32 1.12

.42 .o7 1.32 .36 .04 .82
.03 .42 .83 1.16 1.43
.82 .74

.60 .48 .21 .21 .41 .26 .29 2.03 .58 2.52

.29 .58 1.16 .72 .91 1.59 1.39 1.74 1.13 1.88 1.43 .29 2.03 .58 .72 .38 .19 .38 .57 .40 .72 .68 1.03 .46 1.18 .63 .27 1.14 .38 .76

.24 .36 .21 .45 .17 .50 .19 .09 - - - - - - - - - - ~ _1Q _]_ ~ ___,91} _]_ _]_ - - - - - 100.19 99.17 100.21 99.79 99.71 97.93 98.94 98.14 100.49100.04 99.75 99.90 99.52 99.89 99.30

*After Abrams, 1983 **Analyses done by H. Smith and J . Reid, in the laboratories of the U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.

qz co or ab an ne
WO
en fs en fs fo fa mt il hm pf ru ap cc
TOTAL

CIPWNORMS

26.45 1.71
18.32 37.23 10.91

32.16 1.17
27.77 27.08
5.95

1.49

1.49

.84

1.93

31.92 .65
26.00 27.08
7.44
1.74 2.13

24.96
27.18 27.92 10.07
.35
.18 .16 2.31 2.06

1.59

.58

.58

1.45

.95

.57

.76

1.14

99.49

98.70

98.30

97.78

**Analyses done by H. Smith and J. Reid, in the laboratories of the
U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.

2.0

0.8

1.5

'LS.--- ....... _

0
Cl 1.0 ~
0.5 0

\0~-------- ( 15"',,

- - - - - - - - - - - - - : : . : . : --- .... __

0

!::. ----q:--. __ _

. 0

-----a--- 0 ---...o4

' l3.8-..d-.:

---.. ........Q .......... ....... ...... .

. -- --

0.6
Q"'0.4 --.,---,---~-"'"'~-;
1-

0.2

------ -- 11-..4_ o

'cf-..... oo .6:
- -'R . ~ ----

0~--~--~--~--~--~--~----L---~--~---L--~

5 4
b 3
uQ.)
2

01

~

0

,....-----is',

'{!::. '-..... -------- ...... ____

',
'- , '"4'

a--...-.-..-.........::::::-:_.,._ t::.

-

'-.....

'-,
'' ,

"''a, o o ---- ---- --o, L'>)

... - ..0...____-Q_a_...-_.

10

[;]:> -- 6J .... (~ ..------ o--------- -----

8

a o

:

0 0

o@ --.,

0

--- ----- .......... .. ..............<:?..... .......... ...................................... ..9.:

::."::'::6

+
q,4

,/~.------------~--------3-~---------f-o

z(II

2

oL---~--~---L---L--~--~L---~--~--~--~--~

EXPLANATION ......<?....... Austell Gneiss

17
16 15
0 "'
:;:;": ' 14
13
12 11
68


o------------..

~ - - - --- ....,........ __ 0 ----:::~--- --~- -

::..-c,.)

/ /.~...

0

//

-..

-

- - - -t::0.___ 0

\o:.

o8

0

69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
Si02

5

rE----.._-....
\

...._-...

__

3~ :.:~~-: -;,~~;;:::::~<>-- 4

' '-,

~~ .....................

...... ____

0
(II

0 - '-"'--"cr'>_____ ----......

0 2

.... 0

0 o0 \
............ ..... '?.:

79

~L8---6~9--~7~0---7~1--~7L2---7~3~--7L4---7~5----7~6--~77~~7~8--~79

Si02

t::. Gaits Ferry - - - Gneiss
_o_ Sand Hill Gneiss
Union City Complex
Camp Creek Formation
4 Lithonia Gneiss

Figure40. Variation diagrams of premetamorphic and synmetamorphic rocks of the Greater Atlanta Region.

OM

.......

1

h "tbf ft

t

=a rr !< -

n

t



._....

=e

Table 15. Chemical and normative analyses of intrusive rocks of the southern Piedmont. (Oxides in weight percent)

SAMPLE NO. P1*

P2* BH1* UC2* CCI*

Si02 A1 20 3 Fe20 3 FeO
MgO
CaO
Na20 K 20 Ti02 MnO

68.1 65.3 68.9 72.1 72.1

16.5 17.5 17.0 15.2 16.4

1.0

1.1

0.6

0.3

0.2

1.0

2.0

1.7

1.2

1.1

0.5

0.9

0.7

0.3

0.3

1.3

2.6

1.7

1.7

1.7

4.0

4.6

3.3

4.7

4.6

6.1

5.2

5.0

3.4

2.9

0.5

0.3

0.5

0.2

0.3

0.1

0.1 _Q&_ 0.0

0.1

TOTAL

99.1

99.6

99.4

99.1

99.7

CIPWNORMS

qz

17.79 10.86 25.06 26.92 29.45

co

.95

3.07

.70 2.60

or

36.05 30.73 29.55 20.09 17.14

ab

33.85 38.92 27.92 39.77 38.92

an

6.45 11.74 8.43 8.43 8.43

ne

WO

.48

en

.23

fs

.23

en

1.25

2.01

1.74

.75

.75

fs

.37

2.21

1.80

1.63

1.55

fo

fa

mt

1.45 1.59

.87

.43

.29

il

.95

.57

.95

.38

.57

hm

pf

ru

ap

cc

TOTAL

99.11 99.57 99.39 99.10 99.70

*Analyses performed in the laboratory of the Georgia Geologic Survey; Roger Landrum, analyst.

Because of this interest in the Stone Mountain Granite, wholerock and trace element chemical data are abundant. Figure 41 shows plots of major oxides from analyses by Whitney and others (1976) and Grant and others (1980). Plots of silica versus other oxides show that the Stone Mountain Granite has a very restricted silica range in comparison to the Austell Gneiss and plots distinctly below the Austell trend for Ti02, CaO, MgO, and FeO*. Several analyses from other postmetamorphic plutons (Table 15) also are plotted in Figure 41, but the data are too sparse to draw any conclusions regarding their relation to the Stone Mountain Granite or other categories of intrusives.
The occurrence of diabase dikes in Georgia was first described in detail by Lester and Allen (1950). In their report, Lester and Allen (1950) indicate that diabase dikes strike

predominantly northwest-southeast and dip approximately 75 to 90 degrees to the east. Weigand and Ragland (1970) studied the chemical character of diabase dikes of the eastern U.S. and concluded that those dike's occurring in Georgia and Alabama (including those in the Greater Atlanta Region) are olivine tholeiites and low Ti02 quartz normative tholeiites. Somewhat later, Dooley (1977) isotopically dated several diabase dikes in Georgia using K-Ar methods. Dooley's work showed that many diabase dikes contain environmental excess 40Ar that was incorporated into the dikes during crystallization (Dooley, 1977). Diabase dikes are believed to have intruded rocks of the Georgia Piedmont in three distinct pulses (Dooley, 1977): the first approximately 228 m.y. ago, the second approximately 200 m.y. ago and the third approximately 180 m.y. ago.
Summary
Intrusive rocks in the Piedmont portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map outline an evolving orogen. Premetamorphic felsic and mafic extrusive-intrusive complexes of category 1 define a period of igneous activity during which syngenetic massive sulfide and gold deposits in the Dahlonega gold belt were formed. McConnell and Abrams (1982b) proposed that rocks of category 1 in the New Georgia Group represented a younger analog of "greenstone belts" characteristic of Archean terranes. Similarities between the New Georgia Group and the Abitibi greenstone belt of Canada were used as a basis for this correlation. These similarities include predominance of mafic over felsic volcanics; dacitic composition of felsic volcanics; chemical sediments (banded iron formation) located near the top of sequences that are possibly at the end of a volcanic cycle; bimodal volcanic chemistry; Cu-Zn dominated base-metal deposits; and the presence of subvolcanic plutons within the volcanic pile. Sangster (1980) has suggested that greenstone belts formed in areas of crustal tension. A similar tectonic setting for the New Georgia Group is supported by trace and rare-earth element analyses from mafic volcanic rocks in the New Georgia Group (Fig. 18a-e). New Georgia Group rocks, therefore, may have formed in either a back-arc or marginal basin tectonic setting (McConnell, 1980a; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). A similar tectonic setting also may be appropriate for rocks of the Big Cotton Indian, Camp Creek and Promised Land Formations and the Intrenchment Creek Quartzite (Atlanta Group) southeast of the Brevard fault zone.
As volcanism waned, the basin, floored by intrusiveextrusive complexes and subordinate sediments, was infilled by flysch facies greywackes, argillites and subordinate volcanic rocks of the Sandy Springs Group and its equivalents southeast of the Brevard zone (Plate I). During the mid- to late Paleozoic (approximately 365 m.y. ago), all rocks of the aforementioned succession underwent high-grade metamorphism. Just prior to or during the late Paleozoic metamorphic event, a second major intrusive event occurred. This episode of plutonism is most notably documented by the syntectonic Austell Gneiss (Abrams and McConnell, 1981b). Higher alkali contents than the premetamorphic plutons, deeper level of emplacement, and their intrusion in the crestal areas of folds (F1) suggest that they were intruded into a thickened, tectonically active crust.

53

2.5

2.0
0 1.5
-rCl 0.5 0
5
3 1- 6
0
Q)
u..

0 6

'.,.,.,..-- -- 0

..................

' , (

' , ............

. . . ..

' c~--- .

............ ...........

'

->::c~~~ ~--- - -- --.

'::: '

6

0 .8
0 .6
0"'
16 i= 0.4
0.2
0
12
'T6
0 8
~"' + 8
0 ~N 4

0

c:,(~
'

6----:--~"'::~~;_)

6
0
\...

- --........
--,..i
c-::.:~:::-_-_-======::::)

EXPLANATION _ o_ Stone Mountain
Granite
0 Ben Hill Granite
6 Palmetto Granite o Panola Granite - ...- .... Austell Gneiss

.

- - - Gaits Ferry

Gneiss

0

o L-~--~--~--~--J---~--L---L-~~~--~---L---L--~

&:

18

l c:.

11

0

6

16

- - Sand Hill Gneiss Union Cit y Complex Camp Creek Formation

.,

15
I

0

q. 14

:<(

13

12

-..:.... - _ , ...... - ;
/,
--~- :::.-:==~~/ .
.... . .-...

0
u<t!

6

r------.... \

__ ................

' -----
' , ---- {""-...... -

....'............,_

.......

,

-- ...... )!; ............ ...........)

0

Uthonia Gneiss

6
11

10~--~--~--~--~~--L---~--~--~--~~--L---~---L--~--~
65 66 61 68 69 10 11 12 13 74 75 76 71 18 19
'Si02

0ss 66 67 68 69 70 7 1

17 18 19

Figure 41. Variation diagrams of felsic igneous rocks in the Greater Atlanta Region.

,..

Following the peak of the metamorphism and deformation in the Piedmont, a third group of plutons was emplaced. Most of these plutons are approximately 300 m.y. old (Whitney and Wenner, 1980; Higgins and Atkins, 1981) and lack the penetrative fabric associated with regional metamorphism. Sinha and Zietz (1982) have proposed that intrusives in the postmetamorphic category used in this report are part of a Hercynian magmatic arc along the eastern margin of the Appalachian orogen. This magmatic arc formed over a western-dipping subduction zone.
Diabase dikes were intruded along tensional fractures during the initial stages of rifting along the continental margin of eastern North America (Weigand and Ragland, 1970). This stage of rifting began approximately 280 m.y. ago (Weigand and Ragland, 1970).
METAMORPHISM AND DEFORMATION
As with most other aspects of geology in the Greater Atlanta Region, previous workers limited their interpretations and discussions of deformation to a particular belt, e.g., northern Piedmont or southern Piedmont, but regional relations generally were not addressed. This report serves to combine data and interpretations from various geographic subdivisions in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map into a comprehensive interpretation of metamorphism and deformation. The only two prior attempts to describe metamorphism on a regional scale were by Smith and others (1969) and Hurst (1970); however, little detailed mapping was available at that time.
Metamorphism
At least two episodes of progressive regional metamorphism and one episode of localized retrogressive metamorphism are apparent in rocks of the Greater Atlanta Region. A late, localized zeolitic facies event also is recognized across most of the Piedmont(R.D. Hatcher, personal commun., 1983). Progressive regional metamorphic events occurred in Grenville and mid-Paleozoic time, and localized retrogressive metamorphism occurred along major fault zones in the mid- to late Paleozoic. Butler (1972) suggested that two major episodes of regional metamorphism occurred in the Paleozoic (i.e., Taconic and Acadian in age). Direct evidence for two major progressive metamorphic events is lacking in rocks of both the Greater Atlanta Region and Tallulah Falls Dome (Hatcher, 1974). Although Atkins and Higgins (1980) have proposed that two major metamorphic events affected rocks southeast of the Brevard fault zone in the Paleozoic, this interpretation was based largely on the interpretation of a major unconformity between the Lithonia Gneiss and Snellville Formation (Atkins and Higgins, 1980). However, O'Connor and others (1974) and Atkins and Higgins (1980) also present evidence that supports a fault solution for this contact. If the correct interpretation of this contact is that it is a fault, then evidence supporting a second progressive metamorphic event in the Paleozoic is significantly reduced. Until direct evidence for a second progressive metamorphic event in the Paleozoic is found in the Greater Atlanta Region, it is assumed that only a single event occurred.

Basement gneisses exposed in the Salem Church anticlinorium (i.e., Corbin Gneiss Complex) contain evidence of Grenville-age granulite facies metamorphism. Ferro-hypersthene and Mg-rich garnet-bearing facies of the Corbin Gneiss Complex (Martin, 1974; K. Gillon, written commun., 1980) are indicative of this granulite facies event. Precambrian rocks stratigraphically overlying the Corbin show no evidence of this event. Textures related to this metamorphism, for the most part, have a retrogressive metamorphic overprint produced by the Paleozoic metamorphic event, although some rocks do retain a marked discordance between the planar fabric present in the Corbin and the more dominant planar fabric in the cover rocks. Dallmeyer (1975) presented isotopic evidence supporting a Grenville age for the pre-Paleozoic metamorphic event. 40Arj39Ar ages of 702 and 735 m.y. from biotite concentrates of the coarse-grained phase of the Corbin were interpreted to represent cooling ages following Grenville metamorphism (Dallmeyer, 1975).
Paleozoic metamorphism affected rocks of the Corbin Gneiss Complex as well as most other rocks in the Greater Atlanta Region. Exact timing of this event is uncertain, but Dallmeyer (1978) concluded that peak metamorphism in the southern Piedmont southeast of the Brevard fault zone occurred approximately 365 m.y. ago. Abrams and McConnell (1981b) extrapolated Dallmeyer's (1978) data northwest of the Brevard zone and concluded that regional metamorphism in the northern Piedmont of Georgia occurred approximately 365 m.y. ago. Tull (1978) also recognized only one major Paleozoic event in the northern Piedmont of Alabama and inferred that peak metamorphism occurred there approximately 348 m.y. ago based on evidence derived by Wampler, Neathery and Bentley (1970). Based on Rb-Sr whole-rock ages from the northern Alabama Piedmont, Russell (1978) placed the peak of metamorphism at 360 to 380 m.y. ago. Thomas and others (1979) suggested that the major dynamothermal phase to affect the northern Piedmont of Alabama occurred during the Devonian.
Metamorphic isograds formed during Paleozoic metamorphism probably defined a Barrovian series increasing from the northwest to southeast prior to subsequent deformation. Late folding and faulting have deformed isograds and locally retrograded mineral assemblages. Figure 42 is a representation of isograds drawn on the first appearance of metamorphic index minerals in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. This diagram must be taken in the context that it is highly interpretive and that all rocks in the Greater Atlanta Region do not have the necessary bulk compositions to accurately reflect metamorphic grade. Smith (in Bentley and others, 1966) and Hurst (1970) reported that rocks of the lower Cambrian sequence just west and north of the Cartersville fault have undergone low-grade metamorphism and that there is a metamorphic break across the fault. Just east of the Cartersville fault, rocks of the Pinelog and Wilhite Formations are metamorphosed to chlorite grade. Although data are sparse, the pattern of isograds suggests that they were folded by the formation of the Salem Church anticlinorium (F2) (McConnell and Costello, 1984).
From the Cartersville fault metamorphic grade increases up to kyanite grade toward the axis of the Murphy synclinorium, but the core of the Murphy synclinorium contains lower grade rocks than the surrounding area. This relationship is similar to that observed in northern Georgia (Dallmeyer and

55

(
I
I
I
I

a Carrollton

I .:"
(/

/\

"" -'~'

>-;/'-,... .".-.._"

/
... / / /

'

'
I

'!I'-...._ '-. . _ ,

__ _1_.....,_'-'_"'' /

I

"-

- I' __1'__ ' \

1.,

\. ''-x

I

EXPLANATION

--fault ---- metamorphic isograd

-\ inferred isograd

c ...,_)

)\ ,/

,1 1~ o-L__ ___,_,o_ _---;'_J2o MiIleVs r,!

Figure 42. Generalized plot of post Grenville metamorphic isograds in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area.

others, 1978). The trace of the Allatoona fault and rocks of the New Georgia Group that lie just southeast of the fault in the Dahlonega trend form a distinct metamorphic "low" (Fig. 42) that is traceable northeastward along trend into the area of Helen, Georgia (K. Gillon, 1982). Rocks of the New Georgia Group in the Dahlonega trend in the Greater Atlanta Region are characterized by garnet-grade metamorphism, while rocks on either side of the Dahlonega trend (Fig. 11) are of kyanite or higher grade (Fig. 42). Kyanite does occur locally in the Canton Formation southeast of the Allatoona fault. McConnell (1980a) reported that biotite was altered to chlorite in some of the rocks in the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation just south of the Allatoona fault near Emerson. This suggests that the metamorphic low associated with the Allatoona fault may be, at least partially, caused by retrogression. The trace of the Chattahoochee fault (modified after Hurst, 1973) is present just southeast of the Dahlonega trend in the northeastern part of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map (Fig. 11). The Chattahoochee fault forms the boundary between rocks of the Sandy Springs Group to the southeast and New Georgia Group to the northwest and is a distinctly traceable tectonic boundary across the northern Piedmont of Georgia. The Chattahoochee fault is a migmatitic front with little to no anatectic melting apparent north of the fault and abundant pegmatites and aplites south of the fault. Metamorphic grade also increases across the Chattahoochee fault trace (Fig. 42}, from garnet on the northwest to kyanite to the southeast. Unrecrystallized mylonite locally occurs along the trace of the Chattahoochee fault and is interpreted to suggest that the Chattahoochee fault is a syn- to post-metamorphic (post-peak metamorphism) fault that displaces units of the Sandy Springs Group over the New Georgia Group.

Southeast of the Chattahoochee fault, metamorphic grade remains at kyanite with a few reported sillimanite occurrences except for localities where metamorphic mineral assemblages are retrogressed by late movements along the Brevard fault zone. Although the significance of the Brevard zone is debated by many authors, the fact that it is a zone of retrogressive metamorphism is widely accepted (Higgins, 1966; Hurst, 1970; Hatcher, 1975). In the Atlanta area Higgins (1966) reported that metamorphism of the Brevard zone is characterized by the presence of muscovite, quartz, biotite, epidote, chlorite and garnet. Hurst (1973), Crawford and Medlin (1973), and Kline (1981) report kyanite and staurolite occurrences in rocks of the Brevard zone.
Southeast of the Brevard fault zone metamorphic grade increases to sillimanite (Higgins, 1966). Sillimanite grade dominates throughout the southern Piedmont to the southeastern margin of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map.
Deformation
The style, intensity, and number of deformational events vary significantly across the area of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. While tracing individual fold events across major tectonic boundaries is possible, some fold events, particularly late events, are not present in all areas. In this report, major deformational and folding events are listed and described numerically in sequence of their occurrence. This numbering system, like stratigraphic names, can only be used with certainty in the area of its definition; the relationship with deformational events recognized in other areas must be displayed by use of a correlation chart for tectonic events

56

(Table 16). Geographic names used to describe fold generations south of the Brevard zone (Atkins and Higgins, 1980) are not employed in this bulletin.
The first deformational event (Table 17) recognized in the Greater Atlanta Region is premetamorphic faulting along the Allatoona fault zone. (Hatcher, 1978a; McConnell and Costello, 1980b; McConnell, 1980a). The Allatoona fault as used in this bulletin is a redefinition of the Allatoona fault as described by Hurst (1973). Hurst (1973) defined the Allatoona fault as separating Talladega belt rocks from "Ashland Group" rocks in Paulding County and Lower Cambrian sediments from "Ashland Group" rocks in Bartow County. McConnell and Costello (1980b) redefined the Allatoona fault as thrusting northern Piedmont rocks (Sandy Springs and New Georgia Groups in this report) over Blue Ridge rocks (Talladega beltOcoee Supergroup rocks). In this bulletin, the usage of the Allatoona fault follows that of McConnell and Costello (1980b). In the northeastern part of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, the Allatoona fault separates two distinct terranes. On the northwest are rocks of the Corbin Gneiss Complex, Ocoee Supergroup and Murphy belt group which lack: a significant volcanic component; any large post-Grenville age plutons; and significantly large mafic and ultramafic bodies. To the southeast of the Allatoona fault in this area, are rocks of the New Georgia and Sandy Springs Groups that are characterized by the presence oflarge amounts of metavolcanic rocks, Paleozoic plutons, and mafic and ultramafic rocks. The contact between these two rock sequences is sharp and is locally denoted by the absence of units and evidence of retrogressive metamorphic effects. In the western part of the Greater Atlanta Regional

Map, along the trend of the Allatoona fault, phyllites and metasandstones of the Talladega belt are in contact with units interpreted to be the upper portion of the Sandy Springs Group, western belt. The distinction between rocks of the Talladega belt and Sandy Springs Group in this area is not clear owing to the absenee of large amounts of mafic metavolcanics in the upper portion of the Sandy Springs Group. Also, there is no apparent retrogressive metamorphism associated with the contact. Therefore, the transition from Sandy Springs Group to Talladega belt rocks is not as abrupt as the transition from New Georgia Group to Ocoee Supergroup rocks observed to the northeast. In this regard, we have indicated on Figure 11 that the trace of the Allatoona fault through this area would most likely be along the Sandy Springs-Talladega belt boundary. However, an alternative interpretation would be that the Allatoona fault is not present in this area and rocks of the Talladega belt represent stratigraphic equivalents to rocks of the Sandy Springs Group.
As stated above, the Allatoona fault, at least in the northeastern part of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, separates two distinct geologic terranes. A similar relationship is observed in northeastern Georgia where the Hayesville fault (Hatcher and others, 1979; Hatcher and Odom, 1980) separates a dominantly volcanic, ultramafic, granite-bearing terrane on the southeast from a nonvolcanic, abundant basement-bearing terrane on the northwest. The Allatoona fault probably represents the southwestern extension of the Hayesville fault.
The most intense deformational event recognized in the Greater Atlanta Region is the second (D2, Table 17). Rocks of

Table 16. Correlation chart of fold events in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge.

Northeast Georgia (after Hatcher and Butler, 1979)
F 1 isoclinal recumbent EW-NE trend (S 1 rarely observed) F2 isoclinal recumbent EW-NE trend, dominantS-surface F 3 upright isoclinal to open, NE trend
F 4 crenulation cleavage, NE trend not recognized
F 5 upright, open NE trend
F 6 upright, open, NW trend

ARM area (this report, includes Blue Ridge and northern and southern Pied-
mont)
not recognized

Southern Piedmont (after Atkins and Higgins, 1980)
not recognized

F 1 isoclinal recumbent ENE trend, dominantS-surface. F2 upright isoclinal to open, NE trend
Fza upright, open, NE trend F 3 open to isoclinal, SW vergent,
SE trend not recognized
F 4 upright, open NW trend

Buck Branch generation
Klondike generation Elijah Mountain generation not recognized Scott Creek generation Tara generation

57

Table 17. Post-Grenville tectonic elements of the Greater Atlanta Region.

Generation Dl

Fold Style
not observed

Lineations

Generation

Type

D2 (F 1)

Isoclinal recum-

Lu.

Elongation

Q.ent; NE trend-

ing,NW

Lib

Intersection

vergence

(F2l

Tight, upright

L2

Intersection

to overturned;

NE trending,

NW vergence

(F 2a)

Tight, upright

L2a

Intersection

to overturned;

NNE trending,

NW vergence

D4

not observed

Ds (F3) D6 (F4)

Open, Upright to

L3

overturned; SE

trending, SW

vergence

Open, upright; NW trending

Intersection

Timing
Pre-metamorphic

Event Hayesville & Greenbrier faults.

Late Paleozoic (350-480 m.y.) Late Paleozoic (370 m.y.)

Regional metamorphism. Intrusion of Austell and Sand Hill Gneisses. Ductile shearing in basement gneisses and along Allatoona, Cartersville and Brevard faults. Retrograde metamorphism.

Late Paleozoic Salem Church anticlinorium, Austell(post-metamor- Frolona antiform, Newnan-Tucker synform. phi c)

Late Paleozoic Sand Hill antiform. (post-metamorphic)

Late Carboniferous
Hercynian(?)

Brittle faulting; emplacement of Blue Ridge thrust sheet.
Folds plane of Great Smoky fault.

(?)

the Blue Ridge and Piedmont portions of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map are affected by D2 which is characterized by isoclinal, recumbent, northeast-trending and northwest-vergent folds (F1). Regional progressive metamorphism was coeval with F 1 and is indicated by development of an axialplanar foliation (S1). Axial-planar foliation formed during D2 is the predominant S-surface present in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map and completely transposes earlier surfaces. Ductile shear zones in the Fort Mountain Gneiss, Corbin Gneiss Complex, and those associated with the Brevard fault zone are believed to have developed during this event, but after the peak of metamorphism as indicated by retrograde mineral assemblages. Russell (1976) indicates a 368 m.y. Rb-Sr whole-rock age for mylonites in the Grenville-aged Fort Mountain Gneiss which lies to the north of the Corbin Gneiss outside the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. Major ductile shearing along the Brevard zone was dated as last occurring approximately 356 m.y. ago by Odom and Fullagar (1973) and 387 m.y. ago by Bond and Fullagar (1974). From zircons analyzed from the Henderson Gneiss in North Carolina, Sinha and Glover (1978) derived ages of 440 m.y. and 360-390 m.y. for mylonitization and reactivation of the Brevard zone. As described in a previous section, the peak of metamorphism in the Piedmont near Atlanta is believed to have occurred approximately 365 m.y. ago (Dallmeyer, 1978). The near coincidence of the timing of ductile shearing and peak

metamorphism in this area and structural evidence given below suggest that the Brevard zone in the Atlanta area and shear zones in the Fort Mountain Gneiss and Corbin Gneiss Complex developed, at least in part, simultaneously with and possibly as a result of intense shearing and transposition along the axial zone of F 1 isoclines. Intrafolial folds in the Brevard zone have axes parallel to F 1 fold trends and F 1 axial-planes are aligned parallel to the mylonitic foliation. The above evidence supports a genetic relationship between the ductile shearing in the Brevard zone and the F 1 fold event. Roper and Dunn (1973) previously proposed a similar, albeit more complex, mechanism for the formation of mylonites in the Brevard zone in South Carolina.
A later, perhaps local episode of ductile shearing along the Brevard fault zone is suggested by textures present in the Palmetto and Ben Hill Granites. Both plutons are approximately 325 m.y. old (Higgins and Atkins, 1981) and contain a mylonitic fabric near the Brevard zone. This suggests that at least two stages of ductile shearing occurred after the peak of metamorphism (356 m.y. and 325 m.y.). Hatcher and Butler (1979) previously referred to this history of multiple movements along the Brevard zone to the northeast in North and South Carolina.
In the Piedmont and Blue Ridge, F 1 folds are large-scale recumbent isoclines. In the Blue Ridge, the axial zone of one recumbent anticline is occupied by the Corbin Gneiss Complex, while in the northern Piedmont the axial zone of another

58

recumbent anticline is occupied by rocks of theNew Georgia Group. The lower limb of the northern Piedmont recumbent anticline is interpreted to be exposed along the north side of the Austell-Frolona antiform (F2) (Figs. 26 and 27). The same limb is interpreted in this report to be exposed along the northwestern limb of the Carroll-Paulding synform (Fig. 3; modified after Crawford and Medlin, 1973) where rocks of the Sandy Springs Group are again exposed. Sandy Springs Group rocks east of the Chattahoochee fault are highly migmatized, while rocks of the Sandy Springs Group west of the Chattahoochee fault lack evidence of anatectic melting. In addition, in the southwestern part of the Sandy Springs outcrop area on the southeastern limb of the Austell-Frolona antiform (Plate I), Sandy Springs Group rocks (western belt) are in contact with Sandy Springs Group rocks (eastern belt) along the Blairs Bridge fault. The two relationships mentioned above are interpreted in this report to suggest that the eastern belt of Sandy Springs Group rocks representsthe limb of a tectonically lower nappe that was thrust over rocks of theNew Georgia Group along the Chattahoochee fault. Southeastof the Brevard fault zone, rocks of the Atlanta Group are interpreted to be exposed in the core of another recumbent anticline (F1). The Brevard zone, present between two recumbent anticlines, may represent a tightly compressed and sheared syncline (i.e., tectonic slide).
An important aspect of D2 deformation is its apparent absence in rocks of the Valley and Ridge west of the Cartersville fault. Isoclinal recumbent folds are present in rocks of the Blue Ridge just east of the Cartersville fault (Costello and McConnell, 1981), but nowhere are described in rocks of the Valley and Ridge; therefore, rocks west of the Cartersville fault seem to lack the pervasive deformation characteristic of rocks in the Blue Ridge. Deformation in Lower Cambrian rocks of the Chilhowee Group, Shady Dolomite, and Rome Formation is characterized by dominance of thrust faults over folds (Hull, 1920) and lack of pervasive deformation that is characteristic of rocks east of the Cartersville fault. Folds recognized in the Valley and Ridge closely resemble in style and orientation F 2 folds that are present in the Blue Ridge. Differences noted in the number of fold events on either side of the Cartersville fault are interpreted to suggest that the early F 1 fold event is not present in the Valley and Ridge and therefore, the presence of the Cartersville fault, in part, is justified by the absence of F 1 in the Valley and Ridge.
Deformation related to D3 is characterized by large, open to isoclinal, upright to overturned, northeast-trending folds (F2). Outcrop patterns in all geographic subdivisions of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map are controlled by folds of this generation. Northeast-trending folds in the Valley and Ridge as well as the Salem Church anticlinorium in the Blue Ridge, and the Austell-Frolona antiform, Carroll-Paulding synform (modified after Crawford and Medlin, 1973), Villa Rica antiform, and Newnan-Tucker synform (Fig. 3) in the Piedmont were formed during this event. Generally, folds of this generation (F2) are tight to isoclinal near the Brevard fault zone but open away from the Brevard. Axial-planar foliation is well developed only in the hinges ofF2 folds, and transposition of the S1surface is locally apparent. The AustellFrolona antiform is the best known structure related to F 2 folding. Based on stratigraphic relationships, the AustellFrolona antiform was interpreted to represent an antiformal

syncline (Fig. 26) by Abrams and McConnell (1981a). Older rocks of the New Georgia Group now structurally overlie younger rocks of the Sandy Springs Group along the northwestern limb of the Austell-Frolona antiform (Fig. 27).
Subsequent to the formation of the Austell-Frolona antiform, a series of open to tight, upright to overturned to the northwest, northeast-trending folds was generated (e.g., Sand Hill antiform, Fig. 3). Crawford and Medlin (1973) interpreted these folds to be digitations of the same generation offolds that formed the Austell-Frolona antiform and indicated that they are cylindrical. The Austell-Frolona antiform also is cylindrical (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a) and is oriented eastnortheast in contrast to the north-northeast trend of the later folds. Because both fold generations are cylindrical and have differing trends, they can not be of the same generation. We interpret those folds that lie along the northwestern limb of the Austell-Frolona to be representative of changes in the stress field during the latter stage of D3 deformation.
D4 deformation is characterized by brittle faulting present most notably along the Cartersville and Blue Ridge thrusts as well as the Brevard fault zone. Late movements along these fault zones, characterized by brittle deformation and a correspondingly shallow overburden, probably represent the last stages of northwest directed stress. Crawford (1977c) indicated that rocks as young as Mississippian in age were overthrust by rocks in the Cartersville thrust sheet. Timing of this stage of deformation must, therefore, be post-Early Mississippian.
Costello and others (1982) and Costello and McConnell (1983) suggested that the fault that separates late Precambrian Ocoee Supergroup rocks on the east from the Lower Cambrian sequence on the west may not represent the Great Smoky fault as it is defined in Tennessee (Neuman and Nelson, 1965). Numerous authors (Georgia Geologic Survey, 1976; Cressler and others, 1979; McConnell and Costello, 1980b; Reade and others, 1980) following the lead of Stose and Stose (1944) have extended the Great Smoky fault southward and connected it with the Cartersville fault in Georgia. In the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area, the Cartersville fault thrusts late Precambrian Ocoee Supergroup rocks over Lower Cambrian rocks. In Tennessee, the Miller Cove-Sylco Creek faults form a thrust relationship similar to the Cartersville fault (i.e., thrusting late Precambrian Ocoee Supergroup rocks over the Lower Cambrian and late Precambrian sequence); therefore, Costello and McConnell (1983) have proposed that the Cartersville fault is an extension of the Miller Cove-Sylco Creek faults and that the Great Smoky thrust sheet must lie farther to the west.
At least two other major faults formed during D4 traverse the area underlain by rocks of the Valley and Ridge in the Greater Atlanta Region. These are the Rome and Coosa faults. Hayes (1902) defined both the Rome and Coosa faults in his Rome folio. The Rome fault is the westernmost fault in the Greater Atlanta Regional Map and thrusts Conasauga Group over Mississippian Floyd Shale. Hayes (1902) noted that the Rome fault was folded during deformation subsequent to the emplacement of the thrust sheet. In the hanging wall of the Rome fault, rocks of the Conasauga Group are overthrust by rocks of the Coosa thrust sheet (Hayes, 1902). Hayes (1902) indicated that the Coosa thrust sheet was emplaced later than the Rome thrust sheet.

59

Subsequent to the emplacement of the Blue Ridge and Cartersville thrust sheets, southeast-trending, moderately tight, upright to overturned folds formed. These folds are recognized only in the northern part of the northern Piedmont, Blue Ridge and Valley and Ridge. Fairley (1965) recognized these folds in the Tate quadrangle while McConnell and Costello (1982a) described these folds and their effect on the trend of units in the Blue Ridge south and east of Emerson as well as their deformation of the plane of the Cartersville fault in that area. Folds of this generation may also be present southeast of the Brevard fault zone where O'Connor (1977) and Atkins and Higgins (1980) show southeast-trending folds that Atkins and Higgins (1980) termed Elijah Mountain folds (Table 16).
The last major compressive tectonic event recorded in rocks of the Greater Atlanta Region is characterized by gentle open warps that in the northern Piedmont have a northwest trend. Atkins and Higgins (1980) indicated that two late-stage warping events occurred in the southern Piedmont. In this report, these two late warp fold generations are grouped together into the F4 fold generations (Table 16).
ECONOMIC RESOURCES
Introduction
Many parts of the Greater Atlanta Region have been prospected and mined extensively in the past for commodities ranging from gold to sand. As the Greater Atlanta Regional Map encompasses portions of three major geologic provinces (i.e., Valley and Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont, Fig. 1), there is a wide variety of both commodities and host rocks within its boundaries. Host rocks range from the limestones and shales of the Valley and Ridge to granites and granite gneisses of the Piedmont.
Twenty-eight commodities were mined or prospected in the Greater Atlanta Region. Of these, only barite, ocher, sand, granite and granite gneisses (dimension stone and crushed), limestone, structural clays, and marble are still actively mined (Martin and Stafford, 1972; Kline and O'Connor, 1981). Appendix B presents a comprehensive list of mines and prospects (active and inactive, by commodity) within the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. This list was compiled from various sources listed at the end of Appendix B. A map delineating approximate locations for these mines and prospects also accompanies this report (Plate II).
Because host rocks vary from geologic province to province, commodities of each province are discussed separately. The Piedmont province is divided into two sections, northern and southern, at the Brevard fault zone. As the authors of this report mapped predominantly in the northern Piedmont, base metal and gold deposits of that area are discussed in greater detail than those in other areas of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map.
Valley and Ridge
The most extensively mined and prospected area within the Greater Atlanta Region is the Valley and Ridge Province,

with most of the activity centered on the Cartersville district. In the past, bauxite, barite, limonite, manganese, tripoli, ocher and umber, limestone, shale and clay, slate, and sand and gravel were mined or quarried for commercial use. Some of these commodities had limited workings; others were worked extensively for limited periods, while commodities such as barite, ocher, limestone, shale, clay, and sand and gravel are still worked today (Kline and O'Connor, 1981).
Limonite, ocher and umber, manganese, bauxite, and barite are, for the most part, secondary deposits (O'Neil and Wyndham, 1954). Miningofthesedepositshas been mostly by open-pit method. Secondary deposits of limonite, ocher, manganese, and barite occur in association with each other, commonly in the same cut(Hull and others, 1919). This type of deposit is largely confined to the Cartersville mining district and is associated with the Shady Dolomite, Knox Group, Rome Formation, Conasauga Formation, and Chilhowee Group (McCallie, 1900; Watson, 1906; Hull and others, 1919; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948).
BARITE
Barite deposits are largely confined to the Cartersville mining district (Plate Ila), although some occurrences are reported from western Bartow, eastern Floyd, and western Cherokee Counties. Barite has been mined in the Cartersville district since 1887 (Kesler, 1950). Primary barite occurs in veins within the Rome Formation and in veins and as fossil replacements in Shady Dolomite (Kesler, 1950). Barite is mined for use as a medium in drilling muds, in the production of barium chemicals and glass, or as a filler, pigment, or extender (Brobst, 1973). Ore varies from crystalline to granular barite (Hull, 1920) and is accompanied by or encloses sulfides (generally pyrite) (Kesler, 1950).
Barite deposits occur as several types: vein, replacement, breccia, residual, colluvial and alluvial. Of these, the residual, colluvial and alluvial deposits are the largest and best commercial deposits (Hull, 1920). Barite is found associated with the Rome Formation, Conasauga shale and limestone, Knox Group, Weisner Formation (Chilhowee Group), Shady Dolomite and at the Shady-Weisner contact(Hull, 1920; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Kesler, 1950). Hull (1920), Butts ~nd Gildersleeve (1948) and Chowns (1977) viewed the Shady Dolomite as the host for most of the important barite occurrences, whereas Kesler (1950) indicates that the main deposits of barite are found associated with the calcareous metashale of the Rome Formation. Reade and others (1980) indicate that dolostones of the Rome Formation are the main source of the barite. Stan Bearden (written commun., 1982) indicates that the host rock for barite is a light-grey dolostone which overlies ocherous clays. The reader is referred to the Valley and Ridge stratigraphy section of this report for a discussion of the Rome-Shady stratigraphic problem.
OCHER AND UMBER
Ocher and umber deposits are confined to a narrow, north-south trending belt adjacent to the west side of the Cartersville fault in Bartow County (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). The ochers of this area were used predominantly in the manufacture of linoleum and oil cloth, in addition to some use as a coloring agent (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Currently, the deposits are mined for use as a pigment in paint, in

60

concrete capping and in chemicals (Martin and Stafford, 1972). Mining of the ore began in 1877 (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948) and has continued on a small scale to the present. The ore consists of very fine-grained limonite and clay with some hematite (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Kesler, 1950). The ocher varies in color depending on amounts of intermixed clays, hematite, and limonite (Watson, 1906). The presence of as much as 5 percent disseminated manganese in some deposits also affects color and classifies the ore as umber, rather than ocher (Kesler, 1950).
Watson (1906) stated that the ocher was limited to the Weisner Formation (Chilhowee Group) where ocher occupies fracture zones and is associated with clays derived from the weathered Weisner. Hull (1920) stated that the commercial ocher deposits belong to the clays of the Shady Dolomite and Weisner Formation. In a conclusion similar to that of Hull (1920), Kesler (1950) stated that ocher deposits occur in weathered Shady Dolomite, conformable to the underlying Weisner. O'Neil and Wyndham (1954) suggested that the deposits were formed by hydration of hematite in the Shady. Bearden (1981) suggested that the ocher occurs as a primary stratiform deposit overlying the Chilhowee Group.
MANGANESE
The largest and most commercially important manganese deposits in Georgia are located within the Cartersville mining district in Bartow County. Other less productive manganese mining districts of Georgia lie outside the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map in Whitfield, Catoosa, northwest Polk and southwest Floyd Counties (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Manganese was first mined in Georgia in 1866 (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). The ore's most important use is as an alloy in the manufacture of steel (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948).
Manganese deposits in the Valley and Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map are secondary in origin (Hull and others, 1919; Kesler, 1950) and occur as residual, replacement, vein or detrital deposits (Hull and others, 1919). Kesler (1950) and O'Neill and Wyndham (1954) reported that no primary source for the manganese could be found. Manganese deposits take the form of nodules, pellets, powder, breccia, irregular masses or crystals (Hull and others, 1919). Kesler (1950) reported pyrolusite to be the dominant mineral with associated psilomelane and cryptomelane. Hull (1920) also reported the presence of manganite, whereas Butts and Gildersleeve (1948) report both manganite and braunite. Manganese is associated with limonite, ocher, and barite (Hull and others, 1919; Hull, 1920; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Kesler, 1950). The closest association is with the brown iron ore, limonite, where contacts between manganese ores and limonite ores are gradational (Hull and others, 1919; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Kesler, 1950). Pierce (1944) recognized the presence of cobalt associated with manganese deposits near Cartersville and Cedartown and, in his descriptions of the Gemes and Ward Mines, Pierce reported .5 to 1.3 percent cobalt from manganese ore.
Hull and others (1919) and Butts and Gildersleeve (1948) stated that ores of manganese were formed from residual clays derived from the decayed Shady Dolomite and Weisner Formation. O'Neil and Wyndham (1954) inferred a similar origin and found the ore to be located in residual clays

overlying the Weisner. Kesler (1950) placed the manganese ore zone in the residuum of the calcareous component of the Rome Formation, whereas Hull and others (1919) stated that the economic occurrences of manganese are only minor in the Rome Formation and Conasauga Group.
IRON ORE
Iron ores of the Valley and Ridge consist of two types, brown iron ores (limonite and goethite) and red iron ores (hematite) (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Hayes (1901) stated that brown iron ores were the most important of the two types of deposits. Deposits of brown iron ore were first mined prior to the Civil War, but production declined in the late 1800's. Mining operations increased during World War II (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948); however, there is no commercial production at the present.
The principal brown iron ore localities are within Bartow, Polk, and Floyd Counties, with the best commercial deposits in the Cartersville district in eastern Bartow County (McCallie, 1900; Lewiecki, 1949). Other less important iron ore areas are the Iron Hill and Linwood districts, also in Bartow County; the Fish Creek (Grady) and Aragon districts of Polk County; and the Silver Creek district (near Reesburg) of Floyd County (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948).
Both red and brown iron ores are secondary and occur as nodules, pebbles, "pots" (hollow concretions), boulders, or large (sometimes connected) masses in residual clays (McCallie, 1900; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Kesler, 1950). Ore generally occurs in association with manganese (McCallie, 1900; Hull, 1920). In deposits of Floyd County, McCallie (1900) also observed an association between iron ores and bauxite. Hayes and Eckel (1902), Kesler (1950), and O'Neil and Wyndham (1954) considered the source of the iron ores to be the weathering or oxidation of pyrite and iron carbonate (siderite); however, McCallie (1900) interpreted the origin of the brown iron ore to be due only to the oxidation of iron carbonate. Ores are commonly referred to as limonite, but Cook (1978a) considers goethite to be the main mineral constituent of the ore.
McCallie (1900) concluded that iron ores of the Greater Atlanta Region are associated with the Weisner Formation in Bartow County and that ore consisted chiefly of limonite, hematite, and siderite. Knox Group rocks were considered by McCallie (1900) to be the host for these ores in Polk and Floyd Counties. Kesler (1950) stated that the best commercial deposits of iron ore in the Cartersville district occurred in residuum of calcareous rocks of the Rome and Weisner Formations with smaller occurrences in the Shady Dolomite (associated with ocher and umber) and in fractured or brecciated Weisner. O'Neil and Wyndham (1954) saw a relationship similar to that of Kesler and suggested that iron ore formed from the weathering of pyrite and possibly siderite in the Weisner, Rome, and Shady. Butts and Gildersleeve (1948) stated that the iron ores are associated with residual clays of the Shady Dolomite, Newala Limestone, Weisner Formation, and Knox Dolomite. Hurst and Crawford (1970) noted the apparent coincidence of old iron-ore mines in the Shady, Knox, and Newala with geochemical anomalies for copper and zinc. They, like O'Neil and Wyndham (1954), indicated that the iron ore may represent a deeply weathered gossan, perhaps overlying a metalliferous sulfide deposit.

61

TRIPOLI
Tripoli was mined to a limited extent in Georgia until approximately 1936 by both open-cut and underground methods (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Its main use was as an abrasive, but tripoli was also used as a filler for paint, cement and rubber (Crickmay, 1937; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Within the area of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, tripoli deposits are located in Bartow, Floyd, and Polk Counties. The best occurrences are near Silver Creek in Floyd County (Crickmay, 1937; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Tripoli of Georgia is composed of fine-grained, nearly pure, chalcedonic quartz (Crickmay, 1937; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Butts and Gildersleeve (1948) suggested that Georgia tripoli is a residual deposit that results from weathering of siliceous limestone. Most deposits are associated with the Knox Dolomite, but smaller deposits are also associated with the Shady Dolomite in the Greater Atlanta Region and with the Bangor Limestone and Murphy Marble outside the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map (Crickmay, 1937; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948).
BAUXITE
Georgia bauxite is composed of hydrated alumina, principally as gibbsite (Cook, 1978a). Deposits are secondary and form in place by the weathering of aluminous minerals (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Associated with gibbsite are halloysite and kaolinite with minor amounts of iron and manganese (Watson, 1904; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). The ore occurs as pebble ore, pisolitic ore (spherical concretions), oolitic ore, vesicular ore, or amorphous ore within clay (Watson, 1904; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Color varies from white to red, depending on the amount of iron present (Watson, 1904; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948).
The largest deposits of bauxite occur in Bartow and Floyd Counties, with minor occurrences in Polk, Walker, Chattooga, and Gordon Counties (Watson, 1904; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Two of the three principal bauxite districts lie within the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. These are the Hermitage district in Floyd and Bartow Counties and Bobo district in Floyd and Polk Counties (Watson, 1904; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948).
Watson (1904), Lewiecki (1949), Butts and Gildersleeve (1948) and White and others (1966) agree that the ore is predominantly associated with the residual clays of the Knox Group. The deposits are not limited to a specific horizon, but occur throughout the Knox as "well-defined pockets" (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Deposits of bauxite in the Bobo district follow the trend of north-south faults between the Conasauga Group and Knox Group (Watson, 1904; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). White and others (1966) found a similar relationship between bauxite deposits and faults of the Hermitage district.
SHALE AND CLAY
Commercial clays in the area of the Valley and Ridge include those in shales in addition to those in residual, colluvial and alluvial clay deposits(Smith, 1931; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Deposits of clay are presently mined in several areas of the Valley and Ridge, including portions of Bartow, Floyd, and Polk Counties (Martin and Stafford, 1972; Kline and

O'Connor, 1981; O'Connor, in preparation). These deposits produce structural clays for the manufacture of sewer pipe, building and fire brick, decorative and roofing tile and earthenware (Smith, 1931; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; O'Connor, in preparation).
Veatch (1909) considered clays from the Floyd Shale, Rockmart Slate and Conasauga Group to be good for clay products. He also considered the clays of the Fort Payne Chert and Knox Group to be of sufficient quality for use as fire clays, but thought clays of the Rome Formation to be "stoney" and of no commercial value. At the time of Veatch's publication the area around Rome held the most actively mined deposits. Many other areas, including those in the Floyd Shale and Rome Formation, remained undeveloped. Veatch (1909) also reported production of brick at Cartersville, at Adairsville in the Conasauga Group, and at Rockmart where both portland cement and brick were manufactured from the Rockmart Slate. Butts and Gildersleeve (1948) stated that the most suitable shales for structural clay products are within the Rome Formation, Conasauga Group, Floyd Shale, Rockmart Slate and Red Mountain Formation. At present, clay production is from the Conasauga Group, at Adairsville (Bartow County) and south of Rome (Floyd County); and the Floyd Shale, west of Rome (Floyd County) (Martin and Stafford, 1972; Kline and O'Connor, 1981; O'Connor, in preparation).
Shales and clays of the Conasauga Group and Floyd Shale show considerable economic potential for brick and tile manufacture. These clays are characterized by an illitic clay mineralogy and show a good range of firing temperatures and colors (O'Connor, in preparation). Both the Conasauga and Floyd shales and clays occur extensively over large areas of northwest Georgia and are easily mined by conventional surface mining methods. The Floyd Shale is particularly desirable because it tends to have sufficient plasticity for easy molding of a variety of differently shaped ceramic bodies (O'Connor, in preparation). Further information on the ceramic firing characteristics of these and other clay and shale units in the Valley and Ridge is available in O'Connor (1983,in preparation).
SLATE
Slate is used as dimension stone, as roofing slate or granules, and as expanded lightweight aggregate. Deposits in the Greater Atlanta Region occur in Polk and Bartow Counties in the Rockmart and Fairmont belts of Butts and Gildersleeve (1948).
The Rockmart belt, underlain by the Rockmart Slate, lies parallel to the Cartersville fault and includes parts of Bartow and Polk Counties (Shearer, 1918; Butts and Gildersleeve 1948). Slates of this area are fine grained and dark colorec (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Quarrying of the Rockmar1 Slate began in approximately 1850 (Butts and Gildersleeve 1948) and continues to the present. Most production today i: for use as lightweight aggregate (Martin and Stafford, 1972)
The Fairmont belt extends northward from White il Bartow County to Murray County outside the norther1 boundary of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map (Butts an1 Gildersleeve,1948). Commercial slates of this belt occur in th Conasauga Formation (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Slate of the Conasauga are green due to an abundance of chlorit

62

(Shearer, 1918; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). These slates were mined for roofing aggregate and tile (Martin and Stafford, 1972), but there is no production at present.
Shearer (1918) also recognized areas of the Rome Formation as a possible commercial roofing material. Slate in these areas is light in color, but beds are thin (Shearer, 1918).
LIMESTONE
Limestone of northwest Georgia, including dolomite, is used as aggregate for roads, in concrete, and for agricultural purposes. In the past, limestone was also used for dimension stone, for paving and in other construction (Maynard, 1910; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Martin and Stafford, 1972).
Limestone-bearing formations of the Greater Atlanta Region include the Shady Dolomite, Conasauga Group, Knox Group, Newala Limestone, Murfreesboro Limestone, Moccasin Limestone and Bangor Limestone (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). McLemore and Hurst (1970) noted the potential resources of limestones in the Knox Group, Conasauga Group, Newala Limestone and Shady Dolomite. Color, thickness of beds, and texture vary among the different formations. Maynard (1912) stated that the Knox Dolomite was suitable for road materials, concrete, and as a flux. He also stated that limestone of the Conasauga Formation was suitable as a flux and for lime.
Current production of limestone in the Greater Atlanta Region occurs in Bartow and Floyd Counties. In Bartow County, northwest and west of Cartersville, limestone from the Conasauga Formation until recently was used in the manufacture of cement (Bruce O'Connor, written commun., 1983). At the Rome quarry (Floyd County), limestone from the Floyd Shale is used as aggregate for construction purposes (Martin and Stafford, 1972; Kline and O'Connor, 1981).
MOLYBDENUM
Although the Shiloh Church molybdenum deposit is located immediately outside the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, the deposit occurs in lithologic units that extend into the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. For this reason molybdenum is included in the list of economic resources of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map.
Molybdenum ore occurs in the Newala limestone and Knox Group (Foss and others, 1983) near Cedartown. Host rock is a pyritic breccia which also contains anomalous amounts of Zn, Pb, As, and Ni (Foss and others, 1983). Foss and others (1983) interpret the deposit as Mississippi Valley type and suggest that the potential for other deposits in the Newala/Knox may be good.
SAND AND GRAVEL
Uses of sand and gravel are numerous. They include uses in concrete, as road gravel, as an abrasive, in glass manufacture, and as roofing or paving materials (Teas, 1921; Yeend, 1973).
In the Greater Atlanta Region most commercial sand and gravel deposits are found along streams (Teas, 1921; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). These deposits were worked in the past by excavation of flood plains and by dredging and pumping of stream beds (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948). Deposits were once worked in Bartow and Floyd Counties along the Etowah and Oostanaula Rivers (Teas, 1921; Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948).

Blue Ridge
Mined or prospected commodities of the Blue Ridge geologic province include feldspar, mica, talc, gold, barite, limonite, marble, kyanite, staurolite and sand. Of these, only sand (Kline and O'Connor, 1981) and marble (Robert Power, personal commun., 1982) are actively mined or quarried within the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map.
BARITE
Barite deposits of the Blue Ridge occur in the Corbin Gneiss Complex, Pinelog Formation, and Wilhite Formation (Hull, 1920). Hull (1920) suggested that the Corbin Gneiss was the source for the barite deposits of the Valley and Ridge because the body contains anomalous amounts of barium oxide. Barite occurs as a replacement of calcareous material in rocks overlying the Corbin (Pinelog and Wilhite Formations) (Hull, 1920) and was mined from the Corbin Gneiss at or near the Carbin/Wilhite contact. Barite ()re also is associated with brown iron ores as in the Valley and Ridge (Hull, 1920).
PEGMATITES
Pegmatites are composed of interlocking grains ofquartz, potassium feldspar and plagioclase with accessory mica (predominantly muscovite). Associated minerals are tourmaline, garnet, apatite and beryl (Furcron and Teague, 1943). Minerals of economic importance found in pegmatites are feldspar, for use in enamels, glazes and china; muscovite; and beryl. Of these, only muscovite and beryl were mined within the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. Mining was by open-cut method (Galpin, 1915). No active mining of pegmatites is being conducted in the Blue Ridge area of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map at present.
Muscovite makes up as much as 30 percent of the pegmatite in some instances (Galpin, 1915). Both sheet and ground mica are economically important: sheet mica is used as an insulating, dielectric or glazing material; ground mica is used in paints, wallpaper, rubber goods, drilling mud, and in roofing materials (Lesure, 1973). Sheet mica was mined from several localities within the Blue Ridge (Plate II; Galpin, 1915; Furcron and Teague, 1943). The best known of these localities is probably the Amphlett Mine in Cherokee County where muscovite sheets were reported to exceed 10 in. (Cook, 1978a).
Beryl is also reported from the Amphlett mine (Cook, 1978a) and several other localities within the Blue Ridge (Furcron, 1959). The mineral is a useful source of beryllium which is used in alloys, specifically, beryllium-copper alloys (Furcron, 1959). Production has ceased at present, but during and immediately after World War II beryl was mined extensively (Furcron, 1959; Cook, 1978a).
GRAPHITE
Graphite of the Wilhite Formation was mined and prospected in the Blue Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. The graphite is amorphous in form and is associated with pyrite in a "copper stained" rock that also contains trace amounts of gold (Hayes and Phalen, 1907, p. 464). Mining of graphite by open-pit methods occurred at two locations south of Emerson (Hayes and Phalen, 1907; Cook, 1978a). Samples of ore containing as much as 12 to 15 percent graphite were produced (Hayes and Phalen, 1907). Some uses

63

of graphite are as a polish or lubricant and as a source of carbon in steelmaking (Weis, 1973).
LIMONITE
Limonite of the Blue Ridge occurs as massive vesicular ore or as concretionary nodules. Most ores are associated with the Murphy Marble and the Mineral Bluff, Brasstown, and Nantahala Formations with larger ore bodies located at the contacts between schists and less permeable rocks (Haseltine, 1924). Most occurrences are within a belt known as the Chattahoochee Iron Lead (Haseltine, 1924) which begins north of the Etowah River near Canton, Georgia, and extends westward. Deposits were prospected mainly for local use (Haseltine, 1924). Limonite of the area probably results from weathering of pyrite or associated magnetite within the host rock (Haseltine, 1924).
MANGANESE
Manganese within the Blue Ridge occurs in sporadic deposits adjacent to the Cartersville fault. These deposits are no longer actively mined or prospected. See Valley and Ridge section for a discussion of other manganese deposits of the Greater Atlanta Region.
MARBLE
Actively quarried marble deposits of Georgia lie predominantly north of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map in the Murphy belt in Pickens County, Georgia. There the rock is quarried for both dimension stone and crushed marble as well as fillers and extenders.
Georgia marble of the Murphy Marble belt is well known as an excellent building, interior and monument stone. A variety of colors of marble exists due to the presence of minor accessory minerals (McCallie,l907). Bayley (1928), in a report on the Tate Quadrangle, discussed the various commercial varieties of dimension stone marble in Georgia.
Crushed marble is used as a filler, roofing aggregate, in paper coating, and in the manufacture of agricultural lime (McCallie, 1907; Martin and Stafford, 1972). In the Greater Atlanta Region, marble was formerly quarried from the County Line Quarry near the Bartow-Cherokee County line and, currently, crushed marble is produced from a new quarry located near Ball Ground in Cherokee County (W.R. Power, personal commun., 1982).
SAND AND GRAVEL
Sand is presently dredged from streams within southeastern Bartow County and north of Canton in Cherokee County. Actively worked deposits are located on Pumpkinvine Creek and the Etowah River (Kline and O'Connor, 1981). Deposits are used primarily as construction material (Martin and Stafford, 1972).
TALC AND CHLORITE
Talc and chlorite were prospected and mined at several locations within the Blue Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, but no substantial commercial deposits were found (Hopkins, 1914). Chlorite schist interlayered with sericite schist was mined as a talc substitute in southern Cherokee County and talc is reported west of Ball Ground (Hopkins, 1914). These minerals are used as fillers and lubricants (Martin and Stafford, 1972).

GOLD
Gold associated with quartz and pyrite has beeh mined and prospected in the Blue Ridge in Cherokee and Bartow Counties. The gold occurs in what was described as "narrow bands of siliceous material" (Jones, 1909, page 151). Mining was by both open-cut and underground methods (Yeates and others,1896; Jones,l909). A more detailed discussion of gold is. presented in the northern Piedmont minerals section.
ALUMINOSILICATES
Kyanite and staurolite are reported to occur locally in the area around Ball Ground (Furcron and Teague, 1945; Furcron, 1960a). No aluminosilicate deposits of commercial value are known in the Blue Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Region.
Piedmont
NORTHERN PIEDMONT
Mineral deposits of the northern Piedmont were mined and prospected extensively, with most activity taking place from the late 1800's to approximately 1920. Abandoned gold and sulfide mines and prospects dot the area underlain by rocks of the New Georgia Group (Fig. 11, Plates II and III). Deposits of gold, sulfides, magnetite and manganese were formed contemporaneously within volcanogenic rocks of this sequence and are related both genetically and spatially. For this reason, deposits of gold, sulfides, magnetite (associated with banded iron formation) and manganese are discussed together rather than as separate and distinct commodities. Gold, sulfides and related commodities also are discussed in greater detail than other commodities in the northern Piedmont due to recent detailed work by the authors. Other commodities previously mined or prospected in the northern Piedmont include mica-bearing pegmatites, titaniferous magnetite, corundum, asbestos, soapstone, talc, graphite, clay, sand and gravel, and aggregate. Presently, active workings include only sand and gravel, clay, and crushed stone.
Gold, Sulfides, Magnetite, and Manganese
The northern Piedmont contains numerous gold and sulfide deposits. Mining and prospecting began prior to the Civil War and continued to approximately 1920 (Table 18). Deposits of gold and disseminated and massive sulfides in this area previously were interpreted to have formed by hydrothermal or magmatic replacement (Jones, 1909; Shearer and Hull,1918; Hurst and Crawford,1970), but are now recognized to be syngenetic (Abrams and others, 1981; Abrams and McConnell, 1982a, 1982b; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). Ores present in the New Georgia Group are stratabound and lie predominantly within a sequence of metamorphosed mafic to felsic volcanic rocks interlayered with subordinate metasediments (Fig. 43). Volcanic cycles within the terrain are culminated by Algoma-type banded iron formation (BIF). now represented by its metamorphic equivalent, magnetite quartzite (Abrams and McConnell, 1982a, 1982b, 1982c; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). Iron formation was mined or prospected locally for iron and associated manganese in the early 1900's (Hull and others, 1919; Haseltine, 1924).

64

Table 18. Selected mines and prospects of western Georgia.

Mine or Prospect

Lithologies Present

I. Franklin-Creighton (Standard Pyrites)

amphibolite, mica shist. chlorite schist and banded iron formation

Group or Formation Univeter Formation

2. Cherokee
3. Sixes
4. Georgianna 5. Bell-Star
6. ~01 7. LaBelle 8. Rich (Canton)

amphibolite, mica. schist. and auriferous quartz "vein" (I)

Pumpkinvine Creek Formation

amphibolite, hornblende gneiss, mica schist. auriferous quartz "vein"(!)

Pumpkinvine Creek and Canton Formations

amphibolite. mica schist (I)

Pumpkinvine Creek Formation

hornblende gneiss. sericite and chlorite schists and banded iron formation

Univeter Formation

mica schist (3)

Univeter Formation

mica schist (I)

Canton Formation

hornblende schist, graphitic Pumpkinvine Creek and mica schist. chlorite schist (4) Canton Formations

9. Villa Rica
10. Pine Mountain (Stockmar)
II. Little Bob
12. Smith-McCandless

chlorite schist. hornblende gneiss. leucocratic gneiss. garnet biotite gneiss

Mud Creek Formation

muscovite-paragonite quartzite pyrite and kyanite

Mud Creek Formation

chlorite schist garnet. sericite quartzite and schist. garnet hornblende schist and gneiss

Univeter Formation

muscovite schist and chlorite New Georgia Group schist garnet

I:l. Tallapoosa

chlorite schist. garnet muscovite schist graphite. and dolomite

Dog River Formation

14. Swift (McCiarity)

chlorite-amphibole schist and felsic gneiss

New Georgia Group

15. Yorkville

mica schist, amphibolite. and Dog River Formation banded iron formation

16. Rush- Banks

chlorite-hornblende schist and Hericite schist (4)

Dog River Formation

17. Reeds Mountain

sericite quartzite. kyanite quartz sericite schist. chlorite schist. hornblende and biotite gneisses

New Georgia Group

18. Royal

chlorite-amphibole schist. mica schist and banded iron formation

Dog River Formation

19. Bonner

mica schist and felsic gneiss

(I) Yeates and others. 1896 (2) Pardee and Park. 1948 (3) Georp:ia Geologic Survey mineral files. unpublished (4) Shearer and Hull, 1918 (5) Hurst and Crawford. 1970 (6) Cook, 1970

*Numbers in parentheses refer to references listed above.

Dog River Formation

Ore Type or Grade (if available)
pyrite and gold: Au 6.5 oz./ton (!)*

Production (if available)
622,000 to 933.000 grams Au(2) 22.000 tons pyrite concentrates (4)

pyrite. pyrrhotite. gold and silver: Au 7.35 oz./ton: Ag .73 oz./ton (3)

Chalcopyrite, pyrite. gold: Cu 1.05'X.; Au .07 oz./ton (3)

gold .25 oz./ton (I)

gold . pyrite. chalcopyrite. sphalerite. and magnetite (4) Au 4.95 oz./ton (3)

gold 2.9 oz./ton (3)

gold .122 oz./ton (I)

pyrite. chalcopyrite. sphalerite. galena. gahnite: Zn 2.12~.: Pb.. 15% (4)

Chalcopyrite. sphalerite. pyrite and pyrrhotite

400.000 tons pyrite ore (6)

gold

chalcopyrite. sphalerite: pyrite. pyrrhotite and gahnite: Cu 6.48%: Zn 3.43% (4)

14.5Hi long tons for sulfuric acid from 1918 to 1919(5)

chalcopyrite. sphalerite pyrite and pyrrhotite: Cu .:l:l.6'X.; Zn .6-4.09% Ag..25-1.0 oz./ton: Au .04 oz./ton (4)
chalcopyrite. pyrite. gold. sphalerite: Cu .1-4.75'K,; Zn .5-5.1'X,; Au .45oz.fton: Ag 1.4 oz./ton (4)
pyrite. chalcopyrite. pyrrhotite and magnetite (4)
gold

7.450 tons at av. 3.5% Cu: 50.000 lbs. secondary ore (chalcocite) (4)

pyrite. pyrrhotite and chalcopyrite: Cu 3.85% (4)
p y r ite

:l car loads shipped (4)
4.000 tons pyrite concentrate (4)

p:old .:l2 oz./ton (:l)

gold .25 oz./ton

65

BASALT WITH INTERLAYERED SEDIMENTS

Figure 43.

Generalized model of the sequence of events in the Mud Creek and Pumpkinvine Creek Formations.

Rocks of the New Georgia Group form a volcanogenic sequence that extends from near Bremen on the west, northeastward through Canton where the outcrop belt narrows and continues northeastward outside the area of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map to form what is termed the "Dahlonega gold belt" (Fig. 11). New Georgia Group rocks are dominantly metavolcanic and metaplutonic rocks with interlayered metamorphosed volcaniclastics and sediments. These rocks grade stratigraphically upward, through decreasing abundance of metavolcanics, into the predominantly metasedimentary Sandy Springs Group (McConnell and Abrams, 1982a). This gradational zone marks the southeastern boundary of theNew Georgia Group. Due to multiple folding, rocks of the New Georgia Group lie within a major structure which is interpreted as an overturned or refolded syncline in which rocks of the older New Georgia Group were overturned to lie in a position structurally above younger rocks (Fig. 27).
Rocks of the northern Piedmont were subjected to at least one episode of regional metamorphism and at least four (McConnell and Costello, 1980b; Abrams and McConnell, 1981a), and in some places six or more (Hatcher, 1977), fold events. Metamorphism, as high as upper amphibolite facies, has recrystallized the entire sequence and rocks now consist predominantly of metamorphosed felsic (leucocratic biotite gneiss, quartz sericite schist) and mafic (amphibolite, hornblende gneiss) volcanic rocks. Second-generation folds dominate outcrop patterns (McConnell and Abrams, 1978; R.D. Hatcher, written commun., 1978; Abrams and McConnell, 1981a), and ores of sulfides and gold that were deformed and remobilized by metamorphism now lie predominantly within the crests and hinges of these second-generation folds. For this reason early mining efforts in rocks of theNew Georgia Group followed the axial traces of these folds. Later fold events lacked the intensity to remobilize ore, but interference between these folds and earlier fold events complicates outcrop patterns and definition of ore horizons (Abrams and others, 1981; Abrams and McConnell, 1982a, 1982b;McConnell and Abrams, 1982b).
Banded iron formation (BIF) forms a distinct, easily traceable unit that provides an excellent stratigraphic marker

in this multiply deformed terrain. The iron formation is associated genetically with ores of the area and overlies sulfide ore horizons (Abrams and others, 1981; Abrams and McConnell, 1982a, 1982b, 1982c; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). A spatial relationship also exists between the banded iron formation and mines and prospects of western Georgia (Plate III). This close relationship between the iron formation and ores makes the BIF a valuable tool for exploration and interpretation of premetamorphic relationships and structures in a highly deformed terrain. The iron formation is discontinuous, probably due to nondeposition or attenuation during folding. Banded iron formation is composed predominantly of fine to coarse, disseminated magnetite and layers of magnetite in a coarse to microcrystalline quartzite (oxide facies) (Fig. 12). This facies of iron formation also contains specular hematite, varying amounts of garnet and minor biotite. In addition to oxide facies, a sulfide and an aluminous facies were recognized. The sulfide facies is characterized by pyrite and pyrrhotite; the aluminous facies, by abundant sand-size garnets that locally constitute up to 25 percent of the rock. The aluminous zones possibly represent areas ofclay sedimentation or hydrothermally altered tuffaceous material within the volcano-sedimentary environment (G.O. Allard, personal commun., 1981; Abrams, 1983). The iron formation also locally contains graphite and in some zones is rich in manganese(Tables 19 and 20). Manganese-rich zones were prospected in the Draketown area of the northern Piedmont in the early 1900's (Watson, 1908; Hull and others, 1919). Manganese ores also represent volcanogenic deposits like those manganese deposits commonly found in volcanic sequences associated with basic to acidic volcanics and iron deposits (Roy, 1976).

Table 19.

Partial whole-rock analyses of banded iron formation from previous works. (Oxides in weight percent.)

Sample Number

Si02

Fe

MnF1

1** 2** 3** 4** 5** Hu 128* Hu 129* Hu 126A* Hu 129A* Crane 24* 6** Hu 122* Crane 25* S-364*** 7*** 8*** 9*** 10*** Crane 41*** Crane 37*

28.30 5.84 15.29 5.36 13.96 44.00 44.10 5.54 9.96 23.76 19.74 5.30 22.34 25.73 39.76
32.05 15.11 30.47 19.74

15.80 16.47 3.35
1.62 3.89 3.13 29.12 1.6(} 16.68 2.80 5.26 1.23 6.27 3.55 36.94 48.59 3.08
13.77 5.26

15.23 53.17 41.02 51.37 44.00 24 .8 5
5.55 49.74 15.83 32.08 33.57 53.70 32.58 28.35
0.15 4.52 24.25 46 .03 14.72 33.57

*Hull and others, 1919 **Georgia Geologic Survey mineral files (unpublished) ***Shearer and Hull 1918.

66

Table 20. Partial whole-rock analyses of banded iron formation (this report). (Oxides in weight percent)

SAMPLE NO.

Si02

Fe

A120 3

Mn Ti02

P203

MgO

CaO V(ppm)

VR-4* VR-14* VR-15* VR-20* VR-22A* VR-22* VR-27* N-190* N-191 * W-52* W-133* BHR-3 L. BOB-M DR-9 NG-8-8-0 BU-11-22-1 N-190 N-195 TE-129 VR-8 VR-9 VR-20

27.00 50.65

0.80 2.00 0.05

72.00 18.10

1.60 0.80 0.10

0.30

90.40

5.06

0.50 0.90 0.05

0.30

67.40 21.70

2.40 0.05 0.00

0.10

83.00 10.85

1.60 0.00 0.00

0.10

67.50 21.70

1.80 0.30 0.00

0.10

67.00

5.79 19.00 0.20 0.10

0.20

42.00 36.80

1.50 6.00 0.00

0.10

90.50

0.10

2.20 0.10 0.20

0.20

73.80 18.10

1.80 0.10 0.00

0.01

57.00 28.94

1.20 1.50 0.00

0.20

71.20 11.27

3.20 0.01 0.17

0.06

0.17

0.98

20

63.60 23.35

0.61

0.00 0.03

0.05

0.03

0.00

70

80.80 10.63

0.32

0.00 0.00

0.02

0.03

0.00

10

83.50

9.66

0.82

0.00 0.00

0.05

0.05

0.30

20

89.40

6.07

0.25

0.00 0.00

0.01

0.05

0.00

100

85.60

7.04

0.83 0.00 0.08

0.02

0.17

0.19

20

76.70 12.33

0.81

0.00 0.03

0.02

0.08

0.00

20

84.40

7.99

0.84

0.00 0.02

0.01

0.05

0.00

50

77.90

4.68

6.30 0.00 0.05

0.06

1.70

7.00

150

86.40010 7.07

0.42 0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

10

81.70 10.55

0.43 0.00 0.01

0.00

0.00

0.00

30

*Analyses done in the laboratory of the Georgia Geologic Survey: Roger Landrum, analyst. Iron and manganese calculated as elemental Fe and Mn.

These manganese-enriched zones have been metamorphosed to form manganese oxides (pyrolusite, psilomelane) (Watson, 1908, p. 189; Hull and others, 1919, p. 178 and 181) and spessartite.
Gold analyses of 55 banded iron formation samples yielded trace to .41 ppm gold (Table 21). Samples from near Burnt Hickory Ridge contain above average gold values, and McConnell and Abrams (1983) suggested that iron formation was a source for gold mined from several placer deposits of that area.
Early reports on gold deposits (Yeates and others, 1896; Jones, 1909) refer to the occurrence of two types of deposits in the northern Piedmont. These are placer and "vein" -type deposits. Jones (1909, p. 43) attributed the origin of gold deposits of the area to "deposition of the ores from heated waters coming from great depths." On the basis of stratigraphic relationships and the association of gold and sulfide deposits with banded iron formation and other rocks of volcanic affinity, both gold and sulfide deposits of the northern Piedmont are interpreted to be syngenetic and subsequently remobilized by metamorphism (Abrams and others, 1981; Abrams and McConnell, 1982a, 1982c; McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). Volcanogenic gold deposits occur within felsic volcanic rocks and interlayered volcanic/sedimentary rocks and as placer type deposits (Abrams and McConnell, 1982c). They occur predominantly in association with sulfide deposits within specific rock units in the New Georgia Group. These units are: the Pumpkinvine Creek and Canton Formations on the northeastern border of the New Georgia Group, the Univeter Formation in the center of the group, and the Mud

Table 21. Gold assays of banded iron formation.

SAMPLE NO.
BHR2 DR5 DR7 DRll NG7 NG!4 TE8 WI W2 DRS DR9 NGI NG8 NG9 TEll VR6 BREI VR9 CAl N TE!29 NG4 LB5 WC2 BUC2 BSl CT6

AU(PPM)
.24 .07 .07 .10 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .07 .10
.03
.07 .03 .07 .07 .20 .07 .41 .02 .03 .26 .01

SAMPLE NO.
NG2 NG5 NG6 BHRI DR! DR2 DR3 DR4 DR6 DRIO N3 Nl2 N!5 VR5 VR7 VR!6 TE12 RM BHR3 BUCll N190 N195
Y5 VR8 VR5 VR20 KM4 LR3

AU(PPM) .02 .22 .04 .10 .08 .06
.02 .05 .04
.02 .03
.02 .02 .02
.01
.02
.01 .01

67

Creek Formation near the southern boundary of the New Georgia Group (Fig. 11). Rocks of the Pumpkinvine, Canton and Univeter Formations extend northeastward outside the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map to form the "Dahlonega Gold Belt." In addition, some gold and base metal deposits are found on the northeastern border of the New Georgia Group in rocks interpreted to be lower Sandy Springs Group (western belt) (McConnell and Abrams, 1982b). Examples of these are the Tallapoosa sulfide mine and the Royal gold mine (Plate III, Table 18).
The Stockmar or Pine Mountain gold mine near Villa Rica is one of the best known gold mines of the area. At that location, gold was mined along the axes of second-generation folds from a pyritic paragonite muscovite quartzite kyanite. The quartzite lie within the boundaries of the Villa Rica Gneiss (metadacite)(Abrams and McConnell, 1981a). Saprolite residuum developed on other siliceous zones within the metadacite also were mined for gold by hydraulic means.
Sulfides occur as stratabound deposits within the same distinct stratigraphic and lithologic units as gold. As previously stated, these ores were remobilized to thicken in the hinges and attenuate along the limbs of second-generation folds. Ores are massive to disseminated and contain variable amounts of pyrite, chalcopyrite, and sphalerite. Pyrrhotite is also present, but is due, in part, to metamorphism of pyrite. Galena is present, but in minor amounts (Cook, 1970). Host rocks consist of mafic or interlayered felsic and mafic metavolcanic rocks. Sulfide deposits in the western Georgia Piedmont were mined primarily for the production of sulfuric acid (Shearer and Hull, 1918). In the 1880's the Tallapoosa and Little Bob mines were opened to mine sulfides for manufacture of sulfuric acid (Shearer and Hull, 1918), but at the Tallapoosa mine copper ore was also recovered (Hurst and Crawford, 1970). Later, around 1899, the Villa Rica mine opened and was shortly followed by the opening of others such as the Bell Star, Reeds Mountain and Swift mines (Shearer and Hull, 1918). The area of the western Georgia Piedmont was drilled extensively in the 1950's and 60's, specifically at the location of abandoned mines and prospects. Analyses of cores from several locations indicate zones reasonably high in copper and zinc(Hurstand Crawford, 1970).
In recent mapping of the Greater Atlanta Region, several stratigraphic and lithologic indicators to ore zones were recognized (Plate III). The importance of banded iron formation as an exploration tool in the northern Piedmont of Georgia was first noted by Abrams and others in 1981. Other lithologic and stratigraphic indicators known to be associated with volcanogenic ores of the northern Piedmont are aluminosilicate assemblages, magnesium-aluminum assemblages, and tourmalinite (Abrams and McConnell, 1982c and Plate III). Aluminosilicate assemblages are represented by distinct zones of coarse kyanite-quartz granofels (Fig. 44). These zones also contain pyrite, muscovite, and paragonite with minor amounts of garnet and staurolite. Magnesiumaluminum assemblages are characterized by chlorite and (or) anthophyllite. Allard and Carpenter (1981) have pointed out that these aluminosilicate and magnesium-aluminum assemblages commonly result from alteration around geothermal fields associated with base and precious metals. Rock present at the Stockmar (Pine Mountain) mine is an example of one these alteration zones. Tourmalinite consists of massive

Figure 44. Photograph of kyanite-quartz g ranofels from 3.5 miles southwest of New Georgia.
or poorly foliated tourmaline-quartz rock. Slack (1982) hu
noted the significance of these lithologic indicators oo ore
bodies. In the area of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, these units do not form extensive zones within the New Georgia Group, but do appear to be related to ore zones (Plate III~ More detailed mapping of the New Georgia Group may show tourmalinite to be more abundant than presently recognized.
Soapstone, Talc, and Asbestos
In general, soapstone, talc, and asbestos deposits occur in anthophylite-chlorite schists, altered ultramafic rocks or
altered siliceous dolomites. None of the above commodites are
presently mined within the Greater Atlanta Region. The only substantial mining effort for talc within the confines of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map was at the Verde Antique Quarry in southern Cherokee County in 1890 (McCallie, 1907~ The quarry there was first worked for talc, bu t erpentine.
soapstone, and marble are reported at the site and marble and
soapstone were later worked (McCallie, 1907; Hopkins, 1914~ Prospecting for talc and asbestos was done primarily in rocka of the New Georgia Group in Hall, Cherokee, Cobb, Paulding.
Carroll, and Douglas Counties, but no other deposits fl
commercial value were found. The dominant asbestiform mineral in asbesto depositsol
Georgia is anthophyllite (Teague, 1956). Anthophyllite il found predominantly within anthophyllite-chlorite schistS which are also host rocks for corundum in the areaoftheNe Georgia Group. Associated minerals include minor olivine. actinolite, talc, and epidote. These magnesium-aluminum rich rocks are interpreted as alteration zones or pipes within the volcanic sequence (Abrams and McConnell, 1982c). Carpenter (1982) discussed the significance of these Al-Mg assembl~ and noted that they are found beneath volcanogenic mass~ sulfide deposits like the Mattagami and Noranda deposits~ Quebec. Plate III shows the location of these bodie and thell' relationship to gold and base metal mines and prospects ofthe northwestern Georgia Piedmont.

68

Talc occurs in foliated sheets and massive, compact bodies (Hopkins, 1914). The best known use of the mineral is in toiletries such as talcum powder, but talc is also used in paints, rubber roofing products, insecticides, asphalt, lubricants, ceramics and in the production of talc crayons (Hopkins, 1914; Martin and Stafford, 1972). Soapstone associated with talc deposits is used for interior, building and monument stone (Hopkins, 1914). Asbestos was used in chemical filters, as a filler in rubber, as an insulating material and in construction materials (Hopkins, 1914; Teague, 1956).
Corundum
Corundum was prospected and mined prior to the turn of the century in the Blue Ridge and northern Piedmont of Georgia. During the late 1800's Georgia was the largest U.S. producer of abrasive corundum (Cook, 1978a). No producing deposits occur within the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, although portions of the northern Piedmont contain corundum and were prospected extensively (King, 1894; Furcron, 1960b). Occurrences of corundum are typically associated with magnesium-rich rocks including altered peridotites, pyroxenites, and anthophyllite-chlorite schists (King, 1894; Furcron, 1960b). Corundum occurs in these rocks in chlorite-walled "veins or pockets" associated with plagioclase, phlogopite, quartz, actinolite, hornblende, margarite, and vermiculite(King, 1894; Furcron, 1960b). Several varieties of corundum are common to the northern Piedmont and include gem-quality corundum, known as sapphire, and dull, opaque corundum (King, 1894). Corundum is found in sandsized grains, massive blocks, and small to large crystals (King, 1894). King (1894) reported blocks weighing more than 500 lbs. from areas outside the Greater Atlanta Regional Map in the Blue Ridge and blocks of 50 to 100 lbs. from Heard County immediately south of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map boundaries.
Corundum localities are reported from the Greater Atlanta Region in Carroll, Douglas, Paulding, Cobb, and Cherokee Counties (King, 1894; Furcron 1960b; Cook, 1978a). These deposits are located in rocks of the New Georgia Group and most are associated with units which have been interpreted as magnesium-aluminum alteration zones (Plate Ill) within a volcanogenic sequence.
Titanium and Titaniferous Magnetite
Titaniferous magnetite is reported from several localities in Cherokee and Cobb Counties (Haseltine, 1924). These properties lie within the boundaries of the Laura Lake Mafic Complex (this report). Haseltine (1924) reported "ore" to consist of small magnetite pebbles and fragments with Ti02 amounts ranging from 4.6 to 26.4 percent from the A.D. Kemp property near Marietta (Haseltine, 1924, p. 187-189).
Ilmenite deposits are reported to occur in the area of the Allatoona Dam, U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle by Elston and others (1970). Those authors report Ti02 amounts of 2 to 55 percent in heavy minerals obtained from auger samples (Elston and others, 1970, p. 29-33).
Clay
Alluvial clay from the Tallapoosa River was worked for

brick production in Haralson County (Veatch, 1909). No commercial workings are presently active in the northern Piedmont (Kline and O'Connor, 1981).
Sand and Gravel
Sand and gravel deposits are located along many creeks and rivers of the area. Active workings are known in the northern Piedmont along the Chattahoochee River in Fulton and Gwinnett Counties and on Big Creek in Fulton County (Kline and O'Connor, 1981).
Crushed Stone
Felsic to intermediate gneisses presently are quarried for aggregate at several locations in the northern Piedmont. These quarries are located within the Austell Gneiss in Douglas County, Sand Hill Gneiss in Carroll County, Kennesaw Gneiss of the Laura Lake Complex in Cobb County, Powers Ferry Formation in Forsyth County and the Dallas gneiss near Dallas in Paulding County. Crushed stone is produced from these quarries to be used primarily as aggregate.
Graphite
In the northern Piedmont, graphite is reported in Carroll, Cobb, Douglas, and Fulton Counties (Cook, 1978a) in schists of the Sandy Springs, and New Georgia Groups. No mining of graphite occurred in these areas, but several abandoned prospects are known in Cobb County (WPA report, 1940-1941).
Pegmatites and Mica
Pegmatites of the northern Piedmont were once mined for mica, but mines are now inactive. Mica was mined from pegmatites in Hall, Paulding and Cherokee Counties (Furcron and Teague, 1943). Portions of Carroll and Cobb Counties were prospected for sheet mica, but none of commercial quality was found (Furcron and Teague, 1943).
SOUTHERN PIEDMONT AND BREVARD ZONE Mining operations of the southern Piedmont portion of the
Greater Atlanta Regional Map are confined predominantly to the production of crushed stone from marbles, granites and gneisses of the area. Sand and gravel and clay production rank second and third respectively, after stone production. Other commodities which were once mined or prospected in the area include soapstone and talc, mica, gold, pyrite, graphite, chlorite, and iron ore.
Granites and Gneisses (Crushed and Dimension)
Granites and gneisses were quarried at one time or another in most counties of the southern Piedmont. Presently active quarries are located within Newton, Henry, Gwinnett and DeKalb Counties in the Lithonia Gneiss; Coweta and Fayette Counties in the Palmetto Granite; Fulton County in the Ben Hill Granite; Gwinnett County in theNorcross Gneiss; Clayton County in gneiss of the Camp Creek Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981); and Hall County in biotite granite gneiss. Due to texture, grain size, and mineralogy, stone from these quarries is used primarily as crushed stone. Other uses for granite include building stone, curbing and bulkheading.

69

The only active dimension stone production .in the Greater Atlanta Region occurs at several localities in DeKalb County within the Lithonia Gneiss (Kline and O'Connor, 1981). Dimension and curb stone was produced from the Stone Mountain Granite, but commercial production was terminated as the quarry now lies in a state park.
Clay, Sand and Gravel, and Fill Material
Alluvial, residual and colluvial clays are suitable for the production of building brick, terra cotta, and stoneware (Veatch, 1909). These deposits, in addition to deposits of sand and gravel, are found along the floodplains of many streams and rivers of the southern Piedmont. Many of these deposits were mined in the past, but most production was for local use only. The most notable of the depasits lie along the banks of the Chattahoochee River where excellent sand, gravel, clay and fill material are still actively produced. Fill material and brick clays are produced from the banks of the Chattahoochee River in Fulton and Douglas Counties. Active sand and gravel workings are located along the banks of the Chattahoochee in Cobb, Douglas, and Fulton Counties (Kline and O'Connor, 1981).
Marble
Marble from the Brevard fault zone is actively quarried for crushed stone northeast of Gainesville in Hall County (Kline and O'Connor, 1981). Marble of the area is described as blue or grey dolomite which lies within calcareous schists in what was termed the Gainesville marble belt(Furcron,1942). Exposures of marble extend from near Flowery Branch, Hall County, northward to Habersham County (Furcron, 1942) outside the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map where Hurst and Crawford (1964)described exposures ranging from calcareous quartzite to marble. Marble from this area is high in magnesium and, in addition to use as crushed stone, previously was burned to form lime (Maynard, 1912).
Hatcher (1969, 1971a) includes carbonate of the Brevard fault zone as a member of his Chauga River Formation. His work did not extend into the Greater Atlanta Regional Map area, but Hatcher (1971a) suggested that a carbonate unit forming a "topographic low or lineament" as described by Hurst and Crawford (1964) in Habersham County is equivalent to his Chauga River carbonate member. The marble near Gainesville is on strike with this carbonate.
Graphite
Graphite is reported at several locations in Hall County (Work Projects Administration, 1940-42). The graphite occurs in phyllites and graphitic schists of the Brevard fault zone. Prospecting was limited to three to four pits at the most extensively worked locality.
Soapstone, Asbestos and Talc
Soapstone, asbestos and talc are reported from Clayton, DeKalb, Gwinnett, and Hall Counties in the southern Piedmont (Hopkins, 1914). No commercial production at these sites is known. Deposits differ mineralogically and consist of varying amounts of anthophyllite, relict olivine and pyroxene, talc,

chlorite, and actinolite (Hopkins, 1914; Prowell, 1972; Cook, 1978a). The largest of these bodies is located within DeKalb County on Soapstone Ridge.
Pegmatites
Pegmatites are reported in Clayton, Hall, Coweta, DeKalb, Fulton and Henry Counties (Galpin 1915; Furcron and Teague, 1943; Cook, 1978a). Of these, only localities in Hall and Henry Counties were mined or prospected for mica (Galpin, 1915; Cook, 1978a). Furcron (1959) reported beryl and tourmaline from pegmatites near Stone Mountain in DeKalb County, but no commercial deposits are present.
Pyrite
Sulfides and iron ore associated with hornblende gneiss and chlorite schist were mined briefly from a locality known as the Cash Copper Mine in Fulton County(Shearer and Hull, 1918). The term "copper" is a misnomer as little copper was reported and ore was said to consist dominantly of pyrite, magnetite, hematite and limonite (Shearer and Hull, 1918).
Sulfide and gold dep9sits of the southern Piedmont probably originated as stratabound, syngenetic deposits like deposits of the northern Piedmont. It has been suggested that similar rock sequences exist on both sides of the Brevard fault zone (Hatcher, 1978b; Kline, 1980, 1981; McConnell, 1980b; this report) in the northern and southern Piedmont. Lithologic units defined by Higgins and Atkins (1981) such as spessartine-bearing quartzites (Intrenchment Creek Quartzite) may represent a facies of banded iron formation like that seen in the New Georgia Group of the northern Piedmont (see southern Piedmont stratigraphy for more detailed discussion). Other lithologic units of the southern Piedmont (portions of the Atlanta Group, Higgins and Atkins, 1981) may also be equivalent or coeval with the New Georgia Group and may represent a volcanogenic sequence. More detailed work is needed to establish the origin and extent of base metal and gold mineralization of the southern Piedmont.
Gold
Gold mines and prospects of the southern Piedmont are chiefly confined to Coweta, Fulton and Hall Counties. In each of these counties gold was mined or prospected from both placer and "vein"-type deposits (Yeates and others, 1896; Jones, 1909). Placer deposits of Coweta County were located in auriferous gravels or associated with quartz veins (Jones, 1909). Other "vein" deposits of the area, particularly in Hall County, were associated with milky quartz and sulfides in quartz veins.
SUMMARY
This report accompanying the geologic map of the Greater Atlanta Region is a composite of many smaller reports and investigations. Therefore, conclusions related to this report are, to a large degree, conclusions that were reached in earlier studies that accompanied geologic investigations of smaller areas within the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. The report on the geology of the Greater Atlanta Region combines and

70

relates these previous investigations and unpublished data into a single document on the geology of the Atlanta region.
East of the Cartersville fault, rocks nonconformably overlying the Corbin Gneiss Complex and underlying the Murphy Marble belt group are subdivided into five formations. Clastic rocks in contact with the Corbin Gneiss Complex are termed the Pinelog Formation after Hayes's Pinelog conglomerate. Conformably overlying the Pinelog are interlayered carbonaceous and noncarbonaceous phyllites and sandy marbles of the Wilhite Formation. Stratigraphic position and lithologic similarities suggest that rocks of the Pinelog are lithostratigraphic equivalents of the Snowbird Group in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, and the Wilhite Formation is equivalent to Wilhite Formation as defined in the National Park. Lying conformably beneath the Murphy Marble belt group are clastic rocks interpreted to be lithostratigraphic equivalents of the Great Smoky Group. Three formations are defined: Etowah, Sweetwater Creek and Dean Formations. Rocks of the Etowah and Wilhite Formations trend around the Emerson reentrant in the Cartersville fault and into what is referred to as the Talladega belt. Rocks of the Talladega belt, at least in the northeastern part of the belt, are believed equivalent to the Great Smoky and Walden Creek Groups and, therefore, are late Precambrian.
Southeast of the Allatoona fault, rocks of theNew Georgia Group are the oldest rocks exposed in the northern Piedmont. New Georgia Group rocks are conformably overlain by rocks of the Sandy Springs Group which is divided into an eastern and western belt by the Chattahoocheefault. TheNew Georgia Group is dominantly a mixed assemblage of felsic and mafic metavolcanic rocks with subordinate amounts of metasedimentary rocks. Rocks of the New Georgia Group are host to most of the massive sulfide and gold depositS known to occur in the Atlanta area. These deposits previously were believed to be epigenetic in origin, but the recognition of banded iron formation in close proximity to most of these deposits, the stratabound nature of the deposits and their association with volcanic assemblages suggest a syngenetic origin. Rocks ofthe New Georgia Group are traceable to the northeast beyond the boundaries of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map, where they comprise what was termed the "Dahlonega Gold Belt."
The Brevard fault zone in the Atlanta area separates similar rocks and stratigraphic sequences. While undoubtedly a zone of intense ductile shearing, the Brevard zone is not a cryptic suture and does not appear to have large vertical displacement. In this report, the Brevard is interpreted to represent the axial zone of a large recumbent isocline that has undergone intense ductile shearing related to transposition during the (F1) folding event.
Southeast of the Brevard zone, Higgins and Atkins (1981) defined 12 formations and 3 members of the Atlanta Group (Appendix A). Rocks of this group were interpreted by Higgins and Atkins to represent a eugeosynclinal sequence exposed in a synformal syncline. In this report, rocks of the Atlanta Group are interpreted to be exposed in a synformal anticline and, therefore, Higgins and Atkins' stratigraphy is inverted. Rocks of the Intrenchment Creek Quartzite, Camp Creek Formation and Big Cotton Indian Formation are interpreted to be lithostratigraphic equivalents of the New Georgia Group of the northern Piedmont. Units that stratigraphically overlie the above formations may be lithostratigraphic equivalents of the Sandy Springs Group.

Plutonic rocks present in the Atlanta area can be divided into three major groups based on chemical criteria, depth of intrusion, and their time of intrusion with respect to the major progressive metamorphic event in the Piedmont. Felsic intrusive rocks in theNew Georgia Group and possibly biotiteplagioclase gneisses in the Camp Creek and Big Cotton Indian Formations were intruded prior to metamorphism and are, particularly in the case of the former, distinctly low in potassium. Rocks of this category generally are associated with volcanic equivalents and are conformable with the regional trends. Intrusive rocks of the second category are believed to have been emplaced either pre- or syntectonically and all display a metamorphic overprint. Category 2 intrusive rocks generally are concordant with the regional trend, but lack the direct relationship to volcanics that is characteristic of category 1 intrusives. Intrusives of this category also display greater concentrations of potassium than earlier intrusives and define a distinct differentiation trend. Intrusive rocks of the third category are distinctly discordant to the regional structural trends and lack a metamorphic overprint, although some intrusives of this category are sheared locally by movement along the Brevard zone.
Only one major progressive metamorphic event of Paleozoic age is observed in rocks of the Greater Atlanta Region. This event probably occurred approximately 365 m.y. ago and occurred coincidently with the first major fold event. The first major fold event is characterized by large-scale recumbent isoclines. Folds of this generation are not observed in the Valley and Ridge and their absence is a justification for the presence of the Cartersville fault east of Cartersville. F 2 folds overprint F 1 folds and form a series of regional antiforms and synforms that vary from isoclinal near the Brevard zone to open away from the Brevard zone. F2 folds occur in all geologic provinces in the Greater Atlanta Region. Fold events postdating F 2 vary from province to province.
Twenty-eight rock and mineral commodities (asbestos, barite, bauxite, beryl, chlorite, clay, corundum, flagstone, gold, granite, graphite, iron ore, limonite, limestone, manganese, marble, mica, ocher, pegmatite, quartzite, sand and gravel, sericite, shale, slate, soapstone, sulfides, tripoli, and talc have been mined or prospected within the confines of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. Of the above commodities only barite, ocher, sand and gravel, granite, marble, limestone, and structural clays are actively mined today. Historically, the Cartersville area in particular and the Valley and Ridge in general are the areas of greatestmining production within the Greater Atlanta Region. Mining near Cartersville has occurred for over 130 years and has involved the mining of brown iron ore, barite, manganese, ocher and umber, and shale and slate. Of the above, only barite and ocher and umber are still actively mined. Elsewhere, the Valley and Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map contains deposits of bauxite, limestone, shale, and iron ore. At the present time, only limestone and shale are actively mined.
Beryl, barite, gold, graphite, iron ore, marble, sericite and mica were mined or prospected in the Blue Ridge portion of the Greater Atlanta Regional Map. Of these, only marble from a recently activated quarry in Cherokee County is actively mined today.
The largest known deposits of base and precious metals within the Greater Atlanta Region occur in rocks of the northern Piedmont. Volcanogenic gold and massive sulfide

71

deposits occur predominantly within metamorphosed felsic and mafic volcanic rocks. Mining for gold and sulfides occurred during the late 1800's and early 1900's. Other commodities previously mined or prospected in the northern Piedmont include: mica, corundum, asbestos, soapstone, graphite, clay, sand and gravel, and crushed stone. Only sand and gravel and crushed stone are actively mined today.
Crushed and dimension stone, sand and gravel, and clay are the only commodities actively mined from rocks of the Brevard fault zone and southern Piedmont. Crushed stone includes marble mined for aggregate in Hall County, granite mined for aggregate in Fulton, DeKalb, and Fayette Counties, and granite gneiss mined in Gwinnett, DeKalb and Rockdale Counties. Other commodities previously mined or prospected in the southern Piedmont and Brevard fault zone include talc, mica, gold, pyrite, graphite, chlorite and iron ore.
REFERENCES CITED
Abrams, C.E., 1983, Geology of the Austell-Frolona antiform, northwestern Georgia Piedmont (M.S. thesis): Athens, University of Georgia, 119 p.
Abrams, C.E., and McConnell, K.I., 1981a, Stratigraphy of the area around the Austell-Frolona antiform, west-central Georgia, in Wigley, P.B., ed., Latest thinking on the stratigraphy ofselected areas in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 54-A, p. 55-67.
- - - - , 1981b, Emplacement of the Austell Gneiss: implications regarding the timing of metamorphism and deformation in the Piedmont of Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 13, no. 5, p. 1.
- - - - , 1982a, Relationship of banded iron formation to mines and prospects of western Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Map 82-5c, 1:100,000.
- - - - 1982b, Banded iron formation: a key marker unit for massive sulfide exploration in the high grade metamorphic terrain of western Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 14, nos. 1 and 2, p. 1.
- - - - , 1982c, Lithologic and stratigraphic indicators for exploration in a high grade multiply deformed terrain, western Georgia Piedmont (abs.): Exploration for metallic resources in the southeast symposium, University of Georgia Center for Continuing Education, p. 1-3.
Abrams, C. E., McConnell, K.l., Sanders, R.P., and Pate, M.L., 1981, Economic potential of a metavolcanic sequence in the Piedmont of northwestern Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 13, no. 5, p. 1.
Adams, G.I., 1926, The crystalline rocks, in Butts, C., Stephenson, L.W., and Cooke, C.W., Geology of Alabama: Alabama Geological Survey Special Report 14, p. 25-39.
Allard, G.O., and Carpenter, R.H., 1981, Alteration in the Otake geothermal Field - A model for interpreting certain metamorphic assemblages in metamorphosed volcanic terrains: Abstract with Program, lAVCEI Symposium on arc volcanism, Tokyo, Hakone, Japan.
Atkins, R.L., and Higgins, M.W., 1978, Relationship between superimposed folding and geologic history in the Georgia Piedmont: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 10, no. 7, p. 361.

- - - - , 1980, Superimposed folding and its bearing on geologic history of the Atlanta, Georgia, area, in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions in southeastern geology, American
Geological Institute, v. 1, p. 19-40.
Atkins, R.L., Dooley, R.E., and Kline, S.W., 1980a, Multiple folding in the Snellville, Luxomni, Suwanee, and Madras quadrangles in the Georgia Piedmont: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Report 80-6, 44 p.
Atkins, R.L., Higgins, M.W., and Gottfried, D., 1980b, Geochemical data bearing on the origin of the Stone Mountain Granite, Panola Granite, and Lithonia Gneiss near Atlanta, Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,v. 12,no.4,p. 170.
Bayley, W.S., 1928, Geology of the Tate quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 43, 170 p.
Bearden, S., 1976, A petrographic and geochemical study of the Austell, Palmetto, and Sand Hill granite gneisses (abs.): Georgia Journal of Science, v. 34, no. 2, p. 84.
- - - - , 1981, Ochre deposits of the Cartersville mining district (abs.): Georgia Journal of Science, v. 39, no. 2, p. 67.
Bentley, R.D., Fairley, W.M., Fields, H.H., Power, W.R., and Smith, J.W., 1966, The Cartersville fault problem: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 4, 38 p.
Bentley, R.D., and Neathery, T.L., 1970, Geology of the Brevard fault zone and related rocks of the inner Piedmont of Alabama: Alabama Geological Society Guidebook 8, 119 p.
Bond, P.A., and Fullagar, P.D., 1974, Origin and age of the Henderson augen gneiss and associated cataclastic rocks in southwestern North Carolina: Geological Society of America Abastracts with Programs, v. 6, no. 4, p. 336.
Brobst, D.A., 1973, Barite, in Brobst, D.A., and Pratt, W.P., eds., United States Mineral Resources: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 820, p. 75-84.
Bryan, W.S., Thompson, G., Frey, F.A., and Dickey, J.S., 1976, Inferred geologic settings and differences in basalts from the Deep-Sea drilling project: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 81, p. 4285-4304.
Buddington, A.F., 1959, Granite emplacement with special reference to North America: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 70, p. 671-748.
Burchfiel, B.C., and Livingston, J.L., 1967, Brevard zone compared to Alpine root zones: American Journal of Science, v. 265, no. 4, p. 241-256.
Butler, J .R., 1972, Age of Paleozoic regional metamorphism in the Carolinas, Georgia, and Tennessee southern Appalachians: American Journal of Science, v. 272, p. 319-333.
Butts, C., and Gildersleeve, B., 1948, Geology and mineral resources of the Paleozoic area in northwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 54, 176 p.
Carpenter, R.H., 1982, Aluminosilicate assemblages: an exploration tool for metavolcanic terrains of the southeast (abs.): Exploration for metallic resources in the southeast, symposium, University of Georgia Center for Continuing Education, p. 19-23.
Chapman, J.J., and Klatt, E .A., 1983, Gastropod shells with the Murphy Marble: Geologic Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 15, no. 2, p. 52.
Chowns, T.M., 1977, Stratigraphy and economic geology of Cambrian and Ordovician rocks in Bartow and Polk Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 16A,21 p.

72

Cofer, H.E., Jr., 1958, Structural relations of the granites and the associated rocks of south Fulton County, Georgia (Ph.D. thesis): Urbana, University of Illinois, 106 p.
Coleman, S.L., Medlin, J .H., and Crawford, T.J ., 1973, Petrology and geochemistry of the Austell gneiss in the western Georgia Piedmont: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 5, no. 5, p. 388.
Cook, R.B. ,Jr., 1970, Geologic historyofmassivesulfide bodies in west-central Georgia (Ph.D thesis): Athens, University of Georgia, 163 p.
_ _ _ _ , 1978a, Minerals of Georgia: their properties and
occurrences: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 92, 189 p. _ _ _ _ , 1978b, Soil geochemistry of the Franklin-
Creighton gold mine, Cherokee County, Georgia, in Short contributions to the geology of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p. 15-21. _ _ _ _ , 1978c, Ore mineralogy of west-central Georgia massive sulfide deposits, in Short contributions to the geology of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p.
22-31. Cooke, C.W., Crickmay, G.W., Butts, C., Hayes, C.W., Keith
A., and McCallie, S.W., 1939, Geologic map of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey map, 1:500,000. Costello, J .O., 1978, Shear zones in the Corbin gneiss of Georgia, in Short contributions to the geology of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p. 32-37. Costello, J .O., and McConnell, K.l. 1980, Stratigraphy of the southwestern Blue Ridge and northernmost Piedmont of Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,v. 12, no.4, p. 175. _ _ _ _ , 1981, Recumbent folding in the J3lue Ridge of
northwestern Georgia: implications on the intensity of early deformation in the southern Blue Ridge: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 13, no. 1, p.
5. _ _ _ _ , 1983, Relationship of the Cartersville fault and
Great Smoky fault in the southern Appalachian orogen: a reinterpretation: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 15, no. 2, p. 94. Costello,J .O., McConnell, K.l., and Power, W.R., 1982, Geology of late Precambrian and early Paleozoic rocks in and near the Cartersville District, Georgia: 17th Annual Field Trip, Georgia Geological Society, 40 p. Crawford, T.J., 1970, Geologic map Carroll-Heard Counties, Georgia, in Hurst, V.J ., and Long, S.W., 1971, Geochemical study of alluvium in the Chattahoochee-Flint area, Georgia: University of Georgia Institute of Community and Area Development, 52 p. _ _ _ _ , 1976, Geologic Map of the Burnt Hickory Ridge quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Map, 1:24,000. _ _ _ _ , 1977a, Geologic map of the Taylorsville quad-
rangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Map,
1:24,000. _ _ _ _ , 1977b, Geologic map of the Yorkville quadrangle,
Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Map, 1:24,000. _ _ _ _ , 1977c, Cartersville fault, in Chowns, T.M., ed.,
Stratigraphy and economic geology of Cambrian and Ordovician rocks in Bartow and Polk Counties: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 16-A, 21 p.

Crawford, T.J., and Cressler, C.W., 1981, The Talladega "Series"- Great Smoky-Emerson fault: Relationships in the Cartersville area, Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 13, no. 1, p. 5-6.
Crawford, T.J., and Cressler, C.W., 1982, Talladega 'Series,' Great Smoky fault, and Emerson fault: relationships in the Cartersville area, Georgia, in Bearce, D.N., Black, W.W., Kish, S.A., and Tull, J.F., eds., Tectonic studies in the Talladega and Carolina slate belts, southern Appalachian orogen: Geological Society of America Special Paper 191, p. 31-34.
Crawford, T.J. , and Medlin, J .H., 1970, Stratigraphic and structural features between the Cartersville and Brevard fault zones: Georgia Geological Society Guidebook 9, 35 p.
_ _ _ _ , 1971, The Georgia Piedmont west of Atlanta:
stratigraphic and structural features:Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 3, no. 5, p. 306. _ _ __ , 1973, The western Georgia Piedmont between the Cartersville and Brevard fault zones: American Journal of Science, v. 273, p. 712-722. _ _ _ _ , 1974, Brevard fault zone in western Georgia and eastern Alabama: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 12, p. 1-67. Cressler, C.W., 1970, Geology and ground-water resources of Floyd and Polk Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 39, 95 p. Cressler, C.W., and Crawford, T.J., 1976, Cartersville fault found to be two intersecting thrusts: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1000, p. 414. Cressler, C.W., Blanchard, H.E., Jr., and Hester, W.G., 1979, Geohydrology of Bartow, Cherokee, and Forsyth Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 50, 45p. Crickmay, G.W., 1933, The occurrence of mylonites in the crystalline rocks of Georgia: American Journal of Science, fifth series, v. 26, p. 161-177.
_ _ _ _ , 1936, Status of the Talladega Series in southern Appalachian stratigraphy: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 47, p. 1371-1392.
- - - - 1937, Tripoli deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 9, 7 p.
_ _ _ _ , 1952, Geology of the crystalline rocks of Georgia:
Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 58, 56 p. Croft, M.G., 1963, Geology and ground-water resources of
Bartow County, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Water. Supply Paper 1619-FF, 32 p. Dallmeyer, R.D., 1975, 40Arj39Ar age spectra of biotite from Grenville basement gneisses in northwest Georgia: Geological Society of Arp.erica Bulletin 86, p. 1740-1744. _ _ _ _ , 1978, 40Arj39Ar incremental-release ages of horn-
blende and biotite across the Georgia Inner Piedmont: their bearing on late Paleozoic-early Mesozoic tectonothermal history: American Journal of Science, v. 278, p. 124-149. Dallmeyer, R.D., Courtney, P.S., and Wooten, R.M., 1978, Stratigraphy, structure and metamorphism east of the Murphy syncline: Georgia-North Carolina: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 17, 74 p. Dooley, R.E., 1977, K-Ar relationships in dolerite dikes of Georgia (M.S. Thesis): Atlanta, Georgia Institute of Technology, 185 p.

73

Elston, L.W., Husted, J.E., L:mg, L.T., Munoz, M.F., and Ostrander, C.C., 1970, Mineral exploration of the Allatoona Dam (GA) quadrangle; Georgia Institute of Technology, Engineering Experiment Station Project E-100-572, 36 p.
Fairley, W.M., 1965, The Murphy syncline in the Tate quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 75, 71 p.
_ _ _ _ , 1973, Correlations of stratigraphic belts of the
northwest Georgia Piedmont and Blue Ridge: American Journal of Science, v. 273, p. 686-697. Foss, D.W., Gatten, O.J., and Young, R.S ., 1983, Shiloh Church molybdenum deposit: Society of Mining Engineers of AIME Abstracts with Programs, reprint no. 83-86, 9 p. Furcron, A.S., 1942, Dolomites and magnesian limestones in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 14, 30 p. _ _ _ _ , 1959, Beryl in Georgia: Georgia Mineral News-
letter, v. 12, no. 3, p. 91-95. _ _ _ _ , 1960a, Kyanite, sillimanite, and andalusite in
Georgia: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v. 13, no. 1, p. 9-21. _ _ _ _ , 1960b, Corundum in Georgia: Georgia Mineral
Newsletter, v. 13, no. 4, p. 167-177. Furcron, A.S., and Teague, K.H., 1943, Mica-bearing pegma-
tites of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 48, 192 p. _ _ _ _ , 1945, Sillimanite and massive kyanite in Georgia:
Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 51, 76 p. Galpin, S.L., 1915, A preliminary report on the feldspar and
mica deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 30, 190 p. Gastaldo, R.A., and Cook, R.B., 1981, A reinvestigation of paleobotanical evidence for the age of the Erin Shale, Clay County, Alabama: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 13, no. 1, p. 7. _ _ _ _ , 1982, A reinvestigation of the paleobotanical evidence for the age of the Erin Shale, in Bearce, D.N., Black, W.W., Kish, S.A., and Tull, J .F ., eds., Tectonic studies in the Talladega and Carolina slate belts, southern appalachian orogen: Geological Society of America Special Paper 191, p. 69-78. Georgia Geologic Survey, 1976: Geologic Map of Georgia, 1:500,000. Gilbert, O.E., Jr., 1973, The Sylacauga unconformity/Talladega fault: The Piedmont metamorphic front of Alabama as a stratigraphically controlled fault, in Carrington, T.J., ed., Talladega metamorphic front: Alabama Geological Society Guidebook, 11th Annual Fieldtrip, p. 39-50. Gillon, K.A., 1982, Stratigraphic,structural, and metamorphic geology of portions of the Cowrock and Helen, Georgia 7lf/ quadrangles (M.S. thesis): Athens, University of Georgia, 236p. Grant, W.H., 1962, Field excursion, Stone Mountain-Lithonia district: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 2, 21 p. _ _ _ _ , 1963, Weathering of Stone Mountain granite: Clays and Clay Mineralogy, v. 11, p. 65-73. _ _ _ _ , 1969, The intrusion mechanics and cooling history
of Stone Mountain Granite: Geological Sodety of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 1, no. 4, p. 28-29. Grant, W.H., Size, W.B., and O'Connor, B.J ., 1980, Petrology and structure of the Stone Mountain Granite and Mount Arabia migmatite, Lithonia, Georgia, in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions in southeastern geology: American Geological Institute, v. 1, p. 41-57.

Grunenfelder, M. , and Silver, L.T., 1958, Radioactive age dating and its petrologic implications for some Georgia granites: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 69, p. 1574.
Hadley, J.B., 1970, The Ocoee Series and its possible correlatives, in Fisher, G.W., Pettijohn, F.J., Reed , J.C., Jr., and Weaver, K.N., eds., Studies of Appalachian geology: central and southern: New York, Wiley-lnterscience, p. 247-259.
Hadley, J.B., and Goldsmith, R., 1963, Geology of the eastern Great Smoky Mountains, North Carolina and Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 349-B, 118 p.
Hamilton, W., 1961, Geology of the Richardson Cove and Jones Cove quadrangles, Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 349-A, 55 p.
Haseltine, R.H., 1924, Iron ore deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 41,222 p.
Haskin, L.A., Haskin, M.A., Frey, F.A., and Wildeman, T.R., 1968, Relative and absolute terrestrial abundance of the rare earths, in Ahrens, L.H., ed., Origin and distribution of the elements: New York, Pergamon Press, p. 889-912.
Hatcher, R.D., Jr., 1969, Stratigraphy, petrology, and structure of the low rank belt and part of the Blue Ridge of northwesternmost South Carolina: South Carolina Division of Geology, Geologic notes, v. 13, p. 105-141.
_ _ _ _ , 1971a, The geology of Rabun and Habersham
Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 83, 48 p. _ _ _ _ , 1971b, Stratigraphic, petrologic, and structural evidence favoring a thrust solution of the Brevard problem: American Journal of Science, v. 270, p. 177-202. _ _ _ _ , 1972, Developmental model for the southern
Appalachians: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 83, p. 2735-2760. _ _ _ _ , 1974, An introduction to the Blue Ridge tectonic
history of northeast Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 13-A, 60 p. _ _ _ _ , 1975, Second Penrose field conference: The Brevard zone: Geology, v. 3, p. 149-152. _ _ _ _ , 1977, Macroscopic polyphase folding illustrated by the Toxaway dome, eastern Blue Ridge, South Carolina -North Carolina: Geological Society of American Bulletin, v.88,p. 1678-1688. _ _ _ _ , 1978a, Tectonics of the western Piedmont and Blue Ridge, southern Appalachians: review and speculation: American Journal of Science, v. 278, p. 276-304. _ _ _ _ , 1978b, The Alto allochthon: a major tectonic unit of the northeast Georgia Piedmont, in Short contributions to the geology of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p. 83-86. Hatcher, R.D., Jr., Acker, L.L., Bryan, J.G., and Godfrey, S.C., 1979, The Hayesville thrust of the central Blue Ridge of North Carolina and nearby Georgia: a pre-metamorphic, polydeformed thrust and cryptic suture within the Blue Ridge thrust sheet: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 11, no..4. p. 181. Hatcher, R.D., Jr., and Butler, J .R., 1979, Guidebook for southern Appalachian field trip: The Caledonides in the U.S.A., International Geological Correlation Program, 117 p.

74

Hatcher, R.D., Jr., and Odom, A.L., 1980, Timing of thrusting in the southern Appalachians, U.S.A.: model for orogeny?: Journal Geological Society of London, v. 137, p. 321-327.
Hayes, C.W., 1891, The overthrust faults of the southern Appalachians: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 2, p. 141-154.
_ _ _ _ , 1895, Unpublished geology of the Cartersville
topographic quadrangle: scale 1:125,000. _ _ _ _ , 1901, Geological relations of the iron-ores in the
Cartersville district, Georgia: American Institute of Mining Engineers Transactions, v. 30, p. 403-419. _ _ _ _ , 1902, Rome folio, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey
Geologic Atlas of the United States, Folio 78, 13 p. Hayes, C.W., and Eckel, E.C., 1902, Iron ores of the Cartersville
district, Georgia, in Emmons, S.F., and Hayes, C.W., eds.,
Contributions to economic geology: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 213, p. 233-242. Hayes, C.W., and Phalen, W.C., 1907, Graphite deposits near
Cartersville, Georgia, in Hayes, C.W., and Lindgren, W.,
eds., Contributions to economic geology: U.S. Geologic Survey Bulletin 340, p. 463-465. Herrmann, L.A., 1954, Geology of the Stone Mountain-Lithonia District, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 61, 139 p. Higgins, M.W., 1966, Geology of the Brevard lineament near Atlanta, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 77,49 p. _ _ _ _ , 1968, Geologic map of the Brevard fault zone near Atlanta, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Map I-511, 1:48,000.
Higgins, M.W., and Atkins, R.L., 1981, The stratigraphy of the Piedmont southeast of the Brevard zone in the Atlanta,
Georgia, area, in Wigley, P.B., ed., Latest thinking on the
stratigraphy of selected areas in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 54-A, p. 3-40. Higgins, M.W., and McConnell, K.I., 1978a, The Sandy Springs Group and related rocks in the Georgia Piedmont-
nomenclature and stratigraphy, in Sohl, N.F., and Wright,
W.B., eds., Changes in stratigraphic nomenclature by the U.S. Geological Survey, 1977: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1457-A, p. A98-A105. - - - - , 1978b, The Sandy Springs Group and related rocks of the Georgia Piedmont: nomenclature and strati-
graphy, in Short contributions to the geology of Georgia:
Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p. 50-55. Higgins, M.W., and Zietz, I., 1975, Geologic interpretation of
aeromagnetic and aeroradioactivity maps of northern Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Map I-783, 1:500,000, 16 p. Higgins, M.W., Atkins, R.L., and Dooley, R.E., 1980a, Structure and stratigraphy of the Atlanta area, Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 12, no. 4, p. 180. Higgins, M.W., Pickering, S.M., Jr., and Atkins, R.L., 1980b, The Soapstone Ridge Complex, Atlanta, Georgia; a transported mafic-ultramafic complex in the southeastern Appalachian Piedmont: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 12, no. 7, p. 446. Hopkins, O.B., 1914, A report on the asbestos, talc and soapstone deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 29, 319 p.

Hull, J.P.D., 1920, Report on the barytes deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 36, 146 p.
Hull, J.P.D., LaForge, L., and Crane, W.R. , 1919, Report on the manganese deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 35, 295 p.
Hurst, V.J., 1952, Geology of the Kennesaw Mountain-Sweat Mountain area, Cobb County, Georgia(M.S. thesis): Atlanta, Emory University, 165 p.
_ _ _ _ , 1955, Stratigraphy, structure and mineral resources of the Mineral Bluff Quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 63, 137 p.
_ _ _ _ , 1959, Geologic map of Kennesaw Mountain-Sweat
Mountain area, Cobb County, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Map RM-2, 1:24,000.
_ _ _ _ , 1970, The Piedmont in Georgia, in Fisher, G.W.,
Pettijohn, G.J., Reed, J.C., and Weaver, K.N., eds., Studies of Appalachian geology: central and southern: New York, Wiley Interscience, p. 383-396. _ _ _ _ , 1973, Geology of the southern Blue Ridge belt:
American Journal of Science, v. 273, p. 643-670. Hurst, V.J., and Crawford, T.J.,1964, Exploration for mineral
deposits in Habersham County, Georgia: U.S. Department of Commerce Area Redevelopment Administration, 180 p. _ _ _ _ , 1970, Sulfide deposits in the Coosa Valley area, Georgia: Coosa Valley Area Planning and Development Commission, 190 p. Hurst, V.J. and Jones, L.M., 1973, Origin of amphibolites in the Cartersville-Villa Rica area, Georgia: Geological Society of American Bulletin, v. 84, p. 905-911. Hurst, V.J ., and Long, S.W., 1971, Geochemical study of alluvium in the Chattahoochee-Flint area, Georgia: University of Georgia Institute of Community and Area Development, 52 p. Jones, L.M., Hurst, V.J., and Walker, R.L., 1973, Strontium isotope composition of amphibolite of the Cartersville-Villa Rica District, Georgia: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 84, p. 913-918. Jones, S.P.. 1909, Second report on the gold deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 19, 283 p. Keith, A., 1904, Asheville folio: U .S. Geological Survey Geologic Atlas of the United States, Folio 116, 10 p. _ _ _ _ , 1907, Nantahala folio: U.S. Geological Survey
Geologic Atlas of the United States, Folio 143, 11 p. Kesler, T.L., 1950, Geology and mineral deposits of the
Cartersville District, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 224, 97 p. King, F.P., 1894, A preliminary report on the corundum deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 2, 133 p. King, P.B., 1955, A geologic section across the southern
Appalachians, in Russell, R.J., ed., Guides to southeastern
geology: Geological Society of America, p. 332-373. _ _ _ _ , 1964, Geology of the central Great Smoky
Mountains, Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 349-C, 148 p. King, P .B., Hadley, J.B., Neuman, R.B., and Hamilton, W ., 1958, Stratigraphy of Ocoee series, Great Smoky Mountains Tennessee and North Carolina: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 69, p. 947-966.

75

Kline, S.W., 1980, Sandy Springs sequence rocks southeast of the Brevard zone, near Atlanta, Georgia, and their bearing on the nature of the zone: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 12, no. 4, p. 181.
- - - - , 1981, The geology of the northern half of the Suwannee quadrangle and part of the Hog Mountain quadrangle, Gwinnett County, Georgi:l {M.S. thesis): Atlanta, Georgia Institute of Technology, 180 p.
Kline, S.W., and O'Connor, B.J., 1981, Mining directory of
Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 2, 18th Edition, 49 p. Kulp, J.L., and Eckelmann, F.D., 1961, Potassium-argon ages of micas from the southern Appalachians: New York Academy of Science Annals, v. 91, p. 408-416. LaForge, L., and Phalen, W.C., 1913, Ellijay folio: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Atlas of the United States, Folio 187, 22 p. Lester, J.G., and Allen, A.T., 1950, Diabase of the Georgia Piedmont: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 61, p. 1217-1224.
Lesure, F.G., 1973, Mica, in Brobst, D.A., and Pratt, W.P.,
eds., United States Mineral Resources: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 820, p. 415-423. Lewiecki, W.T., 1949, Investigations of the Hermitage bauxite district, Bartow and Floyd Counties, Ga.: U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 4577, 10 p. Long, L.E., Kulp, J.L., and Eckelmann, F .D., 1959, Chronology of major metamorphic events in the southeastern United States: American Journal of Science, v. 257, p. 585-603.
Long, S.W., 1971, Mines and prospects of the ChattahoocheeFlint area, Georgia: University of Georgia Institute of Community and Area Development, 143 p.
Mack, G.H., 1980, Stratigraphy and depositional environments of t1-~ Chilhowee Group {Cambrian) in Georgia and Alabama: American Journal of Science, v. 280, p. 497-517.
Martin, A.C., and Stafford, L.P., 1972, Mining directory of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 2, 17th Edition, 87 p.
Martin, B.F., 1974, The petrology of the Corbin Gneiss {M.S. thesis): Athens, University of Georgia, 133 p.
Maynard, T.P., 1910, Limestone, in McCallie, S.W., A
preliminary report on the mineral resources of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 23, p. 123-126. _ _ _ _ , 1912, A report on the limestones and cement
materials of north Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 27, 293 p. McCallie, S.W., 1900, A preliminary report on a part of the iron ores of Georgia: Polk, Bartow, and Floyd Counties: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 10-,A, 190 p. _ _ _ _ , 1907, A preliminary report on the marbles of Georgia{Second edition): Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 1, 126 p. _ _ _ _ , 1908, Report on the fossil iron ore deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 17, 199 p. McConnell, K.I., 1980a, Origin and correlation of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation: a new unit in the Piedmont of northern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 52, 19 p. _ _ _ _ , 1980b, Brevard fault zone and Piedmont summarized: Geotimes, v. 25, no. 11, p. 16.

McConnell, K.I., and Abrams, C.E., 1978, Structural and lithologic controls of Sweetwater Creek in western Georgia,
in Short contributions to the geology of Georgia: Georgia
Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p. 87-92. _ _ _ _ , 1982a, Geology of the Atlanta Region: preliminary
maps: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Report 82-5. _ _ _ _ , 1982b, Geology of the New Georgia Group and
associated massive sulfide and gold deposits: West-central Georgia: Guidebook, Exploration for metallic resources in the southeast symposium, University of Georgia Center for Continuing Education, p. 143-170. _ _ _ _ , 1983, Geochemistry of metamorphosed banded iron formation and alumino-silicate assemblages of western Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,v. 15,no.2,p.90. McConnell, K.I., and Costello, J.O., 1979, Large scale crustal shortening in the southwest Georgia Blue Ridge and adjacent Piedmont Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 11, no. 4, p. 205.
- - - - 1980a, Uranium evaluation of graphitic phyllites and other selected rocks in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Report 80-5, 41 p.
_ _ _ _ , 1980b, Guide to geology along a traverse through
the Blue Ridge and Piedmont Provinces of north Georgia,
in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions in southeastern geology:
American Geological Institute, v. 1, p. 241-258. ____ , 1982a, The relationship between Talladega belt
rocks and Ocoee Supergroup rocks near Cartersville,
Georgia, in Bearce, D.N., Black, W.W., Kish, S.A., and
Tull, J.F., eds, Tectonic studies in the Talladega and Carolina slate belts, southern Appalachian orogen: Geological Society of America Special Paper 191, p. 36-46. ____ , 1982b, Basement-cover rock relationships along
the western edge of the Blue Ridge thrust sheet in Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 14, no. 1, p. 39. _ _ _ _ , 1984, Basement-cover rock relationships along
the western edge of Blue Ridge thrust sheet in Georgia, in
Bartholomew, M.J., ed., The Grenville event in the J\ppalachians and related topics: Geological Society of America Special Paper 194, p. 263-279. McLaughlin, R.E., and Hathaway, D.J., 1973, Fossils in the Murphy Marble: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 5, no. 5, p. 418-419. McLemore, W.H., and Hurst, V.J., 1970, The carbonate rocks in the Coosa Valley area, Georgia: Coosa Valley Planning and Economic Development Administration and U.S. Department of Commerce, 170 p. Medlin, J.H., and Crawford, T.J., 1973, Stratigraphy and structure along the Brevard zone in western Georgia and eastern Alabama: American Journal of Science, v. 273-A, p. 89-104. Miyashiro, A., 1975, Volcanic rock series and tectonic setting: Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Science, v. 3, p. 251-269. Miyashiro, A., and Shido, R., 1975, Tholeiitic and calc-akalic series in relation to the behaviors of titanium, vanadium, chromium, and nickel: American Journal of Science, v. 275, p. 265-277.

76

Mohr, D.W., 1973, Stratigraphy and structure of part of the Great Smoky and Murphy belt groups, western North Carolina: American Journal of Science, v. 273-A, p. 41-71.
Murray,J.B., 1973, Geologic map of Forsyth and north Fulton Counties: Georgia Geologic Survey Map RM-7, 1:63,360.
Neathery, T.L., Bentley, R.D., Higgins, M.W., and Zietz, I., 1974, Preliminary interpretation of aeromagnetic and aeroradioactivity maps of the crystalline rocks of Alabama: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 6, no. 4, p. 383.
Neathery, T.L., and Reynolds, J.W., 1973, Stratigraphy and metamorphism of Wedowee Group, a reconnaissance: American Journal of Science, v. 273, p. 723-741.
Neathery, T.L., Tull, J.F., Deininger, R.W., Russell, G.S., and Cooke, R.B., 1975, Geologic profiles in the northern Alabama Piedmont, in Neathery, T.L., and Tull, J.F., eds., Geologic profiles of the northern Alabama Piedmont: Alabama Geological Society Guidebook 13, p. 1-8.
Neuman, R.B., and Nelson, W.H., 1965, Geology of the western Great Smoky Mountains, Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 349-D, 81 p.
O'Connor, B.J., 1977, A calcite-bearing calc-silicate gneiss marker horizon in the eastern greater Atlanta region (abs.): Georgia Journal of Science, v. 35, no. 2, p. 89.
_ _ _ _ , 1983, Ceramic and structural clay, shale and slate deposits in the Valley and Ridge Province of northwest Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 15, no. 2, p. 101.
_ _ _ _ , in preparation, Ceramic and structural clays,
shales and slates of Bartow, Floyd, and Polk Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular.
O'Connor, B.J., Costello, J.O., and Lawton, D.E., 1978, Structure, stratigraphy, and lithology of Precambrian basement and cover rocks in the Corbin and Salem Church antiforms, southwestern Blue Ridge thrust sheet, Bartow, Cherokee, and Pickens Counties, Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 10, no. 4, p. 194.
O'Connor, B.J., Lawton, D.E., and Moye, F.J., 1974, A "Brevard" quartzite-schist unit extending into the inner Piedmont of Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstract with Programs v. 6, no. 4, p. 383-384.
Odom, A.L., and Fullagar, P.D., 1973, Geochronologic and tectonic relationships between the Inner Piedmont, Brevard zone, and Blue Ridge belts, North Carolina: American Journal of .Science, v. 273-A, p. 133-149.
Odom, A.L., Kish, S., and Leggo, P., 1973, Extension of "Grenville basement" to the southern extremity of the Appalachians, U-Pb ages of zircons: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 5, no. 5, p. 425.
O'Neill,J.F., and Wyndham, C.E., 1954, Reconnaissance of the Cartersville manganese deposits, Bartow County, Georgia: U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 5017, 65 p.
Pardee, J.T., and Park, C.F., Jr., 1948, Gold deposits of the southern Piedmont: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 213, 156 p.
Pearce, J.A., 1975, Basalt geochemistry used to investigate past tectonic environments on Cyprus: Tectonophysics, v. 25, 41-67.
Pierce, W.G., 1944, Cobalt-bearing manganese deposits, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 940-J, p. 271-183.

Pinson, W.H., Fairbairn, H.W., Hurley, P.M., Herzog, L.F., and Cormier, R.F., 1957, Age study of some crystalline rocks of the Georgia Piedmont (abs.): Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 68, no. 12, p. 1781.
_ _ _ _ , 1958, Age study of some crystalline rocks of the Piedmont, in Variations in isotopic abundances of strontium, calcium, and argon and related topics: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Report NY0-3938, p. 58-60.
Pinson, W.H., Herzog, L.F., and Cormier, R.F., 1957, Age study of some crystalline rocks of the Georgia Piedmont, in Variations in isotopic abundances of strontium, calcium and argon and related topics: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Report NY0-3937, p. 58-61.
Power, W.R., 1978, Economic geology of the Georgia Marble District, in Twelfth forum on the geology of industrial minerals: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 49, p. 59-67.
Power, W.R., and Forrest, J.T., 1973, Stratigraphy and paleogeography in the Murphy Marble Belt: American Journal of Science, v. 273, p. 698-711.
Prindle, L.M., 1935, Kyanite and vermiculite deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 46, 50 p.
Prouty, W.F., 1923, Geology and mineral resources of Clay County, with special reference to the graphite industry: Alabama Geological Survey County Report 1, 190 p.
Prowell, D.C., 1972, Ultramafic plutons in the central Piedmont of Georgia (M.S. thesis): Atlanta, Emory University, 83 p.
Rankin, D.W., Espenshade, G.H., and Shaw, K.W., 1973, Stratigraphy and structure of the metamorphic belt in northwestern North Carolina and southwestern Virginia: A study from the Blue Ridge across the Brevard fault zone to the Sauratown Mountains anticlinorium: American Journal of Science, v. 273-A, p. 1-40.
Reade, E.H., Power, W.R., Keeners, M.J., and White, D.H., 1980, Barite deposits in the Cartersville district, Bartow County, Georgia in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions in southeastern geology: American Geological Institute, v. 2, p. 379-384.
Reed, J.C., Jr., and Bryant, B., 1964, Evidence for strike-slip faulting along the Brevard zone in North Carolina: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 75, p. 1177-1195.
Reed, J.C., Jr., Bryant, B., and Myers, W.B., 1970, The Brevard Zone: a reinterpretation, in Fisher, G.W., Pettijohn, F.J., Reed, J.C., Jr., and Weaver, K.N., eds., Studies of Appalachian geology, central and southern: New York, Wiley Interscience, p. 261-269.
Roper, P.J., and Dunn, D.E., 1973, Superposed deformation and polymetamorphism, Brevard zone, South Carolina: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 84, p. 3373-3386.
Roper, P.J., and Justus, P.S., 1973, Polytectonic evolution of the Brevard zone: American Journal of Science, v. 273-A, p. 105-132.
Roy, S., 1976, Ancient manganese deposits, in Wolf, K.H., ed., Handbook of strata-bound and stratiform ore deposits, regional studies and specific deposits: New York, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, v. 7, p. 395-476.
Russell, G.S., 1976, Rb-Sr evidence from cataclastic rocks for Devonian faulting in the southern Appalachians: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 8, no. 6, p. 1081.

77

_ _ _ _ , 1978, U-Pb, Rb-Sr, and K-Ar isotopic studies bearing on the tectonic development of the southernmost Appalachian orogen, Alabama (Ph.D. thesis): Tallahassee, Florida State University, 196 p.
Sanders, R.P., 1977, Major element chemical variation in several bodies of granite gneiss of the Piedmont of west Georgia(abs.): Georgia Journal of Science, v. 35, no. 2, p. 89.
Sanders, R.P., Jeffers, L., and Reid, B.J., 1979, Petrology of elliptical calcareous pods in metagreywackes (abs.): Georgia Journal of Science, v. 37, no. 2, p. 88.
Sangster, D.F., 1980, Distribution and origin of Precambrian massive sulphide deposits of North America, in Strangway, D.W., ed., The contintental crust and its mineral deposits: Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 20, p. 723-739.
Sears, J.W., and Cook, R.B., Jr., 1982, Grenville basement rocks in the Pine Mountain window of the Alabama and Georgia Piedmont: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 14, nos. 1 & 2, p. 81.
Sears, J.W., Cook, R.B., Gilbert, O.E., Jr., Carrington, T.J., Schamel, S., 1981, Stratigraphy and structure of the Pine Mountain window in Georgia and Alabama, in Wigley, P.B., ed., Latest thinking on the stratigraphy of selected areas in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 54-A, p. 41-54.
Sever, C.W., 1964, Geology and ground-water resources of crystalline rocks, Dawson County, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 30, 32 p.
Shaw, C.E., 1970, Age and stratigraphic significance of the Talladega slate: Evidence of pre-middle Ordovician tectonism in central Alabama: Southeastern Geology, v. 11, p. 253-267.
_ _ _ _ , 1973, Stratigraphy, structure and tectonics of
rocks adjacent to the Piedmont physiographic front in Talladega County, Alabama, in Carrington, T.J., ed., Talladega metamorphic front: 11th Annual Alabama Geological Society Field Trip, p. 56-65. Shearer, H.K., 1918, Report on the slate deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 34, 192 p. Shearer, H.K., and Hull, J.P.D., 1918, A preliminary report on a part of the pyrites deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 33, 229 p. Sinha, A.K., and Glover, L., 1978, U/Pb systematics of zircons during dynamic metamorphism, a study from the Brevard fault zone: Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 66, p. 305-310. Sinha, A.K., and Zietz, I., 1982, Geophysical and geochemical evidence for a Hercynian magmatic arc, Maryland to Georgia: Geology, v. 10, p. 593-596. Slack, J.F., 1982, Tourmaline in Appalachian-Caledonian massive sulphide deposits and its exploration significance: Institute of Mining and Metallurgy Transactions, Section B., v. 91, p. B81-B89. Smith, E.A., 1888, Report of progress for the years 1884-1888: Alabama Geological Survey Report of Progress, 24 p. _ _ _ _ , 1903, Carboniferous fossils in Ocoee slates in Alabama: Science, v. 18, p. 244-246. Smith, J.W., Wampler, J.M., and Green, M.A., 1969, Isotopic dating and metamorphic isograds of the crystalline rocks of Georgia, in Precambrian-Paleozoic Appalachian problems: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 80, p. 121-139.

Smith, R.W., 1931, Shales and brick clays of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 45, 348 p.
Spencer, J.W., 1893, The Paleozoic group: the geology of ten counties of northwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey,
406p. Stonebraker, J.D., 1973, Potassium-argon geochronology of
the Brevard fault zone, southern Appalachians (Ph.D. thesis): Tallahassee, Florida State University, 134 p. Stose, G.W., and Stose, A.J., 1944, The Chilhowee Group and Ocoee series of the southern Appalachians: American Journal of Science, v. 242, p. 367-390, 401-416. Streckeisen, A., 1976, To each plutonic rock its proper name: Earth Science Reviews, v. 12, p. 1-33. Teague, K.H., 1956, Asbestos in Georgia: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v. 9, no. 1, p. 4-7. Teas, L.P., 1921, Preliminary report on the sand and gravel deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 37,
392 p. Thomas, W.A., Tull, J.F., Bearce, D.N., Russell, G.S., and
Odom, A.L., 1979, Geologic synthesis of the southernmost Appalachians, Alabama and Gerogia, in Wones, D.R., ed., The Caledonides in the U.S.A.: Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Department of Geological Sciences Memoir 2, p.
91-97. Tull, J.F., 1978, Structural development of the Alabama
Piedmont northwest of the Brevard zone: American Journal of Science, v. 278, p. 442-460. _ _ _ _ , 1982, Stratigraphic framework of the Talladega slate belt, Alabama Appalachians, in Bearce, D.N., Black, W.W., Kish, S.A., and Tull, J.F., eds., Tectonic studies in the Talladega and Carolina slate belts, southern Appalachian orogen: Geological Society of America Special Paper 191, p. 3-18. Tull, J .F., Stow, S.H., Long, L., and Hayes-Davis, B., 1978, The Hillabee greenstones: stratigraphy, geochemistry, structure, mineralization and theories of origin: Mineral Resources Institute, Research Report 1, 100 p. Veatch, 0., 1909, Second report on the clay deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 18, 453 p. Wallace, B.M., 1978, Chemistry and petrography of a metagabbro from Paulding County, Georgia (Senior thesis): Carrollton, West Georgia College, 24 p. Wampler, J.M., Neathery, T.L., and Bentley, R.D., 1970, Age relations in the Alabama Piedmont, in Bentley, R.D., and Neathery, T.L., eds., Geology of the Brevard fault zone and related rocks of the Inner Piedmont of Alabama: Alabama Geological Society Guidebook 8, p. 81-90. Watson, T.L., 1902, A preliminary report on a part of the granites and gneisses of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey bulletin 9-A, 367 p.
, 1904, A preliminary report on the bauxite deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 11,
169p. _ _ _ _ , 1906, A preliminary report on the ocher deposits
of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 13, 81 p. _ _ _ _ , 1908, A preliminary report on the manganese
deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 14, 195p. Weis, P.L., 1973, Graphite, in Brobst, D.A., and Pratt, W.P., eds., United States Mineral Resources: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 820, p. 277-283.

78

Whisonant, R.C., 1974, Petrology of the Chilhowee Group (Cambrian and Cambrian?) in central, eastern, and southern Tennessee: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 44, p. 228-241.
White, W.S. , Denson, N.L., Dunlap, J.C., and Overstreet, E.F., 1966, Bauxite deposits of Northwest Georgia, in Bauxite deposits of the southeastern United States: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1199M, p. M2-M41.
Whitney, J.A., Jones, L.M., and Walker, R.L., 1976, Age and origin of the Stone Mountain granite, Lithonia district, Georgia: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 87, p. 1067-1077.
Whitney, J.A., and Wenner, D.B., 1980, Petrology and structural setting of post-metamorphic granites of Georgia, in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions in southeastern geology: American Geological Institute, v. 1, p. 351-377.

Wiegand, P.W., and Ragland, P.C., 1970, Geochemistry of Mesozoic dolerite dikes from eastern North America: Contributions to Miner:alogy and Petrology, v. 29, p.195-214.
Work Projects Administration, 1940-41, Mineral Survey, Cobb County, Georgia.
Work Projects Administration,1940-42, Mineral Survey, Hall County, Georgia.
Wright, N.P., 1966, Mineralogic variation in the Stone Mountain Granite, Georgia: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 77, p. 207-210.
Yeates, W.S., McCallie, S.W., and King, F.P., 1896, A preliminary report on a part of the gold deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 4-A, 542 p.
Yeend, W., 1973, Sand and gravel, in Brobst, D.A., and Pratt, W.P., eds., United States Mineral Resources: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 820, p. 561-565.

79

APPENDIX A
Description of Geologic Units
81

APPENDIX A

This appendix provides a brief description of rock units defined on Plate I. geologic province from northwest to southeast across the map. References for

tRhoecdkeusncritisptairoendoefsecaricbhe<rlo1o5~

unit are given in parentheses next to the unit name.

VALLEY AND RIDGE PROVINCE

chq chs

Cambrian Chilhowee Group (Hayes, 1902; Cressler and others 1979): includes rocks previously termed Weisner quartzite and i~ composed dominantly of vitreous quartzite (chq) with local interbeds of conglomerate and sandy shale (chs). 771-656 ft. thick (Mack, 1980).

s

Cambrian Shady Dolomite (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948): bluish-

gray, medium to coarsely crystalline dolomite. Host to barite, iron and

manganese deposits. 100 ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).

r

Cambrian Rome Formation (Hayes, 1902; Butts and Gildersleeve,

1948): includes thin-bedded, fine-grained sandstones and sandy shales

variably colored red, purple, green-yellow and white. Locally contains

thin interbeds of limestone. 500-1000 ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).

WB

EB

csl

-Bed

cis

-Be

cs

cs

CA

cld csu cl csl -Bed

Cambrian Conasauga Group (Cressler, 1970; Cressler and others, 1979): includes Western (WB) and Eastern (EB) belts in Floyd County with units of mostly shale and some limestone (csl), mostly limestone and some shale (cls), siliceous shale and thin-bedded sandstone (cs), dolomite (Bed), shale and limestone mixed (c), and mostly shale (cs). In the Cartersville area (CA): light- to medium-gray and brown dolomite (Bed); greenish-gray, tan, purplish, and black shale (csl); limestone (cl), greenish, gray, and slightly purplish shale (csu), and gray dolomite (cld). 1500 ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).

OCk

Upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician Knox Group (Cressler,

cr

1970; Cressler and others, 1979): includes light- to medium-gray, fine-to

coarse-grained, thickly to massively bedded cherty dolomite and

brownish-gray, medium- to coarse-grained "asphaltic" dolomite of the

Copper Ridge Dolomite (cr and OCk); approximately 500 feet of

light-to medium-gray, thick to massively bedded dolomite interbedded

with gray and tan, aphanitic limestone and sandstone of the Chepultepec

Dolomite; and light- to medium-gray dolomite interbedded with light-

to medium-gray, aphanitic to medium-grained, thickly bedded lime-

stone of the Longview Limestone. The Longview Limestone locally

weathers to a residuum containing angular chert and sandstone

fragments. 3000 ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).

On

Ordovician Newala Limestone (Cressler, 1970): includes light-gray

to medium dark-gray, thickly bedded limestone and light- to medium-

gray, fine- to coarse-grained, massively bedded dolomite. Occurring

locally at the top of the Newala is a conglomerate containing clasts of

argillaceous limestone. Nodular and bedded chert also occur locally.

300ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).

Ors

Ordovician Rockmart Slate (Cressler, 1970): includes dark-gray to

Or

black, calcareous slate and micaceous siltstone (Or) and feldspathic

sandstone interbedded with slate and conglomerate. Two types of

conglomerate occur: one contains limestone, dolomite, slate, sandstone,

chert and both sedimentary and metamorphic quartzite cobbles and

pebbles; another conglomerate is composed of fine quartz pebbles in a

feldspathic sandstone matrix. 0-600 ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).

83

Oum
Srm
MDc Mfp Mls Da
Mh Mfs Ml
Mb
Pu
BLUE RIDGE PROVINCE pc
pt;p
pwu pwg pwc pf;et psc pt;d

Ordovician, Upper and Middle undivided (Cressler, 1970): includes calcareous mudstone and light- to medium-gray, thickly to massively bedded limestone of theMurfreesboro Limestone; several feet of cobbly argillaceous limestone and blue-gray flaggy lim-estone of the Ridley Formation; approximately 100 feet of shale and calcareous mudstone interbedded with thin-bedded reddish siltstone and fine- to mediumgrained sandstone of the Moccasin Limestone; and approximately 300 feet of yellow, maroon, and reddish mudstone, thin-bedded red siltstone, and impure fine to coarse sandstone of the Bays Formation. 480ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).
Silurian Red Mountain (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948): fine-grained, gray, locally ferruginous and rusty sandstone. Sandstone is dominantly thinly layered with interbedded shale. Basal strata are composed of thick bedded limestone. 600-1200 ft. thick Cressler, (1970).
Devonian and Mississippian Chert (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Cressler, 1970): includes a dense, gray, brittle, evenly bedded chert (Fort Payne Chert, Mfp); a dark, compact, calcareous shale member of the Fort Payne Chert (Lavender Shale, Mls); and a locally sandy and ferruginous dark-gray chert (Armuchee Chert, Da). Also includes the Chattanooga Shale which in this area is too thin to break out. Approx. 270-425 ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).
Mississippian Floyd Shale (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Cressler, 1970): includes predominantly gray to black, fissile shale (Mfs); beds of limestone (M l ); and near the top of the formation, beds of sandstone or sandy limestone termed the Hartselle Sandstone (Mh). Approx. 300 ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).
Mississippian Bangor Limestone (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948): approximately 500 feet of thick-bedded, bluish-gray, coarsely crystalline limestone above the Hartselle Sandstone. 300ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).
Pennsylvania Undifferentiated (Butts and Gildersleeve, 1948; Cressler, 1970): dominantly Pottsville Formation composed entirely of thick sandstone, conglomerate and shale beds with interlayered coal beds. 250-325 ft. thick (Cressler, 1970).
Precambrian Corbin Gneiss Complex (McConnell and Costello, 1980b): complex association of ortho and paragneisses with compositions varying from granite to granodiorite. Predominant facies is a megacrystic quartz monzonite gneiss. Also includes a pyroxene granulite facies.
Precambrian Snowbird Group, Pinelog Formation (McConnell and Costello, 1980b): interlayered metaconglomerate, quartzite, sericite phyllite, and graphitic phyllite uncomformably overlying Precambrian basement. Lithic metaconglomerate (diamictite) also present locally.
Precambrian Walden Creek Group, Wilhite Formation (McConnell and Costello, 1980b): includes interlayered sericite phyllite and graphitic phyllite (pwu), graphitic phyllite (pt;wg), quartzite, and quartz-rich carbonate (pwc).
Precambrian Great Smoky Group (McConnell and Costello, 1980b; this report): includes interlayered metasandstone and sericite phyllite with local calc-silicate granofels pods of the Etowah Formation (pet); poorly sorted conglomeratic metagreywacke interlayered with graphite phyllite and sericite phyllite of the Sweetwater Creek Formation (psc); and quartz pebble metaconglomerate interlayered with quartzite and sericite phyllite with accessory staurolite and chloritoid of the Dean Formation (pt;d).
84

Pzna Pzb Pzmm Pzmb

Paleozoic Murphy Marble belt group (Costello and others, 1982): includes carbonaceous phyllite or laminated, dark-colored argillite interbedded with medium-grained metagraywacke of the Nantahala Formation (Pzna); thinly interlayered, gray, biotite schist and micaceous quartzite that weathers to a buff to orange-colored saprolite of the Brasstown Formation (Pzb); calcareous and dolomitic marbles separated by a calc schist composed of hornblende, epidote, calcite, and biotite ofthe Murphy Marble (Pzmm) (Pzmm also includes rocks of the Marble Hill Hornblende Schist composed of alternating layers of marble and hornblende schist ranging in thickness offrom 1 to 10 em); and interlayered mica schist and garnet mica schist with local occurrences of graphitic and quartz-calc schist of the Mineral Bluff Formation (Pzmb).

NORTHERN PIEDMONT PROVINCE

New Georgia Group (late Precambrian to early Paleozoic) (stratigraphic order uncertain).

mcu

Mud Creek Formation (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a): includes

clq

locally garnetiferous, equigranular hornblende-plagioclase amphi-

mcb

bolite and hornblende gneiss interlayered with garnet-biotite-

vrg

quartz-plagioclase gneiss, and biotite schist of the Mud Creek

Formation undifferentiated (mcu); interlayered magnetite quartzite

(banded iron formation) termed the Cedar Lake Quartzite (clq);

garnet-biotite gneiss (mcb); and biotite-quartz-plagioclase ortho-

gneiss (metadacite) termed the Villa Rica Gneiss (vrg).

lma

Univeter Formation (this report): includes a unit composed of

res

hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite, horJlblende gneiss and local

lenses and layers of banded iron formation termed the Lost

Mountain Amphibolite (lma); and garnet biotite-muscovite schist

locally varying to garnet-hornblende-muscovite-quartz schist termed

the Rose Creek Schist (res).

pcu

Pumpkinvine Creek Formation (Crawford, 1976; McConnell,

gfg

1980a; this report): includes hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite

interlayered with garnet-hornblende-plagioclase gneiss, sericite

phyllite, and banded iron formation of the Pumpkinvine Creek

Formation undifferentiated (pcu), and hornblende quartz-plagio-

clase gneiss varying to a biotite muscovite-quartz-plagioclase gneiss

with layers of hornblende gneiss and actinolite-chlorite schist

termed the Gaits Ferry Gneiss (gfg).

cas

Canton Formation (Bayley, 1928; this report): garnet-sericite

schist interlayered with garnet-graphite schist kyanite, micaceous

quartzite and metagraywacke.

acg

Acworth Gneiss (this report): medium-grained biotite-quartz-

plagioclase orthogneiss with accessory muscovite and epidote. Mafic

xenoliths occur locally.

kcc
cs bif kq kqs
q
amp/hgn/fgn amp/hgn fgn urn

Kellogg Creek Mafic Complex (this report): garnet-hornblendeplagioclase amphibolite, metagabbro and lesser amounts of metaultramafic rocks.
Unnamed rock units: includes chlorite schist garnet and chlorite-anthophyllite schist interpreted to represent relict magnesium-aluminum hydrothermal alteration zones (cs); sulfide, magnetite or manganese-bearing quartzites interpreted as banded iron formation (bif); coarse-grained kyanite-quartz granofels interpreted to represent relict aluminosilicate hydrothermal alteration zones (kq); garnet-kyanite-quartz-sericite schist (kqs); intermixed amphibolite, hornblende gneiss and felsic gneiss of undetermined composition (amp/hgn/fgn); felsic gneiss of undetermined composition (fgn); and meta-ultramafic rocks believed to be both intrusives and relict hydrothermal alteration systems (urn).

85

dru drs dra bif
amu amq
ba
pfu pfs bif rna
cpq
fs
cs bif kq
ss
gms bgms gs amp/hgn ggn urn
llu lid llg

Sandy Springs Group (late Precambrian to early Paleozoic): includes an eastern and western belt.
Western belt: Dog River Formation (this report: includes undifferentiated muscovite-biotite-quartz-feldspar gneiss (metagraywacke), garnetmuscovite schist, and amphibolite (dru), with mappable units of garnet-muscovite schist (drs), amphibolite (dra) and thin (1 to 3 in.) layers of banded iron formation (bif).
Andy Mountain Formation (Crawford and Medlin, 1974; Abrams and McConnell, 1981a): biotite-garnet-plagioclase-muscovite-quartz schist graphite, staurolite, and kyanite, and feldspathic, micaceous garnet quartzite of the Andy Mountain Formation undifferentiated (amu); and clean, sugary quartzite garnet (amq).
Bill Arp Formation (Crawford and Medlin, 1974; Abrams and McConnell, 1981a): interlayered garnet-biotite-muscovite-plagioclase-quartz schist; muscovite schist; quartz-muscovite-biotite schist; muscovite-biotite-quartz-plagioclase schist; and metagraywacke (ba). Locally calcareous concretions, possibly limey lenses, occur as elongate features parallel to foliation.
Eastern belt: Powers Ferry Formation (Higgins and McConnell, 1978a; this report): undifferentiated biotite-quartz-plagioclase gneiss (metagraywacke), mica schist and amphibolite (pfu); a mappable mica schist unit (pfs); and banded iron formation (bif). One continuous amphibolite was termed the Mableton amphibolite (rna).
Chattahoochee Palisades Quartzite (Higgins and McConnell, 1978a; this report): massive, white, yellowi.sh, or bluish, sugary to vitreous quartzite locally containing accessory mica, feldspar, and elongate garnets (cpq). Graded bedding is apparent locally.
Factory Shoals Formation (Higgins and McConnell, 1978a): intercalated light-gray, lustrous, garnet-biotite-oligoclase or muscovitebiotite-plagioclase metagraywacke, kyanite-quartz schist, and staurolite-muscovite quartz schist (fs). Locally, schist grades to a garnet-graphite schist.
Unnamed Rock Units: includes chlorite schist and chlorite-anthophyllite schist interpreted to represent relict magnesium-aluminum hydrothermal alteration zone (cs); sulfide, magnetite or manganesebearing quartzites interpreted as banded iron formation (bif); coarse-grained kyanite-quartz granofels interpreted to represent relict aluminosilicate hydrothermal alteration zones (kq); interlayered sericite schist and micaceous quartzite(ss); garnet-muscovite schist (gms); biotite-garnet-muscovite schist (bgms); amphibolite and hornblende gneiss (amp/hgn); blastoporphyritic to nonporphyritic biotite muscovite-quartz-plagioclase-microcline gneiss (ggn), and meta-ultramafic rock (urn).
Laura Lake Mafic Complex (McConnell and Costello, 1980b; this report): migmatitic garnet amphibolite of the Laura Lake Mafic Complex undifferentiated llu) with smaller amounts of pyroxene (relict)-bearing metagabbro (llg), meta-quartz diorite (lid), metaultramafic rock and banded iron formation. Magnetite occurs as common porphyroblasts in amphibolite and coarse-grained amphibolequartz-plagioclase rock is common neosome.
86

ag

Austell Gneiss (Abrams and McConnell, 1981a; Abrams, 1983): fine- to

coarse-grained blastoporphyritic to nonporphyritic orthogneiss com-

posed of muscovite, biotite, oligoclase, quartz and microcline.

shg

Sand Hill Gneiss (this report): fine- to coarse-grained blastoporphyritic

to nonporphyritic orthogneiss composed of muscovite, biotite, oligoclase,

quartz and microcline. Generally contains more muscovite, quartz and

plagioclase and less microcline than Austell Gneiss.

mrg

Mulberry Rock Gneiss (this report): medium-grained, equigranular

muscovite-quartz-microcline-plagioclase orthogneiss.

d

Diabase dikes

SOUTHERN PIEDMONT PROVINCE AND BREVARD FAULT ZONE

Atlanta Group (late Precambrian to early Paleozoic) (stratigraphic order revised after Higgins and Atkins, 1981):

cc

Camp Creek Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): massive

granite gneiss interlayered with thin, fine-grained, dark-green

hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite.

icq

Intrenchment Creek Quartzite (Higgins and Atkins, 1981):

spessartine quartzite and spessartine-mica schist interpreted in this

report to be banded iron formation.

bci

Big Cotton Indian Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): inter-

calated biotite-plagioclase gneiss (locally porphyritic), hornblende-

plagioclase amphibolite, and biotite-muscovite schist.

ca

Clarkston Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): sillimanite-

tc

garnet-quartz-plagioclase-biotite-muscoviteschistinterlayered with

f

hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite (ca). Includes a unit composed

only of schist termed the Fairburn Member (f); and a unit similar to

Clarkston undifferentiated termed the Tar Creek Member (tc).

st

Stonewall Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): intercalated

fine-grained biotite gneiss, hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite and

sillimanite-biotite schist.

wac

Wahoo Creek Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): includes

slabby, medium-grained muscovite-plagioclase-quartz gneiss,

amphibolite, mica schist and epidote-calcite-diopside gneiss (calc-

silicate).

se

Senoia Formation (Atkins and Higgins, 1981): garnet-biotite-

muscovite schist interlayered with fine-grained amphibolite, local

thin layers of spessartine quartzite (iron formation?), sillimanite

schist and biotite gneiss.

cl

Clairmont Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): interlayered

medium-grained biotite-plagioclase gneiss and fine- to medium-

grained hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite.

pl

Promised Land Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): includes

h

massive to thinly layered, medium-grained, gray, banded biotite

granite gneiss interlayered with fine-grained, dark-green to greenish

black, blocky amphibolite. A thin quartzite and muscovite quartz

schist unit near top of the Promised Land Formation is termed the

Hannah Member (h).

we

Wolf Creek Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): thinly lami-

nated, fine-grained amphibolite interlayered with lustrous, silvery,

gray, biotite-muscovite schist.

87

iy
ng
n l
pfu cpq fs
urn amp bgn ggn sg bgn/amp/sch
q
bms m Pzss Pzum Pzsa Pzsas
lig
Cp
Cb
Cpa
Cs
my bz bzm d

I
Inman Yard Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): porphyroblastic biotite-plagioclase gneiss porphyroblastic granite gneiss and sillimanite-muscovite schist.
Norcross Gneiss (Higgins and Atkins, 198l): light-gray epidotebiotite-muscovite-plagioclase gneiss locally containing amphibolite.
Snellville Formation (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): includes two members, a lower member of interlayered garnet-biotite-muscovite schist, biotite-muscovite schist, thin amphibolites and minor biotite gneiss and quartzite termed the Norris Lake Schist (n) and an upper member composed of quartzite variably containing muscovite, garnet and sillimanite termed the Lanier Mountain Quartzite (I).
Sandy Springs Group (Higgins and McConnell, 1978a: Kline, 1980; this report): Similar to sequence observed in northern Piedmont and at least partially equivalent to Atlanta Group (see text). Includes a lower unit of intercalated biotite gneiss, mica schist and amphibolite (pfu); a middle unit composed of micaceous quartzite, mica schist and graphitic schist (cpq); and an upper unit of graphite-garnetmica schist with lesser amounts of biotite gneiss and amphibolite (fs).
Unnamed or unassigned units (after Grant, unpublished data; this report): includes meta-ultramafic rocks (urn); amphibolite (amp); mica schist and biotite gneiss (bgn); granitic gneiss (ggn); interlayered sillimanite-graphite schist and graphitic, feldspathic quartzite (sg); graphitic, micaceous, feldspathic quartzite (q); intercalated biotite gneiss, amphibolite and mica schist (bgn/ amp/sch); garnet-mica schist staurolite and garnet-biotite gneiss (bms); and marble (m).
Soapstone Ridge Complex (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): includes an actinolite-chlorite-talc schist (Pzss); fine-grained amphibolite (Pzsa), intermixed amphibolite and actinolite-chlorite-talc schist (Pzsas); and coarse-grained ultramafic rock (Pzum). Also present but not defined on Plate I is a mixed amphibolite-metagabbro-ultramafic unit and a sillimanite-quartz blastomylonite and epidosite near the base of the complex.
Lithonia Gneiss (Herrmann, 1954): includes evenly banded biotitequartz-feldspar gneiss, quartz-rich garnetiferous layers and migmatitic muscovite-biotite-plagioclase-microcline-quartz gneiss termed the Mt. Arabia Migmatite (Grant and others, 1980; not outline on Plate I).
Palmetto Granite (Dooley, in Atkins and others, 1980a): coarsegrained porphyritic granite composed of microcline, quartz and plagioclase with accessory biotite, muscovite, perthite, sphene, apatite, epidote, and zircon.
Ben Hill Granite (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): coarse-grained, porphyritic muscovite-biotite quartz-plagioclase-microcline granite.
Panola Granite (Higgins and Atkins, 1981): homogenous, mediumgrained biotite-oligoclase-quartz-microcline granite.
Stone Mountain Granite (Herrmann, 1954): fine- to medium-grained granite composed of biotite, muscovite, microcline, quartz and oligoclase with characteristic rosettes of tourmaline.
Ductilely sheared rocks: includes undifferentiated ductilely sheared rocks in the Brevard zone including button schists (bz), mylonites in the Brevard zone (bzm), and mylonite in other areas (my).
Diabase dikes.
88

APPENDIXB
Index to Mines, Prospects and Mineral Localities
(to accompany Plates II and IIa)
89

APPENDIXB
Index to Mines, Prospects and Mineral Localities

Sites are listed by commodity in alphabetical order. Under each commodity heading, counties are listed alphabetically and sites are listed by abbreviated commodity symbol (e.g., Bx for bauxite) and numerical designation to correspond to map designations. Sites are numbered consecutively in each county, beginning with number one. Active mines or quarries are notated by an asterisk. Other information given is geologic province (V.R.- Valley and Ridge, B.R. - Blue Ridge, N.P. -Northern Piedmont, S.P.- includes Southern Piedmont and Brevard zone); site type (M-Mine, P-Prospect, L-Locality, etc.); name, if available; and name of the U.S. Geological

Survey 7.5- minute topographic quadrangle in which the site is located. All U.S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangles are number coded to correspond to the numerical coding system of the Georgia Geologic Survey (Fig. 1, Plate Ia). Numbers in parentheses before each site name refer to the numbered reference list for Appendix B. Sites not numbered were located by the authors.
Locations in some cases are approximate due to a lack of detailed location information in older references. Due to the number of localities in the Cartersville area, this area is shown enlarged at 1:24,000 scale on a separate map.

Categories and Abbreviations of Commodities (listed in order of appearance in appendix)

Aluminosilicates K kyanite St staurolite
Asbestos, talc, soapstone, sericite and chlorite A asbestos T talc Sp soapstone Ch chlorite Sc sericite
B barite
Bx bauxite
Cly clay
c corundum
F flagstone
Au gold
G granite, crushed and dimension
Gr graphite
Ls limestone
Limonite and other iron ore L limonite Fe iron ore

Mg magnetite
Mn manganese
Mb marble
Oc ocher
Pegmatites Pg pegmatite M mica Brl beryl
p pyrite, includes chalcopyrite and sphalerite
Q quartzite
Sand and gravel, includes fill materials S sand SG sand and gravel Fm fill materials
Sh shale
Sl slate
T tripoli

91

ALUMINOSILICATES

SYMBOL

St

60

K

90

K

91

K

102

K

103

K

11

K

27

COUNTY Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Fulton Hall

PROVINCE B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. N.P. S.P.

TYPE L L L L L L L

REF. (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (24) (37)

NAME N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Carter Property Harrington Property

# QUADRANGLE 115 Ball Ground West 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 115 Ball Ground West 186 Chamblee 120 Gainesville

ASBESTOS, TALC, SOAPSTONE, SERICITE AND CHLORITE

SYMBOL

Sp

1

Sp

10

Sp

11

Sp

27

A,Sp 40

A,C 36

Sp,A 37

Sp

38

Tc

63

Sp

10

SP

9

Sp 108

Sp 116

Sp

79

Sc, Ch 30

Sp

1

Tc

13

A

23

Sp

40

Sp

23

Sp

4

Sp

8

Sp

9

Sp

14

A

10

Tc

14

Sp

18

A

32

COUNTY Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Clayton Cobb Cobb DeKalb Douglas Douglas Douglas Gwinnett Gwinnett Hall Hall Paulding Paulding

PROVINCE N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. B.R. N.P. N.P. N.P. B.R. N.P. B.R. S.P. N .P. N.P. S.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. N.P. N.P.

TYPE L p p p p p p p
L Q L p
M L
Q p
L L L L L Q p p
L L L p

REF. (8) (8) (8) (17) (8) (17) (17) (8) (8) (20) (8) (20) (8) (8) (8) (8) (35) (8)
(8) (8) (8) (8) (8) (8) (37) (8) (8)

NAME W.W. Smith Property J. W. Stallings Property W.A. Freeman Property Rogers and McClendon McPherson (Lyle) Property Paschal (Worthy) Property McPherson Property J.W. Pitts Property Emma A. Cox Property Verde Antique Quarry Frank Haws Property Henry Cole Property Brady Mine J.J.Howell Property Southern Talc Co. S.D. Moore Property JohnS. Kemp Property J .H. Cantrell Property Soapstone Ridge N/A J.L. Walton Property T.J. Carnes Property Thomas Doss Property N/A Soapstone Hill Minor Reynolds Property S.M. Harris Property Dean and Hunt Prospects

# QUADRANGLE 256 Bowdon East 257 Carrollton 257 Carrollton 232 Villa Rica 257 Carrollton 257 Carrollton 232 Villa Rica 257 Carrollton 115 Ball Ground West 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 114 Waleska 138 Canton. 137 Canton South 237 Southeast Atlanta 183 Lost Mountain 209 Mableton 237 Southeast Atlanta 208 Austell 207 Nebo 233 Winston 164 Suwanee 187 Norcross 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 182 Dallas 207 Nebo

92

SYMBOL

B

176

B

180

B

47

B

48

B,Oc 49*

B

50

B

51*

B,Oc 52

B

53

B

54

B

55

B

56

B

57

B,Mn 58

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

B

59

B

61

B

62

B

63

B

64

B

65

B

66

B

67

B

68

B

69

B,Mn 106

B

112

B

116

B

259

B

260

B 261

B 262

B,Oc 76

B

71

B

72

B

73

B

74

B

75

B

229

B

292

B

152

B

153

Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

BARITE

PROVINCE B.R. B.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE L M M M M M M M M M M M M M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

REF. (9) (9) (9) (9)
(15) (9) (15) (9) (9)
(9) (9) (9) (9) (9)
(9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (9) (9) (9) (9)
(9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9)

NAME Etowah Dev. Co. Iron Hill Mine Tucker Hollow Mine Bertha Mine New Riverside Ocher Kreb's Pigment and Chemical Paga Mining Co. Ga. Peruvian Ocher Co. PagaNo. 3 Mine Section House Mine Nulsen Mine DuPont Mine No.2 Etowah Dev. Co. Hebble Bros. Mine/ Etowah Dev. Co. Etowah Dev. Co. Etowah Dev. Co. Etowah Dev. Co. R.B. Satterfield Big Creek Mine Thompson-Weinman Co. Clayton Mine Parrott Springs Mine Munford Lot Mine Jones Property Hurricane Hollow Mine Georgia Barium and Ocher N/A Apex Mine Winterbottom Mine Reservoir Hill Mine N/A Cherokee Ochre Co. Tumlin Lot Harrison Chiles Property McClatchey Property Larey Property Abramson Property Norris-Hall Property Carson Property Richey Property Saxon Property

# QUADRANGLE 136 Allatoona Dam 136 Allatoona Dam 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville
135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 112 White West 112 White West

93

SYMBOL

B

165

B

166

B

168

B,L 169

B

170

B

171

B

173

B,Mn 228

B

120

B

96

B

97

B

12

COUNTY
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Cherokee Floyd Floyd Floyd

BARITE (Continued)

PROVINCE
V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE
L L Q Q

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

B.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

REF.

NAME

(9) Brandon Property (9) McCormick Property (9) Stephens Property (9) C.M. Jones
(Chulafinnee) Property (9) Big Tom Mine (9) Pittsburg-Ga. Mining Co. (9) N/A (9) Holcombe Property (9) White Property (9) Whatley Property (9) Braden Property (9) Gibson Property

BAUXITE

SYMBOL

Bx

3

Bx

4

Bx

6

Bx

9

Bx

10

Bx

11

Bx

12

Bx

13

Bx

14

Bx

15

Bx

16

Bx

17

Bx

18

Bx

19

Bx

20

Bx

21

Bx

22

Bx

23

Bx

24

Bx

25

Bx

26

Bx

27

Bx

28

Bx

29

Bx

30

COUNTY
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

PROVINCE
V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE p p p p p
M M M p p
M M p p p p
M p
M p p
M M M p

REF.

NAME

(32) Fountain Prospect (32) Carroll (Martin) Prospect (32) Hatter Prospect

(32) Hawkins Mine

(32) N/A

(32) McGuire Mine

(32) Connesuna Mine

(32) Julia Mine

(32) N/A

(32) N/A

(32) Warner (Waring) Mine

(32) Clemons Mine

(32) Spurlock Prospect

(32) Green Prospect

(32) Montague Prospect

(32) Scott Prospect

(32) Halt Mine

(32) N/A

(32) Mary Mine

(32) N/A

(32) Morrow Prospect

(32) Sheets Mine

(32) Terry Shaw Mine (32) N/A

(32) N/A

94

# QUADRANGLE 157 Taylorsville 157 Taylorsville 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge
158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 111 Adairsville 114 Waleska 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 133 Wax
# QUADRANGLE 133Wax 133Wax 110 Shannon 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville

BAUXITE (Continued)

SYMBOL

Bx

31

Bx

32

Bx

33

Bx

34

Bx

35

Bx

36

Bx

6

Bx

7

Bx

8

Bx

9

Bx

11

Bx

14

Bx

20

Bx

21

Bx

22

Bx

23

Bx

24

Bx

25

Bx

26

Bx

27

Bx

28

Bx

29

Bx

30

Bx

32

Bx

36

Bx

37

Bx

38

Bx

39

Bx

40

Bx

41

Bx

42

Bx

84

Bx

79

Bx

80

Bx

78

Bx

82

Bx

83

Bx

81

Bx

85

Bx

86

Bx

87

Bx

88

Bx

89

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE p p p p
M M M p
M p p
M M p p
M p p p p
M M p p p
p
M M M p
M M M M p p
M M p p
M M M

REF. (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (36) (32) (36) (36) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (36) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32)

NAME Davis #1 Prospect Davis #2 Prospect Gilreath Prospect McGuire Prospect Akin (Chisholm) Mine Curtis Mine N/A Brannon Prospect Cochran Mine Freeman Prospect Terhune Property Minter Mines Kirkland Mine J.D. Erwin Property N/A Jeff Washington Mine Erwin Prospect Duke Prospect N/A Ritch Prospect Fomby Mine Kirkland (M.B. Woods) Mine Evans Mine Jere Dodd Property N/A N/A Howell Mine Fat John Mine Red Warrior Mine Lanham Prospect Bobo Mine Burney Mine Watters (Perry) Mine Maddox Mine Kerce Prospect Watters Prospect Wright Mine Ward Mine N/A N/A Otts Mines New Holland Mine Holland Mines

95

# QUADRANGLE 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 133 Wax 133 Wax 133 Wax 133 Wax 133 Wax 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon

SYMBOL

Bx

90

Bx

91

Bx

92

Bx

93

Bx

94

Bx 103

Bx 105

Bx 106

Bx 107

Bx 108

Bx 109

Bx 110

Bx 112

Bx 113

Bx 114

Bx 115

Bx 116

Bx 117

Bx 118

Bx 119

Bx 120

Bx 121

Bx 122

Bx 123

Bx

411

Bx

50

Bx

51

Bx

52

COUNTY Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Polk Polk Polk Polk

BAUXITE (Continued)

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE p
M M p p p
M p p p
M p
M M M M p p
L p p
M M p
M p
L p

REF. (32) (32) (32) (32) (36) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) {32) {32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32) (32)

NAME Ridge Valley No. 1 Armstrong Mine Stockade Mine N/A J.S. Roach Property Hiram-Bobo Prospect Doyle Mine Willis Reynolds N/A N/A Booger Hollow Creek Minter Prospect Bradshaw (Bonsack) Mine North Ware Mt. Mine Reese Mine Wharton (Mitchell) Mine Maggie Burkhalter Prospect N/A N/A Hiram-Bobo Prospect Brannon Prospect Diamond Mine South Ware Mt. Mine Bush Washington Prospect Broadway (Bigelow) Mine N/A N/A Drummond Prospect

SYMBOL
Sh/Cly 42 Sh/Cly 124 Cly 125 Sh/Cly 155 Sh/Cly 156

COUNTY
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

Cly 24 Cly 17* Cly 24* Sh/Cly 48

Cobb Douglas Douglas Floyd

CLAY

PROVINCE
V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE p p p
Q L

S.P .

Q

S.P.

Pit

S.P.

Pit

V.R.

M

REF. (28) (28) (28) (28) (28)
(28) (15) (15) (28)

NAME
Boyd Orchard Co. Jim Nolan Property R.E. Adair Property W.D. Pittard Property Black, Randolf, Guyton & Ward Property Chattahoochee Brick Co. Siskey Hauling Inc. Jenkins Brick Co. B. Mifflin Hood Property

96

# QUADRANGLE 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East
# QUADRANGLE 111 Adairsville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 112 White West 112 White West
209 Mableton 234 Campbellton 235 Ben Hill 132 Rome South

SYMBOL

Sh/Cly 59

Cly 73

Cly

12*

Cly

1

Cly

19

Cly 61*

COUNTY Floyd Floyd Fulton Hall Hall Polk

CLAY (Continued)

PROVINCE
V.R. V.R. S.P. S.P. S.P. V.R.

TYPE Q p
M p
L Pit

REF.
(28) (36) (15) (37) (37) (15)

NAME
Romega Clay Products N/A Chattahoochee Brick Co. O.P. Henderson Desoto Mica Mine Marquette Cement Mfg. Co.

# QUADRANGLE
109 Rome North 110 Shannon 234 Campbellton 142 Flowery Branch 120 Gainesville 156 Rockmart North

CORUNDUM

SYMBOL

c

33

c

10

c

20

c

21

c

2

c

11

c

1

c

33

COUNTY Carroll Cobb Cobb Cobb Forsyth Hall Paulding Paulding

PROVINCE N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. S.P. N.P. N.P.

TYPE L L p p p
L p
'L

REF. (14) (14) (14) (14) (14) (14) (14) (14)

NAME N/A N/A W.B. Turner Farm N/A Tuggle Property N/A N/A N/A

FLAGSTONE

SYMBOL

F

294

F,G 17

COUNTY Bartow Hall

PROVINCE V.R. N.P.

TYPE Q Q

REF. (37)

NAME N/A D.L. Evans Quarry

GOLD

SYMBOL

Au 123

Au 188

Au 132

Au 186

Au 189

Au 190

Au 191

Au

7

Au

8

Au

20

Au

21

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll

PROVINCE N.P.. B.R. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P.

TYPE p
M p
M p p
M M M,P p
M

REF. (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (12) (12) (12) (12)

NAME Robertson Property Avery Mine (Gold Branch) Howard Property W.M. Goings Property S.D. McDaniel Property Allatoona Vein Glade Mine Bonner Mine Stacy Mine, Stacy Property J.L. Davis Property Chambers Mine

97

# QUADRANGLE 258 Hulett 183 Lost Mountain 208 Austell 208 Austell 164 Suwanee 120 Gainesville 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 207 Nebo
# QUADRANGLE 113 White East 120 Gainesville
# QUADRANGLE 159 Acworth 159 Acworth 159 Acworth 136 Allatoona Dam 159 Acworth 159 Acworth 159 Acworth 256 Bowdon East 257 Carrollton 232 Villa Rica 232 Villa Rica

SYMBOL

Au

22

Au

23

Au

24

Au

25

Au

29

Au

30

Au

1

Au

4

Au

3

Au

13

Au

14

Au

15

Au

16

Au

17

Au

18

Au 110

Au 111

Au 112

Au 113

Au 114

Au 115

Au

22

Au

23

Au

24

Au

25

Au

27

Au

32

P,Au 33

Au

34

Au

35

Au

36

Au

44

Au

50

Au

51

Au

52

Au

53

Au

58

Au

75

Au

80

Au

81

Au

84

Au

85

Au

26

COUNTY Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee

GOLD (Continued)

PROVINCE N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N .P. N.P. N .P. N.P. N.P. N .P. N .P. N.P. N.P. N .P. N.P. N .P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. B.R.

TYPE P M M M M M M
M P M M M M P M P P M p
M p
M M M p
L M,P M
L M L M M M p
L L p
M M M L L

REF. (12) (39) (12) (39) (12) (12) (39) (39) (12) (12) (39) (12) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (12) (39) (12) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (12) (12) (39) (39) (39) (39) (12) (39) (12) (39) (39) (12) (39) (39) (39) (39) (12)

NAME Hixon Property Hart Mine Lassetter Property Clopton (Clompton) Mine Southern Klondyke Mine Jones Mine Stansill Property 301 Mine (Farrar) Lovingood Prospect Haynes Property Haynes Property LaBelle Mine Putnam Mine Macau Prospect Cherokee Mine Casteel Property Cox Property Georgiana Mine Tripp Property Granville Mine Bailey Prospect Coggins Property Clarkston Mine Williams Property Evans (Cobb) Prospect William Poor's Property Bell Mine (Bell-Star) Southern Star Mine (Bell-Star) Williams-Williamson Property Kellogg Mine Kitchens Property Creighton or Franklin Mine Latham Mine Sandow Mine Richards-Smith Property S.R. Smith Property Frank Burt's Property Chester Prospect Davis Mine (Owl Hollow) Whorley Mine Rudicil Mine T.N. Westbrook Property Case Property

98

# QUADRANGLE 232 Villa Rica 232 Villa Rica 232 Villa Rica 232 Villa Rica 206 New Georgia 232 Villa Rica 136 Allatoona Dam 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 116 Ball Ground East 159 Acworth 159 Acworth 159 Acworth 161 Mountain Park 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 160 Kennesaw 160 Kennesaw 160 Kennesaw 160 Kennesaw 160 Kennesaw 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 162 Roswell 138 Canton 138 Canton 139 Birmingham 139 Birmingham 137 South Canton

SYMBOL

Au

19

Au

20

Au

21

Au

28

Au

6

Au

11

Au

12

Au

14

Au

15

Au

28

COUNTY Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb

Au

29

Au

30

Au

7

Au

1

Au

2

Au

3

Au

4

Au

3

Au

6

Au

9

Au

10

Au

11

Au,P 13

Au

10

Au

11

Au

7

Au

36

Au

2

Au

38

Au

3

Au

37

Au

1

Au

2

Au

3

Au

4

Au

5

Au

6

Au

7

Au

11

Au

12

Au

12

Au,M 13

Cobb Cobb Coweta Dawson Dawson Dawson Dawson Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas Forsyth Forsyth Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Gwinnett Gwinnett Gwinnett Gwinnett Gwinnett Gwinnett
Gwinnett Gwinnett Gwinnett Hall Hall

GOLD (Continued)

PROVINCE N.P. N.P. N.P . B.R. N .P . N.P. N.P. N .P. N.P. N .P.

TYPE
M M M p p
M p
M L p

N .P.

M

N.P.

M

S.P.

M

N.P .

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N .P .

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

L

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

S.P.

p

S.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P .

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

N .P.

M

N .P .

M

N.P.

L

S.P.

p

REF. (39) (39) (39) (12) (39) (39) (39) (12) (39) (39)
(39) (12) (12) (12) (12) (12) (12) (12) (39) (12) (12) (39) (39) (39) (39) (12) (39) (12) (12) (12) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (12) (12) (39) (37)

NAME
Downing Creek Placer McCandless Property Sixes Mine Bentley Prospect Cox Property W.H. Hadaway Property J.B. Kemp Property Mason Mine Hathaway Property Payne, Kendrick, Randall & Hause Properties Hamilton Mine Freeman Mine Clarke and Hill Property Kin Mori Mine Barrett Mining Co. McGuire Property Looper Property Triglone Mine (Astinol Co.) Thomas Roach Property Roach Mine Carnes Property John Baggett Property Durgy Property (Villa Rica Mine) Strickland Mine A.D. Campbell Mine N/A Little and Goodwin Property Mason or Gold Lot McClure Prospect N/A Brown Property Piedmont (Newton) Mine Shelly Property Percy Gold mine Moore & Brogden Property Moore & Brogden Property Roberts Property Harris Property Richland Gold Mining Co. Owens Mine Longstreet Property Will Stephens Property

# QUADRANGLE
137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 160 Kennesaw 183 Lost Mountain 183 Lost Mountain 183 Lost Mountain 183 Lost Mountain 159 Acworth
159 Acworth 159 Acworth 286 Whitesburg 117 Matt 117 Matt 117 Matt 117 Matt 207 Nebo 207 Nebo 233 Winston 233 Winston 233 Winston 206 New Georgia 117 Matt 163 Duluth 210 NW Atlanta 186 Chamblee 162 Roswell 163 Duluth 162 Roswell 163 Duluth 164 Suwanee 164 Suwanee 164 Suwanee 164 Suwanee 164 Suwanee 164 Suwanee 164 Suwanee 141 Buford Dam 141 Buford Dam 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville

99

SYMBOL

Au

16

Au

18

Au,M 28

Au

15

Au

20

Au

24

Au

25

Au

14

Au

25

Au

26

Au

28

Au

1

Au

3

Au

4

Au

13

Au

6

Au

7

Au

8

Au

9

Au

26

Au

7

Au

9

Au

12

Au

22

Au

1

Au

2

Au

3

Au

4

Au

5

Au

7

Au

9

Au

36

Au

37

Au

38

Au

39

Au

41

Au

12

Au

13

Au

14

COUNTY Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall Douglas Douglas
Douglas
Douglas Forsyth Forsyth Forsyth Forsyth Forsyth Forsyth Forsyth Forsyth Hall Haralson Haralson Haralson Haralson Heard Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding
Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paudling Paulding Paulding

GOLD (Continued)

PROVINCE N.P. N.P. N.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. N.P. N.P.

TYPE L M Q L L M M M M

N.P.

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

S.P.

L

N.P.

M

N.P.

L

N.P.

L

N.P.

L

S.P.

L

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

p

N.P.

M

N.P.

M

N.P.

p

REF. (37) (37) (39) (37) (37) (39) (39) (39) (l2)
(39)
(12) (12) (39) (12) (34) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (12) (39) (39) (12) (12) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39) (39)
(1) (1) (1) (1) (39) (39) (39) (12)

NAME
John Harrington Property G.A. Elrod & Big Joe Mine Merck Property Hubert Peck Property A.W. Bell Vein Joseph Roberts Mine Mammoth Mine Pine Mt. (Stockmar) Mine McManus Property (Southern States Mining) 212 Prospect (Southern States Mining) N/A Harris Property Collins Property Little Property Dr. Mashburn Property Sawnee Mtn. Property Parks and Fowler Property Parks and Fowler Property Charles Mine O'Shields Property Edwards Mine J.W. Thomason (Placer) McBrayer or Singleton (Placer) Dean Property Hardagree Property Sheffield and Heidt Hodges Property Hobbs Mine Austin (Placer) Mines Parker Property Michigan Gold Mining Co. (Placer) Dunnaway Mine Twilley Mine Russell Mine Merritt Mine Mathews Property J .B. Barton Property Yorkville Mine N/A

# QUADRANGLE 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 206 New Georgia 206 New Georgia
206 New Georgia
232 Villa Rica 164 Suwanee 164 Suwanee 163 Duluth 141 Buford Dam 140 Cumming 139 Birmingham 140 Cumming 117 Matt 120 Gainesville 204 Buchanan 205 Draketown 205 Draketown 205 Draketown 285 Lowell 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 207 Nebo 159 Acworth 157 Taylorsville
158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 157 Taylorsville 181 Yorkville 181 Yorkville 182 Dallas

100

GRANITE, CRUSHED AND DIMENSION

SYMBOL

G

34*

G

35*

COUNTY
Carroll Carroll

G

40 Carroll

G

5* Clayton

G

34* Cobb

G

35 Cobb

G

1 Coweta

G

2 Coweta

G

6* Coweta

G

4 Coweta

G

1 DeKalb

G

2 DeKalb

G

3 DeKalb

G

4 DeKalb

G

5 DeKalb

G

6 DeKalb

G

7 DeKalb

G

8 DeKalb

G

9 DeKalb

G

10 DeKalb

G

11 DeKalb

G

12 DeKalb

G

14 DeKalb

G

15 DeKalb

G

16* DeKalb

G

17 DeKalb

G

18 DeKalb

G

19 DeKalb

G

20 DeKalb

G

21 DeKalb

G

22 DeKalb

G

23 DeKalb

G

24 DeKalb

G

25 DeKalb

G

26 DeKalb

G

27 DeKalb

G

28 DeKalb

G

29 DeKalb

G

30 DeKalb

PROVINCE S.P.
N.P.

TYPE Q
Q

N.P

Q

S.P.

Q

N.P.

Q

N.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P..

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

REF.
(15) (15)
(15)
(15)
(30)
(15)
(30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (15)
(30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30) (30)

NAME
County Rock Pit Villa Rica Quarry; Vulcan Materials Co.
N/A
Forest Park Quarry; Florida Rock Industries Kennesaw Quarry; Vulcan Materials Co.
N/A
Overby Quarry N/A Madras or McCollum Quarry; Vulcan Materials Co. R.D. Cole Quarry Thomas Quarry Southern Granite Bosier Quarry Weeks Quarry Weeks Quarry Duncan Quarry Johnson Quarry J.H. Chupp Quarry Goddard Quarry Mt. Arabia Quarry
Brantley Quarry Cooper Quarry Jenkins Quarry Crossley Quarry Big Ledge Quarry; Davidson Mineral Properties Braswell Quarry Brand Quarry Mary Reagin Quarry Ga. Railroad Quarry Pine Mt. Quarry Wilson Quarry Whitley Quarry Lee Bros. Quarry Walker Quarry Turner Quarry McDaniel Quarry Stone Mt. Quarry Nash & McCurdy Quarry Veal Quarry

101

# QUADRANGLE
286 Whitesburg 232 Villa Rica
232 Villa Rica 262 Riverdale
160 Kennesaw
160 Kennesaw 288 Madras 288 Madras 288 Madras
287 Newnan North 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers
239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 212 Stone Mountain 212 Stone Mountain 212 Stone Mountain

SYMBOL

G

31

G

32

G

33

G

34

G

35

G

36

G

38

G

40*

G

41*

G

42*

COUNTY
DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb

G

43* DeKalb

G

44* DeKalb

G

19* Douglas

G

20* Douglas

G

24 Douglas

G

3* Fayette

G

5* Forsyth

G

16* Fulton

G

34* Fulton

G

35* Fulton

G

15* Gwinnett

G

16 Gwinnett

G

28 Gwinnett

G,SG 18 Gwinnett

G

19 Gwinnett

G

20 Gwinnett

G

21 Gwinnett

G

22 Gwinnett

G

23 Gwinnett

G

24 Gwinnett

G

25 Gwinnett

G

26 Gwinnett

G

17* Gwinnett

G

29* Hall

G

30* Hall

GRANITE, CRUSHED and DIMENSION (Continued)

PROVINCE
S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P.

TYPE
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

N.P.

Q

N.P.

Q

N.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

N.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

p

S.P.

p

S.P.

L

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

L

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

REF.

NAME

(30) Thompson Quarry
(30) Shepard Quarry
(30) Wiggins Quarry
(30) Floyd Quarry
(30) Wade Quarry
(30) Jake Chupp Quarry
(30) Rock Chapel Mtn. Quarries
(15) Consolidated Quarry
(15) McDowell Materials Co. (15} North Ga. Quarry; Coffee
Granite Co. (15} Reagin Granite Co.
(15) Rennie Granite Co. (15} Consolidated Quarries;
Div. Georgia Marble Co.
(15) Lithia Springs Quarry; Vulcan Materials Co.
(15) N/A (15) Tyrone Quarry; Florida
Rock Ind. (15) Hall Aggregates; Div. Ga.
Marble Co. (15} Red Oak Quarry;
Vulcan Materials Co.
(15) Ben Hill Quarry; Davidson Mineral Properties
(15) Bellwood Quarry; C.W. Matthews Construction
(15) Norcross Quarry; Vulcan Materials
(30) Tribble and Bennett Prospect
(30) McElvany Shoals Property
(30) Ewing Property
(30) Bush Quarry
(30) Langley Quarry
(30) Mayfield Property
(30) Rockmore Quarry
(30) Lawrenceville Quarry
(30) Cates Quarry
(30) Sawyer Quarries
(30) Snell Quarry
(15) Grayson Quarry; Vulcan Materials
(15) Gainesville Stone Co; Can<ller Quarry
(15) Hall Aggregates; Div. Ga. Marble Co.

102

# QUADRANGLE 212 Stone Mountain 212 Stone Mountain 238 Redan 238 Redan 238 Redan 238 Redan 213 Snellville 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 238 Redan
239 Conyers 239 Conyers 233 Winston
208 Austell
208 Austell 289 Tyrone
140 Cumming
261 Fairburn
235 Ben Hill
210 Northwest Atlanta
187 Norcross
189 Lawrenceville 189 Lawrenceville 189 Lawrenceville 190 Bold Springs 214 Loganville 214 Loganville 214 Loganville 188 Luxomni 188 Luxomni 213 Snellville 213 Snellville 189 Lawrenceville
143 Chestnut Mountain
142 Flowery Branch

SYMBOL

G,F 17

G

2*

COUNTY Hall Henry

G

1 Newton

G

2 Newton

G

3 Newton

G

34 Paulding

G

35* Paulding

G

1 Rockdale

G

2 Rockdale

G

3 Rockdale

G

4 Rockdale

G

5 Rockdale

G

6 Rockdale

G

7 Rockdale

G

1 Walton

GRANITE, CRUSHED and DIMENSION (Continued)

PROVINCE S.P. S.P.

TYPE Q Q

S.P.

p

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

N.P.

Q

N.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

Q

S.P.

p

REF.

NAME

(37) D.L. Evans Quarry (15) Stockbridge Quarry;
Vulcan Materials (30) Perry Property (30) Freeman Quarry (15} Consolidated Quarries;
Div. Ga. Marble Co. (15} Dallas Rock Products (15) Paulding County Comm. (30} Paper-Mill Quarry (30) Redwine & James Quarry (30) Almand Quarry (30) Goode Quarry (30) Pierce Quarry (30) Reagan Quarry (30} Tilly Quarry (30) Braswell Opening

# QUADRANGLE
120 Gainesville 264 Stockbridge
267 Covington 267 Covington 240 Milstead
182 Dallas 182 Dallas 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 239 Conyers 214 Loganville

SYMBOL

Gr 172

Gr 232

Gr

25

Gr

26

G

2

Gr,M 4

Gr

9

Gr

23

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Cobb Cobb Hall Hall Hall Hall

GRAPHITE

PROVINCE B.R. B.R. N.P. N.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P.

TYPE Q M p p p p p
L

REF. (28) (13) (35) (35} (37) (37) (37) (37)

NAME Old Atlanta Vitrified Brick Co. American Chemical Mining Co. Mary Moore Property Posey Property G.E. White Property L.T. Westbrook Property Chicopee Mfg. Co. Chicopee Mfg. Co.

# QUADRANGLE 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 159 Acworth 209 Mableton 209 Mableton 142 Flowery Branch 142 Flowery Branch 142 Flowery Branch 120 Gainesville

LIMESTONE

SYMBOL

Ls

44

Ls

45

Ls

46

Ls 126

Ls 127

Ls 151

Ls 160

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE M Q Q M/Q Q Q p

REF. (18) (21) (18) (18) (21) (21} (21)

NAME Howard Hydraulic Cement Co. Mine Charle and Jarrett Quarry Clifford Lime and Stone Ladd Lime Co. Ladd Lime and Cement Quarry Marquette Cement Co. Quarry Sophia Prospect

# QUADRANGLE 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 134 Kingston 112 White West

103

SYMBOL Ls 161 Ls 162 Ls 219 Ls 231*

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

Ls

34 Floyd

Ls

49* Floyd

Ls

50 Floyd

Ls

51 Floyd

Ls

52 Floyd

Ls

53 Floyd

Ls

56 Floyd

Ls

57 Floyd

Ls

58 Floyd

Ls

65 Floyd

Ls

66 Floyd

Ls

67 Floyd

Ls

68 Floyd

Ls

69 Floyd

Ls

72 Floyd

Ls

95 Floyd

Ls

22 Hall

Ls

7 Polk

Ls

8 Polk

Ls

20 Polk

Ls

30 Polk

Ls

32 Polk

Ls

33 Polk

Ls

34 Polk

Ls

35 Polk

Ls

36 Polk

LIMESTONE (Continued)

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE p Q Q Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

Q

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

p

V.R.

Q

S.P.

Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Q

REF. (21) (21) (21) (15)
(36) {15)
(20) (18) (18) (21) (36) (36) (18) (21) (21) (21) (18) (18) (36) (36) (37) (18) (18) (18) (21) (18) (18) (18) (18) (18)

NAME
Gum Spring Prospect J .H. Perry Quarry Stockbridge Stone Quarry Conasauga Lime Corp.; Div. New Riverside Ocher County Limestone Quarry Rome Quarry; Florida Rock Industries Six Mile Station Prospect J. Scott Property Six Mile Station Prospect Big Cedar Creek Prospect H.M. Ponder Property A.H. Salmon Property Orsman Prospect Old Hu~faker RR Station Quarry Rome Prospect Public Works Quarry N/A N/A W.M. Clemmons Property Pinson Quarry Deal Lime Co. Quarry Marble Hill Lime Quarries Morgan Hills Young's Station Marquette Cement Co. Bald Mt. Portland Cement Co. Savette Property Aragon Station (Seabord RR) Southern Lime Mfg. Co. Quarry Piedmont Cement Co. Quarry

# QUADRANGLE 112 White West 112 White West 113 White East 113 White East
132 Rome South 109 Rome North
132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 132 Rome South 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 120 Gainesville 180 Rockmart South 180 Rockmart South 179 Felton 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North

LIMONITE AND OTHER IRON ORE

SYMBOL

L

185

L

178

L

179

L

184

L

187

L

192

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow
Bartow

PROVINCE B.R. B.R. B.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE Q Q Q Q Q

V.R.

L

REF. (7) (7) (7) (7) (7)
(7)

NAME J.M. Knight (Iron Hill) Quarry Etowah Dev. and Iron Co. Etowah Dev. Co.; Crow Ore Bank P.M. Mansfield Quarry Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Co. Dysert Property

# .QUADRANGLE 136 Allatoona Dam 136 Allatoona Dam 136 Allatoona Dam 136 Allatoona Dam 159 Acworth
113 White East

104

SYMBOL

L

193

L

194

L

195

L

196

L

197

L

134

L

212

L

267

L,Mn 232

L

233

L

234

L

235

L

236

L

237

L

238

L

239

L

240

L,Mn 241

L

242

L

160

L

37

L

38

L

39

L

40

L,Mn 94

L

108

L

109

L

llO

L

1ll

L,Mn 121

L

102

L,Mn 142

L

144

L

145

L

146

L

147

L

177

L,B 169

L

181

L

5

L

6

L

8

COUNTY
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow
Bartow Bartow Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee

LIMESTONE and other IRON ORE (Continued)

PROVINCE
V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. B.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE
L M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M p
L p p p p
M M p
M M L,M L p
L p
'Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Q

B.R.

L

B.R.

p

B.R.

L

REF.
(7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13)
(7) (7) (7)
(7)
(7) (7) (7)
(7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7)
(7)
(13)
(7) (7) (7) (7)

NAME
H. Goode Property Conner Ore Bank Big Mt. Ore Bank J.J. Bennett Property J.B. Mahon Property Big Mine Cemetery Hill Mine Sugar Hill Mines Black Bank Mine Wildcat Hollow Mine Sloan Mine Kelley Mine Convict Mine Bartow Group N/A Kennedy-Franklin Mine Felton Mine Lowry Mine Bishop Mine Larramore Mine L.T. Sutton Property N/A S.E. Bray Property Anderson and Bishop Property R.B. Satterfield Property J .R. Leachman Property W.C. Satterfield Mine R.B. Northy Mine W.C. Walton Property Guyton Ore Bank Munford Mine; Etowah Dev. Co. Greenfield Property G.B. Hulme Property P.E. Alford Property A.S. Dunn Property Etowah Property Etowah Dev. Co.; LaFollette Coal and Iron Co. C.M. (Chulafinnee) Jones Property Allatoona Ore Bank Evans Property W.C. Hulsey Property J.C. Johnson Property

# QUADRANGLE
ll3 White East ll3 White East ll3 White East ll3 White East ll3 White East 136 Allatoona Dam 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge ll3 White East ll3-White East ll3 White East 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 136 Allatoona Dam 1ll Adairsville 1ll Adairsville 1ll Adairsville 1ll Adairsville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 134 Kingston 134 Kingston 134 Kingston 134 Kingston 134 Kingston 136 Allatoona Dam
158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 136 Allatoona Dam 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton

105

SYMBOL

L

29

L

117

L

121

L 118

L

119

L

122

L

49

L

56

L

61

L

62

L

66

L

67

L

68

L

69

L

70

L

71

L

72

L

74

L

109

Fe

2

Fe

4

Fe

5

L

10

Fe

19

Fe

76

Fe

77

Fe 104

Fe 111

L

1

L

16

L

17

L

18

L

13

L

43

L

74

L

75

L

125

L

3

L

1

Fe,Mn 14

L

1

L

5

L

21

COUNTY
Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Hall Haralson Haralson Polk Polk Polk

LIMESTONE and other IRON ORE (Continued)

PROVINCE
B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. S.P. B.R.
N.P.
V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE
L p p p p p p p
L p p
M p p
L p p p p
L L L L p p p p M M M p p p p p p p p p
L L p
L

REF. (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7)
(36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36)
(7) (7)
(36) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7)
(37)
(7) (7) (7)
(7) (19)

NAME
James Mayhugh Property Hollister Property Cagle Property Chattahoochee Iron Ore Chattahoochee Iron Ore Chattahoochee Iron Ore Andrew Satterfield Prop. L.L. Spence Property
N/A
James M. Quarles D.C. Keith Property James Higgins Property G.F. Teasley Property J.H. Breedlove Property William Worley Property G.P. McFarland Property S.M. Inman Estate S.M. Nelson Property Grady Holbert Property Smiley-Johnson Plantation W.C. Lloyd Property Roy K. Smith Property Terhune Property Mrs. Harry Johnson Property A.G. Liphan Property Moat and Carver Property Hiram-Bobo Prospect H. Grady Bradshaw Property Sam Ellis Property B.C. Forrester Place Samuel Johnson Property Alma Jackson Property T.H. Peek Property T.E. Langley Property Forrester Property T.R. Rich Prospect Minter Property A.M. Williams Property Ezzell Property T.R. King Property Brown Property Patterson Property Peek Property

106

# QUADRANGLE
137 South Canton 114 Waleska 114 Waleska 114 Waleska 114 Waleska 114 Waleska 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 116 Ball Ground East 133 Wax 133 Wax 133 Wax 133 Wax 132 Rome South 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 133 Wax 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 110 Shannon 110 Shannon 132 Rome South 142 Flowery Branch 180 Rockmark South 205 Draketown 157 Taylorsville 180 Rockmart South 179 Felton

SYMBOL

L

22

L

24

L

25

L

26

L

27

L

42

L

43

L

48

Fe

53

L

55

L

56

Fe

15

Fe

18

Fe

23

Fe

40

Fe

41

Fe

44

Fe

45

Fe

46

Fe

47

Fe

54

Fe

57

Fe

58

Fe

59

Fe

60

Fe

65

COUNTY Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk
Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk Polk

LIMESTONE and other IRON ORE (Continued)

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE
M M M p
M

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

REF. (7) (19) (19) (7) (7)
(25) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (25) (19) (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) (36) (25)

NAME
Curtis Property Pulaski Coal and Iron J. Watts Randall Property Greenfield Property Baldwin Property; Pulaski Coal and Iron Porter Property J .J Goss Property F.L. Clark Property Richard Gammon Property Shackleford Ore Bank Garrett Property Morgan and Wynn Property E.D. Hightower Property J.K. Davis Property Brock Property Tom Davitte Property John T. Bennett (Blackrock Mine) Brewster Place W.M. Lowery Prospect T.H. Randall Prospect Tom Lyons Property Thomas A. Grey, Jr. Property A.B. Hogg Property J.E. Whitaker Property Teate Property S.L. Carlton Property

# QUADRANGLE
179 Felton 179 Felton 179 Felton 179 Felton 179 Felton
156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 180 Rockmart South 179 Felton 179 Felton 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East

MAGNETITE

SYMBOL

Mg 31

Mg 37

Mg 78

Mg

3

Mg

4

Mg

5

Mg 18

Mg

11

COUNTY Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Haralson

PROVINCE B.R. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P.

TYPE L L L L L L L L

REF. (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7)

NAME George W. Evarts Property W.L. Dean Property Mrs. Fanny Hutcheson Property J.W. Gunnin Property J.M. Dawson Property J.P. Rogers Property A.D. Kemp Property Douglas Property

# QUADRANGLE 137 South Canton 160 Kennesaw 138 Canton 160 Kennesaw 160 Kennesaw 160 Kennesaw 184 Marietta 205 Draketown

107

MANGANESE

SYMBOL COUNTY

Mn

1 Bartow

Mn

2

Mn

5

Mn

7

Mn

8

Mn

41

Mn

60

Mn 243

Mn,B 58

Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow
Bartow Bartow

Mn

70 Bartow

Mn

77 Bartow

Mn

78 Bartow

Mn

79 Bartow

Mn 241 Bartow

Mn 244 Bartow

Mn 246 Bartow

Mn 256 Bartow

Mn 247 Bartow

Mn 248 Bartow

Mn 249 Bartow

Mn

80 Bartow

Mn

81 Bartow

Mn

82 Bartow

Mn 83 Bartow

Mn

84 Bartow

Mn

85 Bartow

Mn

86

Mn

87

Mn

88

Mn

89

Mn

90

Mn

91

Mn

92

Mn

93

Mn,L 94

Mn

95

Mn 250

Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

Mn 251 Bartow

Mn

98 Bartow

PROVINCE TYPE

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V .R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

REF.
(10)
(31) (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (10)
(31) (10) (10) (10) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (13) (10) (10)
(10) (10) (10) (10)
(10) (10) (23) (31} (10) (31) (31) (31) (31) (10} (31)
(31) (31)

NAME
Virginia Iron, Coal and Coke Company Ligon District Sherman Property Kerr Property Kerr Property Jos. E . Brown Property Etowah Dev. Co.
Saylor Property Hebble Bros. Mine; Etowah Dev. Co. Akin Property C.C. Brown Property Felton Property Etowah Dev. Co.; Stiles Lease Lowry Mine Ziegler Mine N/A N/A Russell Mine Vaughn Mine Peeples Mine Pitman Property Knight and Barron Mine Etowah Dev. Co. Kennedy Lot; Etowah Dev. Co. N/A Etowah Dev. Co. Republic Iron and Steel; Etowah Dev. Co. Etowah Dev. Co. C.N. Smith Property Howard Deposit Morris Property Patillo Property Peacock Lot Rowan Property
Heath Sisters Property R.B. Satterfield Property Smith and Peacock Property Pittsburgh - Ga. Mining; Stegall Property Mansfield Bros. Property T.R. James Lot

108

# QUADRANGLE
133 Wax
133 Wax 110 Shannon 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 135 Cartersville 111 Adairsville 135 Cartersville
135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville
135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville
135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville
135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville

SYMBOL
Mn 99 Mn 100 Mn 101 Mn 103 Mn 104 Mn,Oc 252 Mn,B 106 Mn 107 Mn 113 Mn 114 Mn 115 Mn 117 Mn 118

COUNTY
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

Mn,L 232 Mn 119 Mn 120 Mn,L 121 Mn 122 Mn 128 Mn 129 Mn 131 Mn 139 Mn 253 Mn 289 Mn 290 Mn 291 Mn,L 142 Mn 143 Mn 148 Mn 154 Mn 167 Mn 174 Mn 175 Mn 182
Mn 183 Mn 198 Mn 199 Mn 200 Mn 201 Mn 202

Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

MANGANESE (Continued)

PROVINCE
V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE p p
M M M M M M M M M M M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

L,M

V.R.

L

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

L

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

B.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

M

REF.

NAME

# QUADRANGLE

(31) N.P. Lanham Property

135 Cartersville

(31) W.H. Lanham Property

135 Cartersville

(31) Cherokee Ocher Co. (Gemes Mine) 135 Cartersville

(31) John Dobbs Property

135 Cartersville

(31) Norris Mine

135 Cartersville

(31) Blue Ridge Ocher

135 Cartersville

(13) Hurricane Hollow Mine

135 Cartersville

(10) Etowah Dev. Co.

135 Cartersville

(23) Blue Ridge Deposit

135 Cartersville

(23) Appalachian Deposit

135 Cartersville

(10) Ga. Iron and Coal (Ward Mine)

135 Cartersville

(10) Houck Mine

135 Cartersville

(23) Dobbins Mines, Pyrolusite Mining, 135 Cartersville Etowah Iron Co., Bartow Maganese Mining and Mfg. Co.

(13) Black Bank Mine

113 White East

(31) Milner-Harris-Simpson Property 135 Cartersville

(31) G.W. Satterfield Property

135 Cartersville

(31) Guyton Property

135 Cartersville

(31) T.S. Bishop (Smith) Property

135 Cartersville

(10) Calhoun & Locke Property

135 Cartersville

(31) Jones Brothers' Lot

135 Cartersville

(10) A. AbFamson Property

135 Cartersville

(31) N/A

135 Cartersville

(10) Wyvern Mine, Guyton Ore Bank 135 Cartersville

(10) Mayburn Lot; Etowah Dev. Co.

135 Cartersville

(31) Franklin Lot

135 Cartersville

(31) Laramore Property

135 Cartersville

(10) Greenfield Property

134 Kingston

(10) Strickland Property

134 Kingston

(10) Vincent Property

134 Kingston

(23) Will Lee Deposit

112 White West

(10) Puckett Property

158 Burnt Hickory Ridge

(31) N/A

158 Burnt Hickory Ridge

(10) Shephens Lot

158 Burnt Hickory Ridge

(31) Bartow Iron & Furnace; Tennessee 136 Allatoona Dam Coal, Iron & RR Co.

(10) Etowah Dev. Co.

136 Allatoona Dam

(10) Ga. Iron and Coal Co.

113 White East

(31) P'tree Mine; Ga. Iron and Coal

113 White East

(10) Red Mt. Mine; Ga. Iron and Coal 113 White East

(10) Moccasin Mine; Ga. Iron and Coal 113 White East

(10) Chumley Hill Lot; Ga. Iron and Coal 113 White East

109

SYMBOL
Mn 203 Mn 204 Mn 205 Mn 206 Mn 207 Mn 208 Mn 210 Mn 211 Mn 213 Mn 214 Mn 215 Mn 258 Mn 257 Mn 256
Mn 254 Mn 255 Mn 259 Mn 263 Mn 264 Mn 265 Mn 266 Mn 216 Mn 217

Mn 227

Mn,B 228

Mn 300

Mn

39

Mn

15

Mn 31

Mn 35

Mn 101

Mn 102

Mn,P 124

Mn

5

Mn

3

Mn

4

Mn

8

Mn

10

Mn,Fe 14

Mn

16

COUNTY
Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow
Bartow
Bartow Bartow Cherokee Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Hall Haralson Haralson Haralson Haralson
Haralson Haralson

MANGANESE (Continued)

PROVINCE
V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.
V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE
M M M p
M M P,M L M M M M M M
M M M M M M M M M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

B.R.

M

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

p

S.P.

p

N.P.

L

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

p

N.P.

L

N.P.

L

REF.

NAME

(10) Big Spring Lot; Ga. Iron and Coal (10) Wofford Mine; Ga. Iron and Coal (10) Bartow Co. Pauper Farm (31) Collins Lot; Ga. Iron and Coal (10) Allison Lot (13) Alexander Mine (10) Vaughan Property (31) Mrs. N.E . Mahan Lot (13) Stevenson (Stephenson) Cut (10) Aubrey Cut; Ga. Iron and Coal (13) Bufford Cuts; Ga. Iron and Coal (13) Little Red Mountain Mine (13) New Chumley Mine (13) Boneyard Mine
(13) Hogpen Mine (13) Baker Mine (13) N/A
** N/A ** N/A ** N/A ** N/A
(13) Will Lee (10) Satterfield McGinnis Prop.;
Paga Mining Co. (31) Bufford and White Lot;
Dade Coal Co. (9) Holcombe Property (10) Greenfield Property (31) White Lot; Dade Coal Co. (31) Briscoe Place (31) Hillyer Property (36) Kelley Property (10) Muller-Harper Property (10) Reynolds Mt. Mine (10) Patillo Property (37) Chester Lynn Property (31) McPherson Property (31) Tomlinson Property (31) Griffith Property (31) Draketown Mining Co.;
Douglass Prospect (10) King Property (10) Gober Property

# QUADRANGLE
113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East
113 White East
111Adairsville 134 Kingston 113 White East 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 155 Cedartown East 155 Cedartown East 133 Wax 142 Flowery Branch 204 Buchanan 204 Buchanan 205 Draketown 205 Draketown
205 Draketown 205 Draketown

110

SYMBOL

Mn 24

Mn 25

Mn

47

Mn 11

Mn

28

Mn 29

Mn 30

Mn 31

Mn 19

COUNTY
Haralson Haralson Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Polk

MANGANESE (Continued)

PROVINCE
N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. V.R.

TYPE
L L M L M M L L p

REF. (10) (10) (10) (31) (31) (31) (31) (31) (25)

NAME Westbrook Property W.M. Raburn Property Cochran Property Estes and Folsom Property Statham Property Douglass Prospects Allgood Property Kirk Property Commercial Bank of Cedartown

# QUADRANGLE 231 Temple 231 Temple 158 Burnt Hickory Ridge 181 Yarkville 205 Draketown 205 Draketown 205 Draketown 205 Draketown 179 Felton

**Leonard Foote, Personal Commun., 1983.

MARBLE

SYMBOL

Mb 293

Mb 54

Mb 55

Mb 64

Mb 65

Mb

89*

Mb 104

Mb 105

Mb 106

Mb 107

Mb

31*

Mb

31

Mb

32

COUNTY Bartow Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Hall Haralson Haralson

PROVINCE B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. S.P. N.P. N.P.

TYPE Q L L L L Q L L L L Q p p

REF.
(20) (20) (20) (20) (15) (20) (20) (20) (20) (15) (11) (11)

NAME County Line Quarry Halbert Property Halbert Property Stafford Property Mrs. Stearne's Property Ga. Marble Co. Crain Property Cowart Property Carpenter Property J.M. White Property Terrell A. Philyaw Co., Inc. Bolling Prospect Saunders Prospect

OCHER

SYMBOL

Oc,B 76

Oc,Mn 252

Oc

49*

Oc,B 52

Oc 255

Oc 256

Oc 105

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE M M M M M M M

REF. (9) (9) (15) (9) (13) (13) (13)

NAME Cherokee Ochre Co. Blue Ridge Ocher New Riverside Ochre Co. Ga. Peruvian Ocher Co. American Ocher Knight Mine Southern Mine

111

# QUADRANGLE 113 White East 116 Ball Ground East 115 Ball Ground West 115Ball Ground West 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 115 Ball Ground West 115 Ball Ground West 114 Waleska 114 Waleska 120 Gainesville 204 Buchanan 204 Buchanan
# QUADRANGLE 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville

SYMBOL Oc 112 Oc 257

COUNTY Bartow Bartow

OCHER (Continued)

PROVINCE V.R. V.R.

TYPE M M

REF. (13) (13)

NAME Georgia Barium and Ocher Howard Mine

PEGMATITE, MICA, AND BERYL

SYMBOL

Pg

2

Pg

3

Pg

12

Pg,M 13

M 100

M

101

Pg

11

Pg

12

Pg,M 38

M

42

M,Brl 48

Brl,M 59

Pg

57

M

92

M

93

Pg,M 86

Pg

3

Pg

1

Pg

22

Pg

5

M

94

M

95

M

96

M

97

M

98

M

99

Pg

39

Pg

1

Gr,M 4

Au,M 13

M

21

M,Au 28

M

32

Pg

28

Pg

15

COUNTY Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Clayton Cobb Cobb Coweta Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee DeKalb Fulton Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall Haralson Paulding

PROVINCE N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. B.R. B.R. B.R. B.R. N.P. B.R. N.P. S.P. N.P. N.P. S.P. B.R. B.R. N .P . N.P. N.P. N.P. S.P. N.P. S.P. N.P. N .P . N .P . N.P. N.P. N.P.

TYPE L L L p p
M M L M M M M L p p
M p p
L L p p
M p
M M L L p p
L Q L L L

REF. (6) (6) (6) (17) (4) (4) (6) (6) (6) (83) (3) (33) (6) (4) (4) (6) (6) (6) (6} (6) (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (3) (6) (37) (37) (37) (39} (37) (6) (6)

NAME N/A Turkey Creek J .A. Potate Property Heartley Prospect Kykendall Prospect Ledford Mine J.D. Hillhouse Mine Cole Property Dean Mica Mine Amphlett Mine Hendrix Mica Mine Cochran Mine F .M. Williams Property J.D. Hillhouse Prospect Weaver Prospect Cook Mine N/A W.M. Davis Lot N/A N/A Densmore Prospect Revis Prospect Cole Mine Hause Prospect Wacaster Mine Hause Mine N/A N/A L.T. Westbrook Property Will Stephens Property Carter Property Merck Quarry Henry Wallace Property N/A M.J. Petty Property

112

# QUADRANGLE 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville
# QUADRANGLE 256 Bowdon East 256 Bowdon East 205 Draketown 231 Temple 160 Kennesaw 160 Kennesaw 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 137 South Canton 116 Ball Ground East 139 Birmingham 237 SE Atlanta 161 Mountain Park 208 Austell 287 Newnan N. 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 137 South Canton 213 Snellville 162 Roswell 142 Flowery Branch 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 120 Gainesville 231 Temple 182 Dallas

SYMBOL

Pg

16

Pg

17

COUNTY Paulding Paulding

PEGMATITE, MICA and BERYL (Continued)

PROVINCE
N.P. N.P.

TYPE L L

REF. (6)
(6)

NAME Dr. E.W. Dean Property N/A

# QUADRANGLE 182 Dallas 182 Dallas

PYRITE, INCLUDES CHALCOPYRITE AND SPHALERITE

SYMBOL

p

4

p

5

p

13

p

14

p

15

p

16

p

19

p

26

p

27

p

28

p

31

p

41

p

32

p

39

P,Au 33

p

43

p

45

p

46

p

47

p

76

p

77

p

2

p

8

p

9

p

16

p

19

p

12

p

13

p

27

p

16

P,Mn 124

p

9

p

2

p

6

p

15

p

17

COUNTY Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas Floyd Fulton Haralson Haralson Haralson Haralson

PROVINCE N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. V.R. S.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P.

TYPE p L P P P L P P L P L P P P M M M P P L M P L P
p
M p
M p p p M L p
L p

REF.
(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (17) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (35) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)
(27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27) (27)

NAME J.W. Garrett Property John D. Tarpley Property M.A. Heartley Prospect J.S. Michael Prospect Mt. Zion Prospect M.T. Earnest Property A.H. Cox Property Askew Prospect W.T. Raburn Property Watkins Property Bagwell Property Lasseter Prospect Jenny Stone Prospect Butler Prospect Bell-Star Mine Standard Mine Swift-Blake Mine Smith Prospect Dickerson Prospect McRae Property Rich Mine Dawson Property J.J. Kemp Property C.G. Wright Property C.J. Kamper Property Marietta Mine Hancock Prospect Villa Rica Mine (Durgy Prop.) N/A Keaton-Thomas Prospect Patillo Property Cash Copper Mine W.M. Rayburn Property Jackson-McBride Property Blackmon Property Smith-McCandless Prospect

113

# QUADRANGLE 256 Bowdon East 256 Bowdon East 231 Temple 132 Temple 230 Bremen 230 Bremen 230 Bremen 232 Villa Rica 231 Temple 232 Villa Rica 206 New Georgia 232 Villa Rica 206 New Georgia 256 Bowdon East 160 Kennesaw 160 Kennesaw 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 116 Ball Ground East 138 Canton 138 Canton 161 Mountain Park 183 Lost Mountain 183 Lost Mountain 184 Marietta 184 Marietta 206 New Georgia 206 New Georgia 232 Villa Rica 133 Wax 235 Ben Hill 204 Buchanan 204 Buchanan 205 Draketown 205 Draketown

PYRITE, includes CHALCOPYRITE and SPHALERITE (Continued)

SYMBOL

p

18

p

19

p

20

p

23

p

26

p

29

p

8

p

10

p

19

p

20

p

21

p

22

p

23

p

24

p

25

p

26

p

27

p

6

p

40

p

42

p

43

p

44

p

45

p

46

p

48

COUNTY
Haralson Haralson Haralson Haralson Haralson Haralson Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding Paulding

PROVINCE
N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N .P. N.P. N .P . N.P.

TYPE
M M L L L M L p
M M p p
M M M p
L p p p p p p p p

REF.

NAME

# QUADRANGLE

(27) Tallapoosa mine; Ga. Pyrites Co. 205 Draketown

(27) R.F. Pace Property

205 Draketown

(27) W.J. Speight Property

205 Draketown

(27) J. Humphrey Property

231 Temple

(27) W.M. Raburn Property

231 Temple

(27) Reed's Mountain Mine

230 Breman

(27) Bob Reynolds (Jones) Property

181 Yorkville

(27) Rush-Banks Prospect

181 Yorkville

(27) Little Bob Mine

182 Dallas

(27) Shirley Mine

182 Dallas

(27) Berg Prospect

182 Dallas

(27) W.W. Hunt and L.A. Moon Prospect 182 Dallas

(27) Blake/McClarity (Swift) Mine

205 Draketown

(27) W.P. Hutcheson Property

205 Draketown

(27) S.O. Brown Property

205 Draketown

(27) C.D. Allgood Prospect

205 Draketown

(27) G.B. McGarity Property

205 Draketown

(27) Ragsdale Prospect

183 Lost Mountain

(1) B. McGruder Prospect

157 Taylorsville

(27) Mt. Tabor Prospect

182 Dallas

(27) N.S. Vaughan Prospect

182 Dallas

(27) Mammoth Prospect

182 Dallas

(27) B.T. McGarrity Prospect

180 Rockmart South

(1) Dever Prospect

180 Rockmart South

(27) Helms Prospect

206 New Georgia

QUARTZITE

SYMBOL

Q

87

Q

33

Q

6

COUNTY Cherokee Cobb Hall

PROVINCE N.P. N.P. S.P.

TYPE Q Q Q

REF. (37)

NAME Sweat Mountain Quarry Blackjack Mountain Quarry J.D. Cash Property

# QUADRANGLE 161 Mountain Park 184 Marietta 142 Flowery Branch

SAND AND GRAVEL, INCLUDES FILL MATERIALS

SYMBOL

SG 140

Sg 141

s

230*

s

258*

Sg

6

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Carroll

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. N.P N.P.

TYPE L L Pit
Dredge L

REF. (29) (29) (15)
(29)

NAME N/A L.A. Jones Property Bartow Sand Co. N/A Burwell

114

# QUADRANGLE 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 159 Acworth 159 Acworth 256 Bowdon East

SAND and GRAVEL, includes FILL MATERIALS (Continued)

SYMBOL

SG

40

SG

17

SG

82

SG

83

SG

87*

SG

88*

SG

2

SG

4

SG

33*

SG

28*

SG

7

SG

17

SG

27

SG

31

SG 32

SG

37

SG

2

SG

54

SG

55

SG

71

SG

99

SG 146

FM

13*

SG

5

COUNTY
Carroll Carroll Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Cherokee Clayton Clayton Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb DeKalb Douglas Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Fulton Fulton

SG

6 Fulton

SG

18* Fulton

SG

8 Fulton

SG

10 Fulton

SG

33* Fulton

SG

4 Fulton

SG

14* Fulton

SG

15* Fulton

SG

27* Gwinnett

SG

8 Gwinnett

SG

10 Gwinnett

SG,G 18 Gwinnett

SG

7 Hall

SG

62* Polk

PROVINCE
S.P. N.P. N.P.
B.R. B.R. B.R.
S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. N.P. S.P. S.P.
V.R. V.R. V.R. V:R. V.R.
S.P. S.P.

TYPE
L L L L Pit Pit p
Q Dredge
Pit L L Q p
L L L Pit Pit p p
Pit Pit Dredge

S.P.

L

S.P.

Dredge

S.P.

L

S.P.

L

S.P.

Dredge

N.P.

L

N.P.

Dredge

N.P.

Dredge

N.P.

Dredge

S.P.

p

S.P.

p

S.P.

L

S.P.

p

V.R.

P.it

REF.
(29) (29) (29) (29) (15) (15) (29) (29) (15) (15) (29) (29) (29) (29) (29) (29) (29) (29) (29) (29) (29) (29) (15) (29)
(29) (15) (29) (29) (15) (29) (15) (15) (15) (29) (29) (29) (37) (15)

NAME
NA Bear Creek Town Creek N/A Blankenship Sand Co. Lawson and Quarles Sand Co. N/A Smiley Sand Co. Reece Sand and Gravel Co. Stamps Sand Co. N/A N/A Smiley Sand Co. Acworth-Proctor Creek Ga. Railway and Power Co. W.J. Houston Property Annewakee Creek N.G. Watson Sand Co. H.A Dean Property Rome Sand and Gravel N/A N/A Oornwell Hauling Co. Acme Sand and Supply Company Plant Proctor Creek Johnson and Garrett Sand Co. J.G. Johnson Property Utoy Creek Stamps Sand Co. Walter Thompson Place Ace Sand Co. Mang-Alloy Steel Co. Alpha Asphalt Suwannee Creek Branch Creek Ewing Property F.P. Dover Property Marquette Cement Mfg. Co.

# QUADRANGLE 259 Rico 230 Bremen 138 Canton 138 Canton 138 Canton 115 Ball Ground West 262 Riverdale 263 Jonesboro 210 NW Atlanta 209 Mableton 160 Kennesaw 184 Marietta 209 Mableton 159 Acworth 210 NW Atlanta 211 NE Atlanta 234 Campbellton 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 109 Rome North 110 Shannon 109 Rome North 210 NW Atlanta 210 NW Atlanta
210 NW Atlanta 234 Campbellton 211 NE Atlanta 235 Ben Hill 210 NW Atlanta 162 Roswell 186 Chamblee 162 Roswell 163 Duluth 164 Suwanee 163 Duluth 189 Lawrenceville 143 Chestnut Mountain 181 Yorkville

115

SHALE

SYMBOL

Sh/Cly 42

Sh

43

Sh/Cly 124

s~. 149

Sh 150

Sh/Cly 155

Sh/Cly 156

Sh 158

Sh 159

Sh 218

Sh

45

Sh

46

Sh

47

Sh/Cly 48

Sh/Cly 59

Sh

60

Sh

61

Sh

62

Sh

63

Sh

98

Sh

28

Sh

31

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow
Bartow Bartow Bartow
FLo~d
Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Floyd Polk Polk

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE p
L p
L L Q L

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

L

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Pit

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Q

REF. (28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (28)
(28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (28) (21) (28) (28) (26)

NAME Boyd Orchard Co. Clemmons and Greenfield Property Jim Nolan Property Bishop and Jackson Property Milner and Munford Property W.D. Pittard Property Black, Randolf, Guyton & Ward Property Haney and Richards Property Hamrick and Sullins Property J.L. Parker Property Mrs. P.M Foster Property Mrs. Flora McAfee Jones J.M. Graham Property B. Mifflin Hood Property Romega Clay Product W.S. Dickey Clay Mfg. Co. Camp and Knowles Property H.A. Dean Property Old Summerville Rd. Quarry Walters and Lacy Prospect M.O. Huntington Property Southern State Portland Cement Co. Shale Quarries

# QUADRANGLE 111 Adairsville 111 Adairsville 135 Cartersville 134 Kingston 134 Kingston 112 White West 112 White West
112 White West 112 White West 113 White East 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 132 Rome South 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 109 Rome North 110 Shannon 179 Felton 156 Rockmart North

SLATE

SYMBOL

Sl

133

Sl 135

Sl 136

Sl 137

Sl 138

Sl 157

Sl

163

Sl 164

Sl 220

Sl 221

Sl 222

Sl 223

Sl 224

Sl 225

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow Bartow

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R. V.R.

TYPE L L L L L Q p
L Q p
L Pit Pit L

REF. (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (26)

NAME N/A Johnson Property Daves Property Walker Property Headden Property American Potash Co. Prop. Lilly Property Carpenter Property Bolivar Station Adair Property McDaniel Property Yancey Property McMillan Property Rufus Jones Property

116

# QUADRANGLE 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 135 Cartersville 112 White West 112 White West 112 White West 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East 113 White East

SYMBOL

Sl

226

Sl

2

COUNTY Bartow Polk

Sl

3 Polk

Sl

4 Polk

Sl

6 Polk

Sl

9 Polk

Sl

10 Polk

Sl

11 Polk

s

13 Polk

Sl

14 Polk

Sl

16 Polk

Sl

31 Polk

Sl

37 Polk

Sl

38 Polk

Sl

39 Polk

Sl

63* Polk

Sl

64 Polk

SLATE (Continued)

PROVINCE V.R. V.R.

TYPE
L Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

p

V.R.

Q

V.R.

L

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

Q

V.R.

p

V.R.

M

V.R.

Q

REF. (26) (26)
(26) (26) (26) (26) (26) (28) (28) (26)
(26) (26)
(26) (26) (28) (15) (26)

NAME
Baker Property C. Browns South Quarry; Rockmart Brick and Shale Sibley Quarry-Southern Slate Co. Ellis Davis and Son Quarry Cherokee Slate Co. Dever Property Philpott Property A.G. Rhodes Estate Joe Grice Property Southern State Portland Cement Co. Everet Property Southern State Portland Cement Co. Shale Quarries Columbia Quarry Portland Quarry J.G. Randall Property Galite Slate Quarry Black Diamond Quarries

# QUADRANGLE 113 White East 180 Rockmart South
180 Rockmart South 180 Rockmart South 180 Rockmart South 180 Rockmart South 180 Rockmart South 180 Rockmart South 180 Rockmart South 180 Rockmart South
180 Rockmart South 156 Rockmart North
156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 156 Rockmart North 180 Rockmart South 156 Rockmart North

TRIPOLI

SYMBOL

T

130

T

209

T

44

COUNTY Bartow Bartow Floyd

PROVINCE V.R. V.R. V.R

TYPE M L p

REF.
(2) (2) (2)

NAME Paga Mining Co. White Manganese Co. Old Bob Place

# QUADRANGLE 135 Cartersville 113 White East 132 Rome South

References
1. Crawford, T.J., 1970, Geologic Map: Carroll-Heard Counties, Georgia, in Hurst, V.J., and Long, S.W., 1971, Geochemical study of alluvium in the ChattahoocheeFlint area, Georgia: University of Georgia Institute of Community and Area Development, 52 p.
2. Crickmay, W., 1937, Tripoli deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 9, 7 p.
3. Furcron, A.S., 1959, Beryl in Georgia: Georgia Minerals Newsletter, v. 12, no. 3, p. 91-95.
4. Furcron, A.S., and Teague, K.H., 1943, Mica-bearing pegmatites of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 48, 192 p.

5. Furcron, A.S., and Teague, K.H., 1945, Sillimanite and massive kyanite in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 51, 76 p.
6. Galpin, S.L., 1915, A preliminary report on the feldspar and mica deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 30, 190 p.
7. Haseltine, R.H. , 1924, Iron ore deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 41, 222 p.
8. Hopkins, O.B., 1914, A report on the asbestos, talc, and soapstone deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 29, 319 p.
9. Hull, J.P.D., 1920, Report on the barytes deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 36, 146 p.

117

10. Hull, J.P.D., LaForge, L., and Crane, W.R., 1919, Manganese deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 35, 295 p.
11. Hurst, V.J., and Crawford, T.J., 1970, Sulfide deposits in the Coosa Valley area, Georgia: Coosa Valley Area Planning and Development Commission, 190 p.
12. Jones, S.P., 1909, Second report on the gold deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 19, 283 p.
13. Kesler, T.L:, 1950, Geology and mineral deposits of the Cartersville district, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 224, 97 p.
14. King, F.P. 1894, A preliminary report on the corundum deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 2, 133 p.
15. Kline, S.W., and O'Connor, B.J., 1981, Mining directory of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 2, 49 p.
16. Lewiecki, W.T., 1949, Investigation of the Hermitage bauxite district, Bartow and Floyd Counties, Ga.: U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 4577, 10 p.
17. Long, S.W., 1971, Mines and prospects of the Chattahoochee-Flint area, Georgia: University of Georgia Institute of Community and Area Development, 143 p.
18. Maynard, T.P., 1912, A report on the limestones and cement materials of north Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 27, 293 p.
19. McCallie, S.W., 1900, A preliminary report on a part of the iron ores of Georgia: Polk, Bartow and Floyd Counties: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 10-A, 190 p.
20. _ _ , 1907, A prelimary report on the marbles of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 1, 126 p.
21. McLemore, W.H., and Hurst, V.J., 1970, The carbonate rocks in the Coosa Valley area, Georgia: Coosa Valley Area Planning Commission and Economic Development Administration and U.S. Department of Commerce, 170 p.
22. O'Neill, J.F., and Wyndham, C.E., 1954, Reconnaissance of the Cartersville manganese deposits, Bartow County, Georgia: U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 5017,65 p.
23. Peyton, A.L., and Lewiecki, W.T., 1949, Investigation of the Cartersville manganese district, Bartow County, Georgia: U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 4539,32 p.

24. Prindle, L.M., 1935, Kyanite and vermiculite deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 46, 50 p.
25. Robson, V., ed., 1942, The iron ores of Polk County, Georgia: WPA Mineral Resources Survey.
26. Shearer, H.K., 1918, Report on the slate deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 34, 192 p.
27. Shearer, H.K., and Hull, J.P.D., 1918, A preliminary report on a part of the pyrites deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 33, 229 p.
28. Smith, R.W., 1931, Shales and brick clays of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 45, 348 p.
29. Teas, L.P., 1921, Preliminary report on the sand and gravel deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 37, 392 p.
30. Watson, T.L., 1902, A preliminary report on a part of the granites and gneisses of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 9-A, 367 p.
31. _ _ , 1908, A preliminary report on the manganese deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin
14, 195 .P 32. White, W.S., and Denson, N.M., 1952, The bauxite deposits
of Floyd, Bartow, and Polk Counties, northwest Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 193, 27 p. 33. Willman, L.D., 1970, Volume II, Gem and mineral localities of Southeastern United States: Anniston, Alabama, Higginbothem Inc., 271 p. 34. Wilson, R.A., 1934, ThegolddepositsofGeorgia: Georgia Department of Forestry and Geological Development Information Circular 4, 14 p. 35. Work Projects Administration, 1940-41, Mineral Survey, Cobb County, Georgia. 36. _ _ , 1941-42, Mineral Survey, Floyd County, Georgia. 37. _ _ , 1940-42, Mineral Survey, Hall County, Georgia. 38. _ _ , 1941, Mineral Survey, Haralson County, Georgia. 39. Yeates, W.S., McCallie, S.W., and King, F.P., 1896, A preliminary report on a part of the gold deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 4-A, 542 p.

118

APPENDIXC
Isotopic Age Dates
by Bruce J. O'Connor, Robert E. Dooley
and Keith I. McConnell
119

APPENDIXC
Isotopic Age Dates

The following table and accompanying map (Plate IV) are a compilation of previously published isotopic ages determined on rocks and minerals within the Atlanta Regional Map area. Unpublished ages were purposely omitted because they lack detailed information regarding isotopic ratios and standards. Most of the listed isotopic ages were extracted from a larger compilation of age dates by O'Connor and Dooley for the entire state of Georgia which was made to accompany the Geologic Map of Georgia (1976). This compilation is available through the Georgia Geologic Survey.
Sample locations as presented on Plate IV are based on the best available information supplied by the various authors or obtained from the publications themselves. In this regard, rock units assigned to some of the isotopic ages are also approximate. Most of the ages presented below represent the data as it was originally published. No attempt was made to update data by using revised decay constants. The reader may

refer to the appropriate reference for more detailed information on ages presented in this appendix.
The accompanying map (Plate IV) of the Atlanta region is at a scale of 1:200,000 and is designed so that it can be used independently of the tables. The various methods of age determination are signified by the symbols (i.e., stars= K-Ar, triangles = Rb/Sr, filled circles = 40Ar/39Ar, and squares = U/Pb and Pb-Pb). Letters in parentheses beside the date indicate either the mineral dated or, in some cases, whole-rock analyses [i.e., (wr)]. In cases involving K-Ar and 40Ar/39Ar methods where muscovite and biotite concentrates were analyzed, only the muscovite age is annotated on the map. Where hornblende concentrates were dated also, the hornblende age is annotated on the map. In cases where both K-Ar and 40Arj39Ar ages were reported on the same sample and in the same publication, only the 40Ar/39Ar age determination was annotated on the map.

Map Number
1a
1b
1c 1d
1e
1f
1g
1h 1i
1j 1k
1e 1m 1n
1o 1p 1q 1r
1s
1t

Listing of Ages

Age
289 10 319 26 302 12 281 10 414 14 259 9 280 12 320 13 280 15 275 10 292 10 292 10 290 15 299 12 292 12 295 12 289 12 286 10 321 11 277 20 290 14 401 18 201 11 275 10 292 6 280 9 303 11 298 9 303 9 310 6 286 9 311 12

Map Unit Unknown Unknown Unknown
Unknown Wolf Creek Fm.
Brevard zone
Brevard zone
Powers Ferry Fm.
Powers Ferry Fm. Powers Ferry Fm.
Powers Ferry Fm. Wahoo Creek Fm.
Norcross Gneiss Inman Yard Fm. Norcross Gneiss
Brevard zone Brevard zone Brevard zone Brevard zone
Factory Shoals Fm.
Powers Ferry Fm.

Method
K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar

121

Materials Dated
Biotite Muscovite Biotite Muscovite Hornblende Biotite Muscovite Biotite Muscovite Biotite Muscovite Biotite Muscovite Biotite Biotite Muscovite Biotite Biotite Muscovite Whole Rock Muscovite Biotite Muscovite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Muscovite Biotite Muscovite Biotite Muscovite

Source
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Map Number
lu
lv
lw lx ly
2a 3a
3b 3c
3d 4a
4b 5a 6c 7a 7b 7c 8a 8b
8c
8d
8e 8e
8f
8g
8k 8i
8j
8k
81
8m
8n 9a lOa lOb
lOc

Listing of Ages (Continued)

Age
303 13 295 13 308 12 325 10 303 10 284 8 298 9 295 8 313 10 533 15 536 12 379 15 702 15 707 16 620 15
411 25
430 25 320 15
290 10
1000
309 11 277 10 294 10 310 5 317 5 351 5 311 5 355 5
296 5
326 5
321 7
299 5
323 5
301 7
281 5 283 5 318 5 320 8 300 5 290 5 307 5 284 5 308 5
309 7
261 5
266 6
300 5
250 5 254 7
244 5
311 9
342 34
280 14
283 14
272 30
297 15

Map Unit
Powers Ferry Fm.
Powers Ferry Fm.
Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Pumpkinvine Creek Fm. Corbin Gneiss Complex Corbin Gneiss Complex Corbin Gneiss Complex Corbin Gneiss Complex Corbin Gneiss Complex Corbin Gneiss Complex Corbin Gneiss Complex Corbin Gneiss Complex Camp Creek Fm. Brevard zone Corbin Gneiss Complex Powers Ferry Fm. Lithonia Gneiss (?) Stone Mountain Granite Factory Shoals Fm. Clairmont Fm. Clairmont Fm. Norcross Gneiss Norcross Gneiss Clarkston Fm. Clarkston Fm. Clarkston Fm. Camp Creek Fm. Camp Creek Fm. Camp Creek Fm. Stone Mountain Granite Stone Mountain Granite Clairmont Fm. Clairmont Fm. Lithonia Gneiss Amphibolite Amphibolite Snellville Fm. Snellville Fm. Snellville Fm. Lithonia Gneiss Lithonia Gneiss Biotite gneiss/
amphibolite Biotite gneiss Biotite gneiss Biotite gneiss Clairmont Fm. Ben Hill Granite Stone Mm,mtain Granite Stone Mountain Granite Stone Mountain Granite Lithonia Gneiss

Method
K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar 40Ar/f!:lAr JArjf!:lAr K-Ar 40Ar/ffilAr 40Ar/ffilAr K-Ar 40Ar/f!:lAr 40Ar/f!:lAr K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar Pb-Pb K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar 40Ar/f!:lAr 40Ar/f!:lAr 41JArjf!:lAr 40Ar/f!:lAr 41JArjf!:lAr 40Ar/f!:lAr 4/JAr/ffilAr K-Ar 41JArjf!:lAr 41JAr/f!:lAr K-Ar 41JArjf!:lAr 4/JArjf!:lAr 4/JAr/f!:lAr K-Ar 4/JArjf!:lAr 41JArjf!:lAr 4/JAr/f!:lAr 41JAr/f!:lAr 41JArjf!:lAr K-Ar 4/JArjf!:lAr
K-Ar JArjf!:lAr
41JArjf!:lAr K-Ar
4/JAr/f!:lAr K-Ar Rb-Sr Rb-Sr Rb-Sr Rb-Sr Rb-Sr

122

Materials Dated
Biotite Muscovite Biotite Muscovite Muscovite Biotite Biotite Muscovite Hornblende Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Unknown Zircon Biotite Biotite Muscovite Biotite Biotite Hornblende Biotite Hornblende Biotite Hornblende Hornblende Biotite Hornblende Biotite Biotite Muscovite Hornblende Hornblende Hornblende Biotite Amphibole Biotite Amphibole Amphibole Biotite Biotite Hornblende
Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Biotite Muscovite Biotite

Source
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3,4 4 5 6 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8 9 10 10 10 10 10

Listing of Ages (Continued)

Map

Number

Age

Map Unit

Method

Materials Dated

10d 10e 10e 10f
11a 12 13a 13b 13c 14a 14b 15a* 15b* 15c*
15d*
15e* 15f* 15g*

282 14 287 15 288 20 315 20 305 20 300 15 293 15 313 47 485 475 291 7

Ben Hill Granite Lithonia Gneiss Lithonia Gneiss Lithonia Gneiss Lithonia Gneiss Panola Granite Panola Granite Panola Granite Lithonia Gneiss Lithonia Gneiss Stone Mountain Granite

325

Panola Granite

325

Stone Mountain Granite

(sample localities not given)

375

Lithonia Gne'iss

(sample localities not given)

325

Ben Hill Granite

(sample localities not given)

325

Palmetto Granite

420 8

Diabase

290 6

Diabase

299 6

Diabase

185 4

Diabase

204 4

Diabase

208 4

Diabase

274 5

Diabase

282 6

Diabase

242 5

Diabase

250 5

Diabase

190 4

Diabase

190 4

Diabase

249 5

Diabase

243 5

Diabase

191 4

Diabase

Rb-Sr

Biotite

Rb-Sr

Biotite

Rb-Sr

Muscovite

K-Ar

Biotite

K-Ar

Muscovite

K-Ar

Biotite

Rb-Sr

Biotite

Rb-Sr

Muscovite

U-Pb

Zircon

U-Pb

Zircon

Rb-Sr

Whole Rock

Isochron and Minerals

U-Pb

Zircon

U-Pb

Zircon

U-Pb

Zircon

U-Pb

Zircon

U-Pb K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar K-Ar

Zircon Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock Whole Rock

*Dooley (1977) has indicated that excess argon is a factor in some of these age determinations.

Source
10.1 10.1 10.1 10.2 10.2 10.2, 10.3 10.1 10.1 11 11 12
13 13
13
14
14 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

123

References Cited

1. Stonebraker, J.D., 1973, Potassium-argon geochronology of the Brevard fault zone, southern Appalachians (Ph.D. Dissertation): Tallahassee, Florida State University, 134 p.
2. McConnell, K.I., 1980, Origin and correlation of the Pumpkinvine Creek Formation: a new unit in the Piedmont of northern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 52, 19 p.
3. Dallmeyer, R.D., 1975, 40Arj39Ar age spectra of biotite from Grenville basementgneisses in northwestern Georgia: Geological Society of American Bulletin, v. 86, p. 1740-1744.
4. Smith, J.W., Wampler, J.M., and Green, M.A., 1969, Isotopic dating and metamorphic isograds of the crystalline rocks of Georgia, in Precambrian-Paleozoic Appalachian problems: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 80, p. 121-139.
5. Wampler, J.M., Neathery, T.L., and Bentley, R.D., 1970, Age relations in the Alabama Piedmont, in Bentley, R.D., and Neathery, T.L., eds., Geology of the Brevard fault zone and related rocks of the inner Piedmont of Alabama: Alabama Geological Society Guidebook 8, p. 81-90.
6. Odom, A.L., Kish, S.A., and Leggo, P.J., 1973, Extension of the Grenville basement to the southern extremity of the Appalachians: U-Pb ages of zircons: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 5, p. 425.
7. Long, L.E., Kulp, J.L., and Eckelman, F.D., 1959, Chronology of major metamorphic events in the southeastern United States: American Journal of Science, v. 257, p. 585-603.
8. Dallmeyer, R.D., 1979, 40Ar/39Ar incremental-release ages of hornblende and biotite across the Georgia Inner Piedmont: their bearing on late Paleozoic-early Mesozoic tectonothermal history: American Journal of Science, v. 278, p. 124-149.

9. Kulp, J.L., and Eckelman, F.D., 1961, Potassium-argon ages of micas from the southern Appalachians: New York Academy of Science Annuals, v. 91, p. 408-416.
10.0 Pinson, W.H., Herzog, L.F., and Cormier, R.F., 1957, Age study of some crystalline rocks of the Georgia Piedmont, in Variations in isotopic abundances of strontium, calcium and argon and related topics: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Report NY0-3937, p. 58-61.
10.1 Pinson, W.H., Fairburn, H.W., Hurley, P.M., Herzog, L.F., and Cormier, R.F., 1958, Age study of some crystalline rocks of the Georgia Piedmont, in Variations in isotopic abundances of strontium, calcium, and argon and related topics: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Report NY0-3938, p. 58-60.
10.2 _ _ , 1957, Age study of some crystalline rocks of the Georgia Piedmont(abs): Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 68, no. 12, p. 1781.
11. Grunenfelder, M., and Silver, L.T., 1958, Radioactive age dating and its petrologic implications for some Georgia granites (abs): Geological Society of America Bulletin, v.69,no. 12,p. 1574.
12. Whitney, J.A., Jones, L.M., and Walker, R.L., 1976, Age and origin of the Stone Mountain Granite, Lithonia district, Georgia: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 87, p. 1067-1077.
13. Atkins, R.L., and Higgins, M.W., 1980, Superimposed folding and its bearing on geologic history of the Atlanta, Georgia, area in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions in Southeastern Geology, American Geological Institute, v. 1, p. 19-40.
14. Higgins, M.W., and Atkins, R.L., 1981, The stratigraphy of the Piedmont southeast of the Brevard zone in the Atlanta, Georgia, area, in Wigley, P.B., ed., Latest thinking on the stratigraphy of selected areas in Georgia: Georgia Geological Survey Information Circular 54-A, p. 3-40.
15. Dooley, R.E., 1977, K-Ar relationships in dolerite dikes of Georgia (M.S. Thesis): Atlanta, Georgia Institute of Technology, 185 p.

124

APPENDIXD
Data Sources for Geologic Map of the Atlanta Region
(to accompany Plate Ia)
125

APPENDIXD
Data Sources

1. Cressler, C.W., 1970, Geology and ground-water resources of Floyd and Polk Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 39, 95 p.
2. Cressler, C.W., Blanchard, H.E., Jr., and Hester, W.G., 1979, Geohydrology of Bartow, Cherokee and Forsyth Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 50, 45 p.
3. Costello, J.O., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (detailed): Georgia Geologic Survey.
4. Bayley, W.S., 1928, Geology of the Tate quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 43, 170 p.
5. Murray, J.B., 1973, Geologic map of Forsyth and north Fulton Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Map RM. 7, 1:63,360.
6. Modified after Murray, J .B., Open-file map, 1:24,000 scale (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
7. McConnell, K.I., and Costello, J.O., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey .
.8. Costello, J.O., and McConnell, K.I., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
9. Costello, J.O., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
10. McConnell, K.I., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
11. Crawford, T.J., 1977a, Open-file map of the Taylorsville quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey, 1:24,000 scale.
12. Modified after Crawford, T.J., 1976 and 1977b, Open-file maps of the Burnt Hickory Ridge and Yorkville quadrangles, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey, 1:24,000 scale.
13. McConnell, K.I., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (detailed): Georgia Geologic Survey.
14. Atkins, R.L., Kline, S., and Morris, L.J., 1979, Open-file map of the Suwanee quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey, 1:24,000 scale.
15. Modified after Grant, W.E., Open-file maps, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
16. Crawford, T.J., and Medlin, J.H., 1970, Stratigraphic and structural features between the Cartersville and Brevard fault zones: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 5, 37 p.
17. McConnell, K.I., and Costello, J.O., 1980, Guide to geology along a traverse through the Blue Ridge and Piedmont provinces of north Georgia, in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions in southeastern geology: American Geological Institute, v. 1, p. 241-258.
18. McConnell, K.I., and Abrams, C.E., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
19. Higgins, M.W., 1968, Geologic map of the Brevard fault zone near Atlanta, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey, Geologic Investigations Map I-511, scale 1:48,000.
20. Modified after Dooley, R.E., Open-file map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.

21. Atkins, R.L., and Higgins, M.W., 1980, Superimposed folding and its bearing on geologic history of the Atlanta, Georgia, area, in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions in southeastern geology: American Geological Institute, v. 1, p. 19-40.
22. Atkins, R.L., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance).*
23. Abrams, C.E., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (detailed): Georgia Geologic Survey.
24. Crawford, T.J., 1970, Geologic map: Carroll-Heard Counties Georgia, in Hurst, V.J., and Long, S.W., 1971, Geochemical study of alluvium in the ChattahoocheeFlint area, Georgia: University of Georgia Institute of Community and Area Development, 52 p.
25. Modified after Crawford, T.J., and Medlin, J .H., Open-file map (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey, 1:24,000 scale.
26. Abrams, C.E., and McConnell, K.I., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
27. Modified after Penley, M., Open-file map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
28. Higgins, M.W., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance).*
29. Crawford, T.J., and Medlin, J.H., 1974, Brevard fault zone in western Georgia and eastern Alabama: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 12, p. 1-66.
30. Modified after Atkins, R.L., and Morris, L.J., Open-file map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
31. Modified after Kline, S., Unpublished map of a portion of the Hog Mountain quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey, 1:24,000 scale.
32. Schoenborn, W.A., 1983, Unpublishedmapofaportionof the Gainesville quadrangle, Georgia: Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, 1:24,000 scale.
33. Abrams, C.E., Unpublished map, 1:24,000 scale, (reconnaissance): Georgia Geologic Survey.
*RobertAtkins(GeorgiaGeologic Survey)and Michael Higgins(United States
Geological Survey) jointly mapped a number of quadrangles in the Atlanta Regional Map area. These maps, as yet unpublished, represent a cooperative effort between th(' state and federal surveys.

127

Georgia Geologic Survey
r----
1 I
\
I
\ I I \ I

I
\
I I
\

\- -VA-~4--

1

<Y irr~~w~

I
\

I I
\
I I
\--

.- -- T -- --;r.;;;.~

[pwo ~

MGolo

o

I

! +'. F A N

.Gru.,L-._

lllu

Mt .'J..'"' . - - - - -~

< '

'

I I
\

I I

H E

\

\I ow.....,.,.

Pl at e Ia, Bullet in 96

INDEX TO DATA SOURCES

!,., '1Unmapped

( 15) Source - See Appendi x D

109-Rome North (I) 110-Shannon ( J)
Il l-Adai rsvi l le (2) 112- \olhite Hest ( 2) 113 - l~hite Eas t (2/9) 114-Hal es ka (3/17/9) 115- Ba l lg r ouno West (4 /9 ) 116-Ballground Eas t (4/9)
117- Mat.t (5/9) 118-Coa l mn . (5/9) 119- Chestatee (5/6) 120-Ga 1nesvi lie (3?)

132- Rome South ( 1) 133-Wax (1/2) 134-Ki ngsto n (2)
135-Cartersville (2)
136-Allatoona Dam ( 2/7/ 17) 137-South Can t on (8/17)
138-Canton ( 9!17)
139-Bi n ni nghan (5/9)
140 - Cun>ni ng (5)
141 - Buford Dam (5) 112 -F i m<ery Branrh ( 6) 143-Chestnut ~l tn. (10)

! 55-Cedartown East ( 1)
156- Ror kmart ( 1) !57- Tay l o r svi ll e (11) 158-Bur nt Hickory Ridge (12) 159-Arv;orth ( 13/ 16/17/7) 160-Kennesaw ( 13/ 17) 16Hiountain Pa rk (13/3 / 6) 162-Roswell ( 5 ) 163-Duluth (5)
164-Su>ta nnee (14) 165-Hog Nountain(31 ) 166-Aubu rn (15)

179- Fe lton (l) 180- Rorkmar t South (2/18) 181-York ville (12) 182 - Dallas ( 18) 183-Lost Moun tain (13) 184- <'1ar i etta (10/23) 185-Sandy Springs ( 7/19/21 ) 186-Chambl ee (20/21) 187-No rrross ( 21) 188- Lu xomni (21/30) 189 -La~<renrev iII e ( 20) 190- Bo1d Springs ( unmapped)

204 - Burhan an (13) 205 - Drake t m<n ( 13 ) 206- Nel Georg ia ( 13) 207- Nebo (23) 208 -Aus t ell (26) 209-Nabl eton ( 10/19/21)
210- Northwest Atlanta (21/20) 21 1-Northeast At l anta (21!3)
212 -Stone Mounta i n ( 21/22 / 28) 213 - Snel 1vi 11e ( 21/22/ 28/30) 214- Loganvi lle ( ur<napped) 215-8ebleen (unmapped)

230-Bremen ( 33) 23 1-Temp l e (33) 232 -Vi l la Ri ca (13) 23 3-lli ns ton ( 26) 234 -Campbe l l ton (33/2 1/29) 235-Ben Hi ll (21/20) 236 - Sout hlleS t At l a nt a (21/22/28) 237 - So utheost Atlanta (21/22/28) 238-Redan (21/22/28) 239-Conyers (21/22/28 ) 240-Nil stead (27) 241-Jersey (unmapped)

256-BmJden Eos t ( 24) 257-Carrollton (24) 258 - Hul ett (24fl0/25) 259-Ri co (25/21/29) 260-Pa l me tto (21/20) 261-Fairburn (21/22/28) 262-R i ve rdal e (21/ 22/28 ) 263- Jon es boro ( 21/22/28 ) 264 -Stoc kbridge (21/22/28) 265-Ke ll ey town (21/22) 266 - Porter dale ( 15) 267 -Covington ( 15)

284-Roopvil l e (24)
285 - Lowell (25)
286 - Whitesburg (25) 287-Newnan North (2 1/22/28~
288- Madras (20/21/22/28 ) 289 - Tyrone (21/22/28) 290- Fayett evi l le (21/22/28)) 291 - Harnpto n ( 21/22/28)
292 -McDonough ( 22/28) 293 - Dia ( 15) 294- 1-ior th v i 11 e ( 15)
295 -Stewar t (27)

SCA LE

10

20 Miles

J-.'.+..~'["-'-'-'""---,---,-'

10

20

30 Kilometcrs

Ge or gia Geologic Sur vey

EXp LA N A T I 0 N

Valley and Ridge
(uftcr Cre ss ler, 1970; and Cre ss ler and othe rs, 1979 )

PENNSYLVANIAN ROCKS UND IVIDED

BANGOR LIME STON E
z
0:
FLOYD SHALE : inc 1udes Floyd Sha1e un differenti ated {Mfs), Hartselle Sandstone_ Mernber (Mh), a nd limes tone (Ml).

;},-:
MOe~
-----a;-

CHE RT OF MIS S I SS IPPIAN AND DEVONIAN AGE : in cl ud es r1i ss i ssi ppiiln and Devonian Chert undifferentiated (MOe), Fo r t Payne Chert {Mfp), Lavende r Sha l e Member {M l s), -and Ar muchee Che r t (Da).

RED MouNTAIN FoRMATIO N

UP PER AND MIDDLE 0RDOVIC!AN UND I V I DED : includes Mur freesboro , Ridley , Moccas in, a nd !3ays Fo n na tion s .

z
0:

ROCKMART SLATE : includes ~andstone, conglomera t e, and ::;late {Or::;), and

u

sl ate and si l tstone (Or) .

>

0

0

~

0

NEWALA LIM ESTONE

KNOX GROUP: includes Knox Group undivided ; Longview Limes tone , Chepu 1tepee Dol om ite, and Co ppe r Ridge Dolomite ( Ok) , and Copper Ridg e Do 1om i t e ( Ec r) .

Blue Ridge
(modifi ed a fter Mc Co nnell and Cost e llo, 1980b)

IPzmb l MINERAL BLUFF FoRMATION

<'-

u

MURP HY MARBLE AND MARBLE HI LL HORNBLENDE SCHIST

UN Dl FFE REriTlA TED .

BRAS STOWN FoRMAT I ON

~I ANTAHALA FoR MATION
L
~ DEAN FoRMATI ON

u

0 N

lr t:sc l S~ti EETWATER CREEK FoRMATION

0 w

---'

0:

CL

lpetl ETOWAH FOR MATION

L

TALLADEGA BELT ROCKS

UNDIFFERENTIATED

~
w w

~

'--' ~

" zw

0
~

Cll.S

WILHITE FoRMATION : includes Hilhite Formation undifferentiated {p1-iU), carbonaceous phyllite (pwg), and sa ndy carbonate (pwc).

---'

0:

0 N

""

0

~
w

>-

0

~

CL

~ PINELOG FoRMATION

Ecsl cls cs
Western belt

.astern be lt

cld csu fcl cs l
fed
Cartersville area

CON ASAU GA GROU P : in c ludes Western and East er n belt s in Floyd County with units of mostly shale and some limestont (csl} , mostly limestone and some shale (cls), sil i ceous shale and thi n bedded sandstone {Ecs}, dolom i te (cd) , shale a nd l i mesto ne mixe d (c), a nd most l y shale (cs ). In t he Ca rtersvil l e area: light to med ium gray a nd brown dolomite {cd), greenish , gray, tan, purplish and black shale (csl), limestone (cl), greenish, gray , and slightly purplish shale (csu), and gray dolomite (Ecld} .

z
0:

>-

u 0

~ CORBIN GNEISS COMPLEX

N

0

~

w

>-

0

~

CL

RoM E FoRMATI ON
SHADY DoLOMITE
CHILH OWEE GROUP : in cludes conglomerate a nd quart z i te with int er layers o f graphitic shale and phyll ite ( chq) , and grap hi tic snale and phy ll ite (c hs) .

Plate lb, Bulletin 96

Northern Piedmont

(moditied after Crawford and 11edlin, 1974; Higgins .and McConnell,l978a; McConnell and Costello, 1980b; a nd Abrams a nd McCo nnell , 1981a)

u
I"Z.l diabase dikes

~ AusTELL GNEISS

~ MuLBERRY RocK GNEISS ~ SAND HILL GNEISS

~
" 0
. ~
CD~ ~ <.0 D
,z_, Eg: ~ U) ~
>- 3 R z
0:
U)
-

BILL ARP FoRMATION
ANDY MoUNTAI N FoRMA TI ON : i nclude s a quartzi te member (amq) and undifferentiated schists and gnei s s (amu).
DoG RIVER FORMATION: i nc lu des undi ffere ntia ted bi otite gnei ss, mi cu s chi st and amphibolite (dru), a mica schist facies .:!:: kyanite (drs}, and amphibolite (dra).

YELLOWDIRT GNEISS : (age and stratigraphic position unce r tain).
AcwoRTH GN EISS

CANTON FoRMATION

PuMPKINVINE CREEK FORMATION: includes Pumpkinvine Cre ek undifferentiated (pcu} and Galts Ferry Gnei ss (g fg) .

u

'~

MuD CREEK FORMATION : includes metadacite {Villa Ri ca Gneis s , vrg), Cedar Lake Qu a rt z ite ( c lq), Mudd Creek undifferentia ted (mc u), a nd qarnet

mcb J

biotite gneiss (mcb) .



UNJVETER FORMATION : includes Lost Mountain Amphibolite (lma) and Rose Creek Schist ( res).

Q
z
0:

"u '

0
"0 '

-

~

w

>-

0

~

CL

KELLOGG CREEK MAFIC COMPLEX
LAURA LAK E MAF I C COMPLEX : includes metagabbro (llg) , undifferentiated mafic a nd intermediate rock s (l lu), a nd quartz diorite gn e i ss ( lld ) .

~ ~
u 0
""
0 w >: 0z : z
"' ~ 0
R w z
"'

FA CTOR Y SHOALS FoR MATION
CHATTAHOOCHEE PALISADES QuARTZ I TE
PoWERS F ERRY FoRMAT ION ; incl udes the Mab l eto n Amphibolite (rna), a mi ca sc hist fa cies (pf s ), a nd undiffe rentiated biotite gneiss, mica schist and amphibolite {pfu).
LONG ISLAND GNEISS (age and
stratig r aphic positi on uncertain),
chlorite- bearing schist ga rnet, bioti te, or anthophyllite
magneti te quartzite (banded iron fonna~ion)
muscov ite kyanite quartz granofels ~ pyrite
kyani te musco~i te quartz schist
and sericite quartzite :_ kyanite and pyrite
carbonaceous schist
sericite schist with interlayered quartzite and hornblende gneiss
seri c i te schist with i nterlayered quartzite
quartz muscovite schi::;t
garnet muscovite schist
biotite garnet muscov i te sch i st
epidote quartzite
quartzite
amphibolite/hornbl ende gneiss undifferentiated
amphibolite. hornblende gneiss, a nd fels ic gneiss
granitic gneiss {ggn) and felsic gneiss (f9n) of unknown compos 1t 10n
metagabbro
meta - ultramafic r ocks, i nc ludes anthophyllite - chlorite hydrot he r ma l alte rat i on assemb l ag es

Southern Piedmont and Brevard Fault Zone
(modified after Atki ns and Higgins, 1980 ; and Kli ne, 1981)

-
z
0
~ "'
0:
'--'
u u
u
~
0
0 z
0:
~
3
0 z
<C
>-
u
0
0"'
~
w >-
0
~
CL
-

d iabase dikes

STONE MouNTAIN GRANI TE
PALMETTO GRANITE : includes the Sha ke Ra g phas e ( sr ), and the Ty rone phase ( t) .

Ducta lly s hear ed r ocks : includ es Srevard fault zone undifferentiated (bi!:), Br evard zone mylonites (bi!:nl), and other mylonites (my) .
El PANOLA GRANITE
El BEN HILL GRANI TE

B LITHONIA GNEISS

!Pi!:u c! UNION CITY CoMPLEX

SNELLVILLE FORMATJON: incl udes the
Norr is Lake Sch ist Membe r (n) a nd the Lanier Mountai n Qu a rt z i te Membe r ( 1).

SoAPSTONE RIDGE CoMPLEX : includes a schist
u ni t (Pi!:SS) , a n amphi bo l ite un i t (Pi!: sa ), an amphibo l ite and sc hist un it (Pi!:s as ) and a coa r se-grained ultramafic unit (Pi!:um) .
}G FAcTORY SHOALS FoRMATION
}EJ CHATTAHOOCHEE PAL ISADES QuAR TZITE

INMAN YARD FoRMATION
~ NoRcRoss GNEiss

-
PROM IS ED LAND FoR MAT ION:
inc l ud es the Hannah Membe r (h) .
~ Wo LF CRE EK FoRMATI ON

~ CLAIRMONT FoRMATION

~ SE NOIA FoRMATION

[ 3 WAHO O CRE EK FoRMATION

PowERS FE RRY FoRMATION
UNDIFFERENTIATED

~ STON EWA LL FoR MATION

CLAR KSTON FOR MATI ON: in c ludes the

Fairburn Member (f), Tar Creek

f-lember (tc), and undifferentiated

Clarkston Fonna t ion (ca).

-

-

-

BIG COTTON IN DIAN
FoRMATION

INTRENCHMENT CREE K QuARTZ IT E

n
~ CAMP CREEK FORMATION

,---
B

meta-ultramafic rocks

amphibolite and ho rn blende

gneiss
"u~'

0

""
R

predominantly bi oti te gneiss

w

>:

0zz:

"'
0 z

granitic gneiss

0:

0 w

z

'-'

sillimanite-graphite schist

ma rble

biotite gne i ss, amp hiboli te , a nd mi ca schist undiffe r enti ated
quart zite
~ bi otite muscovite schist

Symbols
CONTA C T~ DASHED WHERE INFERRED TH RUST FAULT 1 DASHED WHERE I NFERRE D REVERSE FAULT1 DASHED WHER E INFERRED1
DOT T ED WHERE UN CERT AIN FLINTY CRU S H ROCK STRIKE-SLIP FA ULT

MINES, PROSPECTS, AND MINERAL LOCALITIES

OF THE CARTERSVILLE AREA

Georgia Geologic Survey

Plate lla, Bulletin 96

X581
*73
_ 8
*~ 2

EXPLANATION

Mine- Coded numerically by county with commodity letter designation. Prospect - Coded numerically by county with commodity letter des1.gnat1.on.

Mineral Locality- Coded numerically by county with commodity letter

designation.
0

1 Mile

Georgia Geologic Survey

Plate IV, Bulletin 9

EXPLANATION

Isotopic Methods

*

K/Ar Age 4 0 Ar/ 39 Ar Age U/Pb Age

Rb/Sr Age

12a 291 (wr)

Reference ( 12a), Age (291), and type of analysis (wr).
(See Appendix C for explanation)

SCALE

0

234 56 78 9

l . _ .. _L____L_ _L___j_ _l__.L__.__L_ _j__J_ _j

ISOTOPIC AGE DATES
Compiled by K. I. McConnell