Geology topics

Research about Chesapeake Bay

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Chesapeake Bay.

At least 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources

USGS2012

Proceedings of the workshop on alternative futures: Accounting for growth in the Chesapeake Bay watershed

This workshop provided a forum for identifying and discussing policies and assumptions for use in creating regionally consistent alternative future land-use scenarios. The alternative scenarios will help to inform how planning can potentially be used as a primary Best Management Practice by identifying land-use policies and other planning actions that can be taken to minimize future increases in nutrients and sediments associated with the spatial pattern and intensity of land development. The Chesapeake Bay Program Office will run these scenarios through the watershed model to quantify the differences in loadings achieved through implementation of land-use policies and to help assess the uncertainty associated with the current trend forecast. In addition, the outcomes of this workshop can assist jurisdictions in planning for growth with respect to minimizing future increases in nutrient and sediment associated with land development. Ultimately, this workshop was intended to provide jurisdictions with information that can be used to better account for refinement of their Watershed Implementation Plans.

Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylv↗

USGS2012

Foraminiferal repopulation of the late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact crater

The Chickahominy Formation is the initial postimpact deposit in the 85km-diameter Chesapeake Bay impact crater, which is centered under the town of Cape Charles, Virginia, USA. The formation comprises dominantly microfossil-rich, silty, marine clay, which accumulated during the final ~1.6myr of late Eocene time. At cored sites, the Chickahominy Formation is 16.8-93.7m thick, and fills a series of small troughs and subbasins, which subdivide the larger Chickahominy basin. Nine coreholes drilled through the Chickahominy Formation (five inside the crater, two near the crater margin, and two ~3km outside the crater) record the stratigraphic and paleoecologic succession of 301 indigenous species of benthic foraminifera, as well as associated planktonic foraminifera and bolboformids. Two hundred twenty of these benthic species are described herein, and illustrated with scanning electron photomicrographs. Absence of key planktonic foraminiferal and Bolboforma species in early Chickahominy sediments indicates that detrimental effects of the impact also disturbed the upper oceanic water column for at least 80-100kyr postimpact. After an average of ~73kyr of stressed, rapidly fluctuating paleoenvironments, which were destabilized by after-effects of the impact, most of the cored Chickahominy subbasins maintained stable, nutrient-rich, low-oxygen bottom waters and interstitial microhabitats for the remaining ~1.3myr of late Eocene time.

Maryl;Virginia↗

USGS2011

Drilling the central crater of the Chesapeake Bay Impact Structure: A first look

The late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure is a well‐preserved example of one of Earth's largest impact craters, and its continental‐shelf setting and relatively shallow burial make it an excellent target for study. Since the discovery of the structure over a decade ago [ Edwards et al., 2004; Poag et al., 2004], test drilling by U.S. federal and state agencies has been limited to the structure's annular trough (Figure 1). In May 2004, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) drilled the first scientific test hole into the central crater of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure in Cape Charies,Virginia (Figure 1). This partially cored test hole, the deepest to date, penetrated postimpact sediments and impact breccias to a total depth of 823 m.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2011

Predator removal enhances waterbird restoration in Chesapeake Bay (Maryland)

This report represents an update to an earlier report(Erwin et al. 2007a) on wildlife restoration on the largest dredge material island project in the United States underway in Talbot County, Maryland (Figure 1) in the mid–Chesapeake Bay region, referred to as the Paul Sarbanes Ecosystem Restoration Project at Poplar Island (www.nab.usace.army.mil/projects/Maryland/PoplarIsland/documents.html). An important component of this largescale restoration effort focused on water birds, as many of these species have undergone significant declines in the Chesapeake region over the past 30 years (Erwin et al. 2007b). The priority waterbird species include common terns ( Sterna hirundo ), least terns ( S. antillarum ), snowy egrets ( Egretta thula ), and ospreys ( Pandion haliaetus ). Although significant numbers of common terns (more than 800 pairs in 2003), least terns (62 pairs in 2003), snowy egrets (50 or more pairs by 2005), and ospreys (7 to 10 pairs) have nested on Poplar Island since early 2000, tern productivity especially had been strongly limited by a combination of red fox ( Vulpes vulpes ) and great horned owl ( Bubo virginianus ) predation. Fox trapping began in 2004, and four were removed that year; no more evidence of fox presence was found in 2005 or subsequently. The owls proved to be more problematic.

Maryland↗

USGS2011

Sources, fate, and transport of nitrogen and phosphorus in the Chesapeake Bay watershed: An empirical model

Spatially Referenced Regression on Watershed Attributes (SPARROW) was used to provide empirical estimates of the sources, fate, and transport of total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and the mean annual TN and TP flux to the bay and in each of 80,579 nontidal tributary stream reaches. Restoration efforts in recent decades have been insufficient to meet established standards for water quality and ecological conditions in Chesapeake Bay. The bay watershed includes 166,000 square kilometers of mixed land uses, multiple nutrient sources, and variable hydrogeologic, soil, and weather conditions, and bay restoration is complicated by the multitude of nutrient sources and complex interacting factors affecting the occurrence, fate, and transport of nitrogen and phosphorus from source areas to streams and the estuary. Effective and efficient nutrient management at the regional scale in support of Chesapeake Bay restoration requires a comprehensive understanding of the sources, fate, and transport of nitrogen and phosphorus in the watershed, which is only available through regional models. The current models, Chesapeake Bay nutrient SPARROW models, version 4 (CBTN_v4 and CBTP_v4), were constructed at a finer spatial resolution than previous SPARROW models for the Chesapeake Bay watershed (versions 1, 2, and 3), and include an updated timeframe and modified sources and other explantory terms. Chesapeake Bay receives an estimated 1.32 x 10 8 kilograms (132,000 metric tons) of nitrogen and 9.74 x 10 6 kilograms (9,740 metric tons) of phosphorus annually from its watershed, mainly through its two largest tributaries, the Susquehanna and Potomac Rivers. Significant (α=0.10) sources of nutrients to streams in the watershed include fertilizer and manure applications in agricultural areas, undifferentiated urban activities, point sources, atmospheric deposition and direct fixation by crops (for nitrogen), and mineral sources (for phosphorus). Agriculture (primarily fertilizer applications and crop fixation) contributes more than half of the nitrogen delivered from the watershed to the bay; phosphorus contributions are more mixed, and fairly evenly distributed among agricultural (fertilizer and manure applications) and urban (including point) sources. Natural mineral dissolution contributes approximately 14 percent of the phosphorus flux from the watershed to the Chesapeake Bay. Empirical estimates of average yields from different source areas and of the portion of selected applications delivered to streams agree closely with previously reported values in the literature. Nutrient fate and transport through the Chesapeake Bay watershed to the bay reflect the diferent physical and chemical properties of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds. Groundwater is an important pathway for nitrogen transport (as nitrate), and TN flux is greatest in areas with greater groundwater flow and in areas of the Piedmont underlain by carbonate rocks. TN flux decreases with increasing vegetative growth (likely indicative of plant uptake) and soil available water capacity (likely indicative of reducing conditions). Phosphorus transport to streams, conversely, is greatest in areas most likely to generate overland runoff and related erosion, including those with less permeable and more erodible soils and greater precipitation. Phosphorus transport also is greater in the Coastal Plain than in other areas, possibly due to saturation of soils with historical phosphorus applications. Both nitrogen and phosphorus are lost within watershed impoundments (lakes, ponds, or reservoirs), and nitrogen is also lost significantly along flowing reaches, particularly in small streams and in larger streams in warmer areas.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2010

The bioeconomic impact of different management regulations on the Chesapeake Bay blue crab fishery

The harvest of blue crabs Callinectes sapidus in Chesapeake Bay declined 46% between 1993 and 2001 and remained low through 2008. Because the total market value of this fishery has declined by an average of US $ 3.3 million per year since 1993, the commercial fishery has been challenged to maintain profitability. We developed a bioeconomic simulation model of the Chesapeake Bay blue crab fishery to aid managers in determining which regulations will maximize revenues while ensuring a sustainable harvest. We compared 15 different management scenarios, including those implemented by Maryland and Virginia between 2007 and 2009, that sought to reduce female crab harvest and nine others that used seasonal closures, different size regulations, or the elimination of fishing for specific market categories. Six scenarios produced the highest revenues: the 2008 and 2009 Maryland regulations, spring and fall closures for female blue crabs, and 152- and 165-mm maximum size limits for females. Our most important finding was that for each state the 2008 and 2009 scenarios that implemented early closures of the female crab fishery produced higher revenues than the 2007 scenario, in which no early female closures were implemented. We conclude that the use of maximum size limits for female crabs would not be feasible despite their potentially high revenue, given the likelihood that the soft-shell and peeler fisheries cannot be expanded beyond their current capacity and the potentially high mortality rate for culled individuals that are the incorrect size. Our model results support the current use of seasonal closures for females, which permit relatively high exploitation of males and soft-shell and peeler blue crabs (which have high prices) while keeping the female crab harvest sustainable. Further, our bioeconomic model allows for the inclusion of an economic viewpoint along with biological data when target reference points are set by managers.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2010

Petrography, mineralogy, and geochemistry of deep gravelly sands in the Eyreville B core, Chesapeake Bay impact structure

The ICDP–USGS Eyreville drill cores in the Chesapeake Bay impact structure reached a total depth of 1766 m and comprise (from the bottom upwards) basement-derived schists and granites/pegmatites, impact breccias, mostly poorly lithified gravelly sand and crystalline blocks, a granitic slab, sedimentary breccias, and postimpact sediments. The gravelly sand and crystalline block section forms an approximately 26 m thick interval that includes an amphibolite block and boulders of cataclastic gneiss and suevite. Three gravelly sands (basal, middle, and upper) are distinguished within this interval. The gravelly sands are poorly sorted, clast supported, and generally massive, but crude size-sorting and subtle, discontinuous layers occur locally. Quartz and K-feldspar are the main sand-size minerals and smectite and kaolinite are the principal clay minerals. Other mineral grains occur only in accessory amounts and lithic clasts are sparse (only a few vol%). The gravelly sands are silica rich (~80 wt% SiO 2 ). Trends with depth include a slight decrease in SiO 2 and slight increase in Fe 2 O 3 . The basal gravelly sand (below the cataclasite boulder) has a lower SiO 2 content, less K-feldspar, and more mica than the higher sands, and it contains more lithic clasts and melt particles that are probably reworked from the underlying suevite. The middle gravelly sand (below the amphibolite block) is finer-grained, contains more abundant clay minerals, and displays more variable chemical compositions than upper gravelly sand (above the block). Our mineralogical and geochemical results suggest that the gravelly sands are avalanche deposits derived probably from the nonmarine Potomac Formation in the lower part of the target sediment layer, in contrast to polymict diamictons higher in the core that have been interpreted as ocean-resurge debris flows, which is in agreement with previous interpretations. The mineralogy and geochemistry of the gravelly sands are typical for a passive continental margin source. There is no discernible mixing with marine sediments (no glauconite or Paleogene marine microfossils noted) during the impact remobilization and redeposition. The unshocked amphibolite block and cataclasite boulder might have originated from the outer parts of the transient crater.

Virginia↗

USGS2010

Long-term reductions in anthropogenic nutrients link to improvements in Chesapeake Bay habitat

Great effort continues to focus on ecosystem restoration and reduction of nutrient inputs thought to be responsible, in part, for declines in estuary habitats worldwide. The ability of environmental policy to address restoration is limited, in part, by uncertainty in the relationships between costly restoration and benefits. Here, we present results from an 18-y field investigation (1990-2007) of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) community dynamics and water quality in the Potomac River, a major tributary of the Chesapeake Bay. River and anthropogenic discharges lower water clarity by introducing nutrients that stimulate phytoplankton and epiphyte growth as well as suspended sediments. Efforts to restore the Chesapeake Bay are often viewed as failing. Overall nutrient reduction and SAV restoration goals have not been met. In the Potomac River, however, reduced in situ nutrients, wastewater-treatment effluent nitrogen, and total suspended solids were significantly correlated to increased SAV abundance and diversity. Species composition and relative abundance also correlated with nutrient and water-quality conditions, indicating declining fitness of exotic species relative to native species during restoration. Our results suggest that environmental policies that reduce anthropogenic nutrient inputs do result in improved habitat quality, with increased diversity and native species abundances. The results also help elucidate why SAV cover has improved only in some areas of the Chesapeake Bay.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2010

Weighted regressions on time, discharge, and season (WRTDS), with an application to Chesapeake Bay River inputs

A new approach to the analysis of long‐term surface water‐quality data is proposed and implemented. The goal of this approach is to increase the amount of information that is extracted from the types of rich water‐quality datasets that now exist. The method is formulated to allow for maximum flexibility in representations of the long‐term trend, seasonal components, and discharge‐related components of the behavior of the water‐quality variable of interest. It is designed to provide internally consistent estimates of the actual history of concentrations and fluxes as well as histories that eliminate the influence of year‐to‐year variations in streamflow. The method employs the use of weighted regressions of concentrations on time, discharge, and season. Finally, the method is designed to be useful as a diagnostic tool regarding the kinds of changes that are taking place in the watershed related to point sources, groundwater sources, and surface‐water nonpoint sources. The method is applied to datasets for the nine large tributaries of Chesapeake Bay from 1978 to 2008. The results show a wide range of patterns of change in total phosphorus and in dissolved nitrate plus nitrite. These results should prove useful in further examination of the causes of changes, or lack of changes, and may help inform decisions about future actions to reduce nutrient enrichment in the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed.

Maryland, Virginia↗

USGS2010

Islands at bay: Rising seas, eroding islands, and waterbird habitat loss in Chesapeake Bay (USA)

Like many resources in the Chesapeake Bay region of the U.S., many waterbird nesting populations have suffered over the past three to four decades. In this study, historic information for the entire Bay and recent results from the Tangier Sound region were evaluated to illustrate patterns of island erosion and habitat loss for 19 breeding species of waterbirds. Aerial imagery and field data collected in the nesting season were the primary sources of data. From 1993/1994 to 2007/2008, a group of 15 islands in Tangier Sound, Virginia were reduced by 21% in area, as most of their small dunes and associated vegetation and forest cover were lost to increased washovers. Concurrently, nesting American black ducks ( Anas rubripes) declined by 66% , wading birds (herons-egrets) by 51%, gulls by 72%, common terns (Sterna hirundo) by 96% and black skimmers ( Rynchops niger ) by about 70% in this complex. The declines noted at the larger Bay-wide scale suggest that this study area maybe symptomatic of a systemic limitation of nesting habitat for these species. The island losses noted in the Chesapeake have also been noted in other Atlantic U.S. coastal states. Stabilization and/or restoration of at least some of the rapidly eroding islands at key coastal areas are critical to help sustain waterbird communities.

Virginia↗

USGS2010

Inside the crater, outside the crater: Stratigraphic details of the margin of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure, Virginia, USA

Two cores at the outer margin of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure show significant structural and depositional variations that illuminate its history. Detailed stratigraphy of the Watkins School core reveals that this site is outside the disruption boundary of the crater with respect to its lower part (nonmarine Cretaceous Potomac Formation), but just inside the boundary with respect to its upper part (Exmore Formation and a succession of upper Eocene to Pleistocene postimpact deposits). The site of the U.S. Geological Survey-National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley core, 6.4 km to the east, lies wholly within the annular trough of the crater . The Potomac Formation in the Watkins School core is not noticeably impact disrupted. The lower part of crater unit A in the Langley core represents stratigraphically lower, but similarly undeformed material. The Exmore Formation is only 7.8 m thick in the Watkins School core, but it is over 200 m thick in the Langley core, where it contains blocks up to 24 m in intersected diameter. The upper part of the Exmore Formation in the two cores is a polymict diamicton with a stratified zone at the top. The postimpact sedimentary units in the two cores have similar late Eocene and late Miocene depositional histories and contrasting Oligocene, early Miocene, and middle Miocene histories. A paleochannel of the James River removed Pliocene deposits at the Watkins School site, to be filled later with thick Pleistocene deposits. At the Langley site, a thick Pliocene and thinner Pleistocene record is preserved. © 2010 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.

Virginia↗

USGS2009

Derivation of habitat-specific dissolved oxygen criteria for Chesapeake Bay and its tidal tributaries

The Chesapeake 2000 Agreement committed its state and federal signatories to “define the water quality conditions necessary to protect aquatic living resources” in the Chesapeake Bay (USA) and its tidal tributaries. Hypoxia is one of the key water quality issues addressed as a result of the above Agreement. This paper summarizes the protection goals and specific criteria intended to achieve those goals for addressing hypoxia. The criteria take into account the variety of Bay habitats and the tendency towards low dissolved oxygen in some areas of the Bay. Stressful dissolved oxygen conditions were characterized for a diverse array of living resources of the Chesapeake Bay by different aquatic habitats: migratory fish spawning and nursery, shallow-water, open-water, deep-water, and deep-channel. The dissolved oxygen criteria derived for each of these habitats are intended to protect against adverse effects on survival, growth, reproduction and behavior. The criteria accommodate both spatial and temporal aspects of low oxygen events, and have been adopted into the Chesapeake Bay states – Maryland, Virginia, and Delaware – and the District of Columbia's water quality standards regulations. These criteria, now in the form of state regulatory standards, are driving an array of land-based and wastewater pollution reduction actions across the six-watershed.

Maryland, Virginia, Washington, D.C.↗

USGS2009

Geologic columns for the ICDP-USGS Eyreville B core, Chesapeake Bay impact structure: Impactites and crystalline rocks, 1766 to 1096 m depth

The International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP)-U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Eyreville drill cores from the Chesapeake Bay impact structure provide one of the most complete geologic sections ever obtained from an impact structure. This paper presents a series of geologic columns and descriptive lithologic information for the lower impactite and crystalline-rock sections in the cores. The lowermost cored section (1766-1551 m depth) is a complex assemblage of mica schists that commonly contain graphite and fibrolitic sillimanite, intrusive granite pegmatites that grade into coarse granite, and local zones of mylonitic deformation. This basement-derived section is variably overprinted by brittle cataclastic fabrics and locally cut by dikes of polymict impact breccia, including several suevite dikes. An overlying succession of suevites and lithic impact breccias (1551-1397 m) includes a lower section dominated by polymict lithic impact breccia with blocks (up to 17 m) and boulders of cataclastic gneiss and an upper section (above 1474 m) of suevites and clast-rich impact melt rocks. The uppermost suevite is overlain by 26 m (1397-1371 m) of gravelly quartz sand that contains an amphibolite block and boulders of cataclasite and suevite. Above the sand, a 275-m-thick allochthonous granite slab (1371-1096 m) includes gneissic biotite granite, fine- and medium-to-coarse-grained biotite granites, and red altered granite near the base. The granite slab is overlain by more gravelly sand, and both are attributed to debris-avalanche and/or rockslide deposition that slightly preceded or accompanied seawater-resurge into the collapsing transient crater.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2009

Geologic columns for the ICDP-USGS Eyreville A and B cores, Chesapeake Bay impact structure: Sediment-clast breccias, 1096 to 444 m depth

The Eyreville A and B cores, recovered from the “moat” of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure, provide a thick section of sediment-clast breccias and minor stratified sediments from 1095.74 to 443.90 m. This paper discusses the components of these breccias, presents a geologic column and descriptive lithologic framework for them, and formalizes the Exmore Formation. From 1095.74 to ~867 m, the cores consist of nonmarine sediment boulders and sand (rare blocks up to 15.3 m intersected diameter). A sharp contact in both cores at ~867 m marks the lowest clayey, silty, glauconitic quartz sand that constitutes the base of the Exmore Formation and its lower diamicton member. Here, material derived from the upper sediment target layers, as well as some impact ejecta, occurs. The block-dominated member of the Exmore Formation, from ~855–618.23 m, consists of nonmarine sediment blocks and boulders (up to 45.5 m) that are juxtaposed complexly. Blocks of oxidized clay are an important component. Above 618.23 m, which is the base of the informal upper diamicton member of the Exmore Formation, the glauconitic matrix is a consistent component in diamicton layers between nonmarine sediment clasts that decrease in size upward in the section. Crystalline-rock clasts are not randomly distributed but rather form local concentrations. The upper part of the Exmore Formation consists of crudely fining-upward sandy packages capped by laminated silt and clay. The overlap interval of Eyreville A and B (940–~760 m) allows recognition of local similarities and differences in the breccias.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2009

Geologic columns for the ICDP-USGS Eyreville A and C cores, Chesapeake Bay impact structure: Postimpact sediments, 444 to 0 m depth

A 443.9-m-thick, virtually undisturbed section of postimpact deposits in the Chesapeake Bay impact structure was recovered in the Eyreville A and C cores, Northampton County, Virginia, within the "moat" of the structure's central crater. Recovered sediments are mainly fine-grained marine siliciclastics, with the exception of Pleistocene sand, clay, and gravel. The lowest postimpact unit is the upper Eocene Chickahominy Formation (443.9-350.1 m). At 93.8 m, this is the maximum thickness yet recovered for deposits that represent the return to "normal marine" sedimentation. The Drummonds Corner beds (informal) and the Old Church Formation are thin Oligocene units present between 350.1 and 344.7 m. Above the Oligocene, there is a more typical Virginia coastal plain succession. The Calvert Formation (344.7-225.4 m) includes a thin lower Miocene part overlain by a much thicker middle Miocene part. From 225.4 to 206.0 m, sediments of the middle Miocene Choptank Formation, rarely reported in the Virginia coastal plain, are present. The thick upper Miocene St. Marys and Eastover Formations (206.0-57.8 m) appear to represent a more complete succession than in the type localities. Correlation with the nearby Kiptopeke core indicates that two Pliocene units are present: Yorktown (57.8-32.2 m) and Chowan River Formations (32.2-18.3 m). Sediments at the top of the section represent an upper Pleistocene channel-fill and are assigned to the Butlers Bluff and Occohannock Members of the Nassawadox Formation (18.3-0.6 m).

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2009

Supplemental materials for the ICDP-USGS Eyreville A, B, and C core holes, Chesapeake Bay impact structure: Core-box photographs, coring-run tables, and depth-conversion files

During 2005-2006, the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program and the U.S. Geological Survey drilled three continuous core holes into the Chesapeake Bay impact structure to a total depth of 1766.3 m. A collection of supplemental materials that presents a record of the core recovery and measurement data for the Eyreville cores is available on CD-ROM at the end of this volume and in the GSA Data Repository. The supplemental materials on the CD-ROM include digital photographs of each core box from the three core holes, tables of the three coring-run logs, as recorded on site, and a set of depth-conversion programs. In this chapter, the contents, purposes, and basic applications of the supplemental materials are briefly described. With this information, users can quickly decide if the materials will apply to their specific research needs.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2009

High-resolution seismic-reflection images across the ICDP-USGS Eyreville deep drilling site, Chesapeake Bay impact structure

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) acquired two 1.4-km-long, high-resolution (~5 m vertical resolution) seismic-reflection lines in 2006 that cross near the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP)–USGS Eyreville deep drilling site located above the late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure in Virginia, USA. Five-meter spacing of seismic sources and geophones produced high-resolution images of the subsurface adjacent to the 1766-m-depth Eyreville core holes. Analysis of these lines, in the context of the core hole stratigraphy, shows that moderate-amplitude, discontinuous, dipping reflections below ~527 m correlate with a variety of Chesapeake Bay impact structure sediment and rock breccias recovered in the cores. High-amplitude, continuous, subhorizontal reflections above ~527 m depth correlate with the uppermost part of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure crater-fill sediments and postimpact Eocene to Pleistocene sediments. Reflections with ~20–30 m of relief in the uppermost part of the crater-fill and lowermost part of the postimpact section suggest differential compaction of the crater-fill materials during early postimpact time. The top of the crater-fill section also shows ~20 m of relief that appears to represent an original synimpact surface. Truncation surfaces, locally dipping reflections, and depth variations in reflection amplitudes generally correlate with the lithostrati-graphic and sequence-stratigraphic units and contacts in the core. Seismic images show apparent postimpact paleochannels that include the first possible Miocene paleochannels in the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain. Broad downwarping in the postim-pact section unrelated to structures in the crater fill indicates postimpact sediment compaction.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2009

Rock-avalanche and ocean-resurge deposits in the late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure: Evidence from the ICDP-USGS Eyreville cores, Virginia, USA

An unusually thick section of sedimentary breccias dominated by target-sediment clasts is a distinctive feature of the late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure. A cored 1766-m-deep section recovered from the central part of this marine-target structure by the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP)-U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) drilling project contains 678 m of these breccias and associated sediments and an intervening 275-m-thick granite slab. Two sedimentary breccia units consist almost entirely of Cretaceous nonmarine sediments derived from the lower part of the target sediment layer. These sediments are present as coherent clasts and as autoclastic matrix between the clasts. Primary (Cretaceous) sedimentary structures are well preserved in some clasts, and liquefaction and fluidization structures produced at the site of deposition occur in the clasts and matrix. These sedimentary breccias are interpreted as one or more rock avalanches from the upper part of the transient-cavity wall. The little-deformed, unshocked granite slab probably was transported as part of an extremely large slide or avalanche. Water-saturated Cretaceous quartz sand below the slab was transported into the seafloor crater prior to, or concurrently with, the granite slab. Two sedimentary breccia units consist of polymict diamictons that contain cobbles, boulders, and blocks of Cretaceous nonmarine target sediments and less common shocked-rock and melt ejecta in an unsorted, unstratified, muddy, fossiliferous, glauconitic quartz matrix. Much of the matrix material was derived from Upper Cretaceous and Paleogene marine target sediments. These units are interpreted as the deposits of debris flows initiated by the resurge of ocean water into the seafloor crater. Interlayering of avalanche and debris-flow units indicates a partial temporal overlap of the earlier avalanche and later resurge processes. A thin unit of stratified turbidite deposits and overlying laminated fine-grained deposits at the top of the section represents the transition to normal shelf sedimentation. ?

Chesapeake Bay↗