BY THE CENTRAL GREAT LAKES GEOLOGIC

MAPPING COALITION

Illinois State Geological Survey

Indiana Geological Survey

Michigan Geological Survey Division

Ohio Division of Geological Survey

U.S. Geological Survey

SUSTAINABLE

GROWTH IN

AMERICA’S 

HEARTLAND—

3-D GEOLOGIC MAPS

AS THE FOUNDATION

U.S. Geological Survey

Circular 1190
The geologic materials at the Earth’s surface in the Central

Great Lakes region are the legacy of the ice age. Throughout

the region, these materials (gravel, sand, silt, clay, and mud)—

• Are the parent materials of today’s agricultural soils

• Are the construction materials we use for buildings and

highways

• Are where we dispose of our trash 

• Contain the aquifers that supply water to our homes,

businesses, and industry

• Provide the habitat for wildlife 

• Support the timber and fisheries industries 

• Support the environment that we use for recreation

Cover. This block diagram is a generalized representation of surface land uses and

underlying deposits in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio. The relatively flat farmland

plains and rolling hills conceal a complex mix of glacial deposits stacked above ancient

rocky hills and valleys like a pile of rumpled patchwork quilts. During the last 1.8 million

years, each glacial advance and retreat modified the previous landscape and deposited

new layers of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and till, capped by soil. The thickness of the glacial

deposits ranges from a few inches to more than 1,300 feet. Diagram by J.M. Evans.
wth in America’s Heartland—

aps as the Foundation

akes Geologic Mapping Coalition

ological Survey

cal Survey

gical Survey Division

Geological Survey

Survey

URVEY CIRCULAR 1190
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BRUCE BABBITT, SecretaryU.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEYCHARLES G. GROAT, DirectorUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1999Published in the Eastern Region, Reston, Va.Manuscript approved for publication June 11, 1999.First printing October 1999; second printing February 2000;third printing September 2003 with a revised map on p. 11.Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes onlyand does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.Free on application toU.S. Geological SurveyInformation ServicesBox 25286, Federal CenterDenver, CO 80225or call the toll-free telephone number1–888–ASK–USGSLibrary of Congress Cataloging in Publication DataSustainable growth in America’s heartland: 3–D geologic maps as the foundation/by the Central Great Lakes

Geologic Mapping Coalition, Illinois State Geological Survey. . . [et al.].

p. cm.—(U.S. Geological Survey circular; 1190)

Includes bibliographical references.Supt. of Doc. no. : I 19.4/2: 11901. Geology—Middle West. 2. Geological mapping—Middle West. 3. Glacial landforms—Middle West.

I. Central Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition. II. Series. 

QE78.7.S87 1999 557.8’022’3—dc21 99–39839

CIP
FOREWORD

I am especially pleased to present this Circular describing the Central

Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition, because the Coalition represents several important new directions for the U.S. Geological Survey. Theplans developed by the Coalition provide a new model for State-Federalcollaboration in research, information delivery, and outreach, as well as amost welcome opportunity to work more closely with the various information-user communities. These are activities that I will foster within theU.S. Geological Survey during my tenure as Director, acknowledging themany benefits that come from interacting closely with our customers andthe State Geological Surveys, who will be our principal partners in thisenterprise. The scope of this activity is such that no single agency can goit alone. Only by actively sharing and combining our resources can wehope to achieve the worthy goals set forth by the Coalition. Although thisCircular deals primarily with the geologic foundation for sustainablegrowth, the program it describes will also serve as the cornerstone in anew integrated science effort that will focus all of the capabilities of theUSGS (biology, geography, geology, and hydrology) to address societalneeds in the Central Great Lakes region.

Charles G. Groat, Director

III
ions . . .

 unconsolidated (loose, not solid) geologic materials

eat Lakes region, most surficial materials were

ater in glacial streams or lakes. Windblown deposits

acial materials. Nonglacial materials include stream

eathered directly from bedrock. Surficial deposits in

m a few inches to more than 1,300 feet. Ranging from

als include gravel, sand, silt, and clay. Mud is a mix

mud deposits contain organic matter, which is very fine

cial till, a compressed mixture of clay, silt, and sand,

pact and is usually impermeable to water. 

 development that meets the needs of the present

of future generations to meet their own needs” (World

d Development, 1987, p. 43).

wo kinds. Valley glaciers form in high mountain

ng out distinctive glacial U-shaped valleys. They

ainous regions of the world today. Continental glaciers

s and can be over 1 mile thick. Both types leave

sand, silt, and clay. Continental glaciers now are pre

ctica. During the ice age, glaciers covered vast regions

 advanced and retreated over portions of the Midwest

n years. The current ice retreat began over 18,000

 the ice age but are experiencing a warm period when

will probably advance again. Scientists cannot predict

c and soils maps depict the distribution of surficial

et of the land. Such maps are based primarily on

ield examination of materials exposed in shallow

 holes. Traditional surficial geologic and soils maps

onal because they provide information on the areal

and not the distribution of surficial materials at depth.

geologic maps depict the distribution and thickness of

s surface down to and including the top of bedrock,

low. Improved drilling and geophysical methods,

omputer technology, make it practical to gather, dis

formation in ways never before possible. When the

 geologists now have the ability to characterize and

nt of different types of surficial materials at great

Location of the four Central Great Lakes States. The heavy line shows the southern extent of continental glaciation in the United States during the lastice age (from Soller, 1998).

Indiana

Michigan

Illinois

Ohio

Cleveland Rockford

Springfield

Indianapolis

Columbus

Dayton

Fort Wayne Peoria

Evansville

Cincinnati

Chicago

Gary

South

Bend Toledo

Akron Youngstown

Flint

Grand

Rapids

Lansing

Detroit

Bay City

Lake Erie

Lake Superior

La

ke

Michigan

Lake

H

u

r

o

n

Upper Peninsula
CONTENTS

Regional Societal Issues RequiringEarth Science Information......2

Coalition Products and Their Use in Society. . . . . . 12 V

Surficial Geology in the Glaciated Heartland......4

What Can Be Done?—A Coalition to Address the Issues. . . . . . 10

New Tools to Collect and AnalyzeEarth Science Information......8

Introduction......1

U.S. Geological Survey Illinois State Geological Survey

Soller and others, in press
Urban landscape.

Corn Belt agriculture and family farms, a way of life.

Transportation crossroads of America’s heartland. 

Illinois State Geological Survey Illinois State Geological Survey U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service 

chigan, and Ohio have 18 percent of the 

ercent of the Nation’s population. These 

heavy industry 

e Nation’s total employment 

on’s corn and soybean production 

e Nation’s trade with Canada 

t cities in the Nation 

of the Fortune 500 companies
INTRODUCTION

STAINABLE GROWTH IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND—

3-D GEOLOGIC MAPS AS THE FOUNDATION

By the Central Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition

INTRODUCTION

The Central Great Lakes States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio

constitute one of the most productive and economically important regions inthe country—America’s heartland. The agriculture, industry, business, recreation, and ecology of these States are based on a common geologic heritage. 

During the last 1.8 million years, glaciers repeatedly advanced and retreated

across the region, leaving behind a thick, complex blanket of intermixed layersof mud, clay, silt, sand, and gravel. These glacial deposits contain bountifulresources—rich soils; plentiful ground water; minerals for construction; land foragriculture, development, recreation, and wildlife habitat; and lakes and rivers forrecreation and wildlife habitat. These materials are also subject to natural hazards—floods, erosion, landslides, radon, and earthquakes—and manmade problems such as soil, sediment, and water contamination from point and nonpointsources. Resulting land degradation has impaired and restricted human use andenjoyment of the land and caused degradation and loss of wildlife habitat.

The continued economic growth of the region and the security of its population and environment are related to fundamental issues involving land, water,

mineral, and biological resources. Addressing the conflicting demands on theseresources without adequate information can result in land-use decisions that arenot compatible with sustainable development and a continued high quality of lifefor future generations. Decisionmakers need knowledge of the glacial deposits—their characteristics, three-dimensional (3-D) distribution, and thickness. To provide this knowledge, a coalition of State and Federal Geological Surveys (IllinoisState Geological Survey, Indiana Geological Survey, Michigan GeologicalSurvey Division, Ohio Division of Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey)has formed to conduct the necessary studies in these four States to depict the 3-Dnature of these glacial and related deposits and to interpret these data in cooperation with the user community for specific societal needs. 

Population patterns revealed by lights at night.Satellite image published with permission of theInternational Dark-Sky Organization.

1
WTH IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND

L SOCIETAL ISSUES REQUIRING EARTH SCIENCE INFORMATION

ety of diverse and competing priorities.

can occur only when the needs of

sportation, housing, and environmental

e with the resources of the region.

sector managers face increasingly diffi

et too often they have insufficient

taining capabilities of the land, water,

e decisions. The following questions

acing decisionmakers.

d-water supplies adequate for a growing

? 

industrial or agricultural wells or mine

fect ground-water resources?

n private wells and septic systems, or

ecessary? Will rural wells become

nstruction aggregate near proposed

t are the benefits and costs of open-pit

hort- and long-term risks from land and

g, land subsidence, and earthquakes?

tions of the land and water pose hazards

g or new development?

ds and habitat be maintained or restored?

 can be grouped under the following

than 2 percent of the Central Great

died and mapped at the level of detail

ese issues.

Competition for the land . . .• loss of prime farmland• building over potential sand

and gravel sources 

• redevelopment of abandoned

contaminated industrial lands(brownfields) 

• suburban sprawl • habitat restoration and maintenanceWater resources . . .• aquifer location and extent• water quality and availability• vulnerability to contamination• drought managementConstruction materials . . .• location of aggregate deposits• aggregate quality and quantity• competition with other beneficial land uses• land-use compatibilityCoastal erosion . . .• inappropriate development• harmful side effects of coastal

protection structures

• bluff recession and loss of

beaches

• loss of property• loss of wetlands and other

habitat

Illinois State Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey
REGIONAL SOCIETAL ISSUES REQUIRING EARTH SCIENCE INFORMATION 

Insufficient information about earth resources adversely

affects economic growth and quality of life. The following are afew instances of where better earth science information in theCentral Great Lakes region would have eliminated unnecessaryexpenditures.• A cost overrun of $14 million during construction of the Upper

Scioto West Interceptor Sewer Project, central Ohio, resultedwhen a tunnel-boring machine was stopped and delayed byunconsolidated cave-fill materials and buried-valley glacialdeposits. Prior geologic mapping, geophysical investigations, andproper understanding of the glacial and preglacial history of theregion could have revealed this subsurface condition, allowingengineers to anticipate the problem and avoid delays andincreased costs.

• $85 million were spent near Martinsville, Illinois, to find and characterize a site to accept low-level radioactive waste. Geologic

mapping would have revealed the presence of aquifers in thearea, eliminating it from consideration as a disposal site.

• Over 1.4 million acres in the Central Great Lakes States were

converted to urban and suburban land use in the decade from1982 to 1992, resulting in the loss of prime agricultural landand many sources of sand and gravel for construction.

• The Central Great Lakes States have over 3,600 miles of shoreline

along the Great Lakes. Each year residential and commercialproperties are damaged or lost to erosion along these shorelines.In addition, habitat necessary for maintaining recreation and sporthunting and fishing is lost or damaged by inappropriate shorelinedevelopment. A better understanding of erosion processes andhabitat needs should be considered in future land-use planning.

nd

 but

n the

lding

repos

eme

 sites,

d sites

tion

prime

cial

ources

of

and

3

U.S. Geological Survey Illinois State Geological Survey Illinois State Geological Survey Illinois State Geological Survey
H IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND

SURFICIAL GEOLOGY IN THE GLACIATED HEARTLAND

Nation’s heartland is deceiving. Hidden

olling hills are layers of sediments that blan

alleys. Both the prosperity and resolution of

gion depend on our understanding of the 3-D

cs of these earth materials. 

n years, as the climate swung between arctic

ant ice sheets as much as a mile thick

s the Great Lakes region. Each advance left

eneath tons of glacial ice pulverized, gouged,

andscape. Glaciers left behind a mixture of

gravel. When compressed by the great

he mixture became a dense, impermeable

ivers roaring from the fronts of the ice sheets

d sand and gravel that make up today’s major

s of sand and gravel for concrete. Cold, dark

ts blocked river valleys, leaving behind

e warm afternoon sun, floods of muddy water

ting layers of clay that are the sources for our

 region’s flat land appears just as the glaciers

—a tabletop made of compact till, smoothed

on at the edges of ancient glacial lakes.

Each advance and retreat of the ice left behind a landscape composed

of patches of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and till, commonly capped by soil.Each new advance and retreat of the ice modified the previous landscapeand deposited new layers of sediment. The result is a complex mix ofglacial deposits stacked like a pile of rumpled patchwork quilts rangingfrom a few inches to more than 1,300 feet in thickness.

Harsh winds blowing off the ice sheet raised clouds of sand and silt

from the rivers and drying lake plains. Large sand dunes formed nearby.Dust clouds boiled eastward across the land like the great storms of theDust Bowl days, depositing layers of silt known as loess. Glacial till,

loess, and lake-bottom sediments are the sources of the fertile soils of theNation’s Corn Belt. 

Understanding the distribution and characteristics of materials in this

3-D puzzle, through geologic mapping, is the key to the continued prosperity and sustainable quality of life of the region. But the appropriateinformation is scarce and takes time to produce. This is why the fiveGeological Surveys formed the Central Great Lakes Geologic MappingCoalition.

Glacial grooves carved by ice or by water beneaththe glacier.

Layered and sorted sand and gravel deposited byglacial meltwater.

ils overlying bedrock. 

Illinois State Geological Survey

Illinois State Geological Survey

U.S. Geological Survey
SURFICIAL GEOLOGY IN THE GLACIATED HEARTLAND 5

U.S. Geological Survey

By comparing the two images below, one can seehow we currently use the land and the general characteristics of the underlying geology. New mappingis required at more detailed scales for such comparisons to assure that the environment is not harmedand that potential risks to land for different uses areidentified.

Land Use

Water

Soller, 1998

posits—Thickness and Character

s indicate thicker deposits]

Unglaciated andperiglacial areas

Loess No data Urban/suburban Agriculture Forest
TH IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND

Cold, dark lakesformed; floods ofmuddy water pouredinto the lakes, depositing lakebed sediments.

Glacial ice pulverized, gouged, andgrooved the underlying bedrock.

Rivers roaring from the frontsof the ice sheets cut new valleysand deposited sand and gravel.

s blowing off

ets raised clouds

 silt; large sand

 deposited

 dust clouds

ward, depositing

e land beyond.

ce age conditions.

bout 10,000 to 1,800,000 years ago), the

t Lakes region was a foreboding and bar

g the front edge of the continental ice

a river and a glacial lake, while cold

the stark terrain. Compare this view with

e facing page and on the front cover.

Ice sheet

Detached blocks of ice meltedto form small lakes (kettles).

Older layers of drift (deposits from glaciers,meltwater, and lakes) from previous glacialadvances were buried and moved.
SURFICIAL GEOLOGY IN THE GLACIATED HEARTLAND 7

A rock quarry is in an area of thin drift.

Footings support largebuildings in formerlakebed sediments.

Wetland habitat and recreationareas are in kettle areas.

Aggregate resources may be obtainedfrom moraines, which underlie poorfarmland; moraines are ridges ofunsorted glacial deposits.

The best farmland is in theflat uplands.

Wildlife habitat and poorfarmland are in dune areas. 

ized representation of modern surface

nderlying deposits.

ce left behind a landscape composed

el, and till, commonly capped by

at of the ice modified the previous

ers of sediment. The result is a com

ed like a pile of rumpled patchwork

to more than 1,300 feet in thickness.

is in the

y water-supply wells are in sand

gravel where the drift is thick.
TH IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND

OLS TO COLLECT AND ANALYZE EARTH SCIENCE INFORMATION

3-D computer model ofglacial deposits in centralIllinois. The top image represents the present surface ofthe land. The bottom imagerepresents the land’s surfacebefore glaciation. The top sixlayers show successiveglacial deposits. From Sollerand others (in press).

Presentsurface

Bedrocksurface

ology and new scientific capabilities are

what lies beneath the surface of the land.

logists with new ways to characterize, orga

three dimensions the complicated pattern of

ers left behind. 

layers beneath the land surface, developed in

xploration industries, increasingly are being

geology, ground-water, and environmental

re being adapted to investigate the 3-D distri

l deposits. 

ace deposits provide material for detailed

eochemical studies. Techniques for obtaining

loose surficial materials have improved in the

ypes of coring devices in previously inacces

Hovercraft are being utilized. 

s and geographic information systems (GIS),

eyond the two-dimensional paper map of

e to produce elegant, three-dimensional pic

cal and chemical analyses of surficial materi

bedrock. These new capabilities are revolu

ce information is gathered and used. For the

, biology, and social science information can

man, ecosystem, and geologic histories of an

he potential societal effects of proposed land

s integrate all of this new information. They

rking with geologists to evaluate many sce

sonable decisions for land and resource use.

 are the ideal foundation for evaluating land

ainable and environmentally friendly develop

re easily managed and updated as new data

cientific insights require reinterpretation.
NEW TOOLS TO COLLECT AND ANALYZE EARTH SCIENCE INFORMATION

9

Some new geophysical and sampling tools:• Advanced computers and GIS technology allow the geologist to see and model surface and buried

surficial materials.

• High-resolution sensors measure properties of surficial materials in wells.• Cameras and sensors make images of drill-hole walls.• Airborne surveys can map electromagnetic and magnetic properties and natural radiation of surficial

materials in two dimensions and sometimes in three.

• Ground-penetrating radar and seismic methods show reflections of buried layers.• Waterborne surveys can map sediment characteristics on the bottoms of lakes and streams.• Drilling tools collect undisturbed core samples.• Barges and Hovercraft support drilling in shallow water and sensitive environments.

rial.

or modeling the subsurface.

ccessible by boats or trucks. Geologists studying earthquake effects on and

beneath a bridge.

Airborne equipment collecting geophysical datafor modeling the subsurface.

U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey

U.S. Geological Survey

U.S. Geological Survey

Illinois State Geological Survey
TH IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND

AT CAN BE DONE?—A COALITION TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES

rth science information necessary to help

es in the Central Great Lakes region is

ny single earth science organization.

ogical Surveys of Illinois, Indiana,

he U.S. Geological Survey have formed

Geologic Mapping Coalition. Its mission is

urficial geologic maps, derivative map

bases. These products will support various

decisionmaking processes. Through coop

ucation of the broad user community, the

s information available and used as widely

 to conduct a cooperative surficial geolog

focuses on societal issues in high-priority

he program emphasizes detailed geologic

rangle-map scale of 1:24,000 (1 inch on

feet on the ground), including new 3-D

s well as traditional surficial geologic

his detailed scale are the optimum for

ms. Such maps depict sequences of surfi

detail to be useful in identifying aquifers

rces. They can also be used to evaluate

amination. These maps identify geologic

or environmental-site investigations.

c map products at 1:100,000 scale will

rge areas where data are sparse, due to

d where detailed mapping is unlikely to

future. Regional surficial geologic maps

important bodies of surficial materials and

ounty and State boundaries. Mapping at

logic context for resolving or evaluating

cal problems, as well as for interpreting

on generated by geologic consulting firms.

Competition for the land . . .

Define, map, and assess

surficial materials, groundwater aquifers, sand andgravel, and ecosystemresources, their historicalproduction and preemption, and their possible sustainable production.Water resources . . .

Determine the distribution

and hydrogeologic characteristics of glacial aquifersystems, their connection tobedrock aquifers and surfacewater bodies, trends inwater use, and vulnerabilityto contamination.Construction materials . . . 

Determine the surface

and subsurface distribution,grain size, composition,and production trends ofsand and gravel resources.Coastal erosion . . .

Determine historical

shoreline recession ratesand erodibility of onshoreand offshore materials;identify active Earth-surfaceprocesses. Help evaluatedisastrous erosion eventsas part of emergencyresponse teams.
WHAT CAN BE DONE?—A COALITION TO 

Floods . . .

Delineate the active flood

plain, calculate intervals offlood recurrence, andassess historical flood erosion and sedimentation.Help evaluate disastrousfloods as part of emergency response teams.Earthquakes . . .

Determine distribution

and geotechnical characteristics of surficial materialsthat are susceptible to seismic liquefaction or slopefailure. Help evaluate disastrous earthquakes as partof emergency responseteams.Contamination of land andwater . . .

Determine natural baseline geochemistry of surficial materials and identify

processes and history ofinteraction with groundwater and toxic substances.Ecosystem change . . .

Determine how Earthsurface processes and

glacial landforms controlledpresettlement ecosystemsas a basis for managing,preserving, or restoringpresent ecosystems.

Low

Earthquake risk High

CHICAGO

LAKE

MICHIGAN

ROCKFORD

LA

GRAND RAPIDS

SOUTH BEND

FORT WAYNE

PEORIA

Areas for mapping will be prioritized 

the needs of customers and clients in botsectors. Work will be accomplished in paand natural science groups and agencies.

The Coalition’s surficial geologic map

ground-breaking State-Federal collaborarates several important innovations. The will share scientific staffs and facilities to subsurface investigations, develop integrstate-of-the-art computer models. The Suand regional societal issues with local staping activities in high-priority areas. A retion delivery system will be established tdigital maps and data bases to all stakeholic outreach program will be implementein the use of Coalition information. In thwill learn to use new mapping techniqueFinally, the program will enhance commtists and public- and private-sector policy
TH IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND

Geologic Mapping Coalition will pro

erized geologic maps of the surficial

 in the glaciated regions of the four

This primary data set includes the 3-D

of the various layers of surficial mate

ll be targeted in cooperation with the

resource and hazard issues in urban

portation and industrial corridors, and

ones.

-D models can be derived from the

et user needs on specific issues. These

e rotated, sliced, and separated by the

users to visualize buried layers of surfi

n the subsurface. In addition, the pri

products can be coupled with extensive

aphic, socioeconomic, and other data

f a powerful information system. This

rehensive decision-support tool for

cult societal land-use issues for

kers in governmental, educational,

al organizations.

 outreach program, Coalition scientists

n easy-to-understand formats that are

ocal resource or hazard issues. Where

ystems will illustrate the probable out

s of action. Coalition outreach person

skills in using the information system

o Coalition scientists to respond to user

nd extensions to the system.

COALITION PRODUCTS AND THEIR USE IN SOCIETY

Quadrangle location

3-D map of surficial geology.From Hansel and others (1999).

VILLA GROVE QUADRANGLE,ILLINOIS

Map showing aquifers. From Berg and Abert (1999).

Map showing aquifer sensitivity tonitrate contamination. From Bergand Abert (1999).

Aquifers

Sensitivity
COALITION PRODUCTS AND THEIR USE IN SOCIETY 13

The objective of the Coalition is to provide earth science information that can support sound, unbiased, and cost-effective landuse decisions. Results of alternative plans to restore, preserve, or

sequentially develop mineral, water, and environmental resourcescan be modeled, thus avoiding resource loss or overregulation.The Coalition will seek to increase communication among scientists and resource decisionmakers in public, private, educational,and environmental sectors. 

Coalition scientists cannot do all of the proposed work alone.

The scientific breadth and magnitude of the work require the cooperation and input of scientists from many other earth science disciplines and from academia, other State and Federal agencies, andthe private sector. To meet the increased need for surficial geologicmappers, additional students must be trained. The Coalition scientists and cooperators will develop 3-D descriptions of the subsurface geology that are consistent throughout the central Great LakesStates and can be broadly extended to other regions of the Nation.

Increased communication between these scientists and the user

community will help assure that the information is understoodand appropriately used. Scientists will be trained to help improveintergovernmental cooperation and communication. Decisionsupport systems developed within this program will serve as amodel for other earth science activities across the Nation.

ram brings opportunities

ement.

 glacial material.

Illinois State Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey
, National patterns of R&D resources; 1996: National

F 96–333.

nt and Development, 1987, Our common future: New

400 p.

pping

 Soller, D.R., McKee, M.J., Sutter, J.F., Matti, J.C., and

value of geologic maps: U.S. Geological Survey

91, Benefits and costs of geologic mapping programs in

d Winnebago Counties and its statewide applicability:

 Circular 549, 40 p. 

mic evaluation of the Kentucky geologic mapping pro

y Geological Survey, series XI, 12 p.

Region

E., Kincare, K.A., Pavey, R.R., and Stone, B.D., in

ogy of the Central Great Lakes region in three dimen

al cooperation: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File

kes’ troubled waters: National Geographic, v. 172, no.

ds of biological resources—Great Lakes, in Mac, M.J.,

E., and Doran, P.D., Status and trends of the Nation’s

ngton D.C., U.S. Geological Survey.

resource planning and management—The ecosystem

in: Washington, D.C., Island Press.

eat Lakes in the balance—Protecting our ecosystem’s

 The Nature Conservancy, Great Lakes Program, 24 p.

reau of the Census, 1997, Population estimates program.

ureau of the Census, 1998, Annual survey of manufac

 April 1998, 146 p. 

 move: National Geographic, v. 171, no. 1, p. 107–119.

the Quaternary history of Michigan, Ohio, and

Education, v. 33, p. 161–167.

2, Quaternary geology of northern and southern

higan Geological Survey Division, scale 1:500,000.

H IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND

FURTHER READING

Fullerton, D.S., Cowan, W.R., Sevon, W.D., Goldthwait, R.P., Farrand, W.R., Muller, E.H.,

Behling, R.E., and Stravers, J.A., comps., 1991, Quaternary geologic map of the LakeErie 4°

X6° quadrangle, United States and Canada: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous

Investigations Series Map I–1420 (NK–17), 8-p. text, 1 sheet, scale 1:1,000,000.

Hansel, A.K., Berg, R.C., and Abert, C.C., 1999, Surficial geology map, Villa Grove quadrangle, Douglas County, Illinois: Illinois State Geological Survey Illinois Geological

Quadrangle Map IGQ Villa Grove-SG, scale 1:24,000.

Hansel, A.K., and Johnson, W.H., 1996, Wedron and Mason Groups: Lithostratigraphic

reclassification of deposits of the Wisconsin Episode, Lake Michigan Lobe area:Illinois State Geological Survey Bulletin 104, 116 p.

Hansen, M.C., 1997, The ice age in Ohio: Ohio Division of Geological Survey Education

Leaflet 7.

Karrow, P.F., and Calkin, P.E., eds., 1985, Quaternary evolution of the Great Lakes:

Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 30, 258 p.

Killey, M.M., 1998, Illinois’ ice age legacy: Illinois State Geological Survey Geoscience

Educational Series 14, 66 p.

Leverett, Frank, and Taylor, F.B., 1915, The Pleistocene of Indiana and Michigan and the

history of the Great Lakes: U.S. Geological Survey Monograph 53, 529 p.

Lineback, J.A., Bleuer, N.K., Mickelson, D.M., Farrand, W.R., and Goldthwait, R.P.,

comps., 1983, Quaternary geologic map of the Chicago 4°

X6° quadrangle, United

States: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I–1420 (NK–16), 1 sheet, scale 1:1,000,000.

Pavey, R.R., Goldthwait, R.P., Brockman, C.S., Hull, D.N., Swinford, E.M., and Van Horn,

R.G., 1999, Quaternary geology of Ohio: Ohio Division of Geological Survey Map 2.

Soller, D.R., 1998, Map showing the thickness and character of Quaternary sediments in the

glaciated United States east of the Rocky Mountains: Northern Great Lakes States andCentral Mississippi Valley States, the Great Lakes, and southern Ontario (80°31' to 93°West Longitude): U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series MapI–1970–B, scale 1:1,000,000. (Also available on the World Wide Web athttp://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds38/.)

Soller, D.R., and Packard, P.H., 1998, Digital representation of a map showing the thickness

and character of Quaternary sediments in the glaciated United States east of the RockyMountains: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS–38, one CD-ROM. (Alsoavailable on the World Wide Web at http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds38/.)

Swinford, E.M., 1996, Bedrock topography of Ohio: Ohio Division of Geological Survey

GeoFacts 1.

White, G.W., 1982, Glacial geology of northeastern Ohio: Ohio Division of Geological Survey

Bulletin 68, 75 p.

Willman, H.B., and Frye, J.C., 1970, Pleistocene stratigraphy of Illinois: Illinois State

Geological Survey Bulletin 94, 204 p.
FURTHER READING 15

 Tools

yk, A.N., 1984, Geology for planning in Boone and

te Geological Survey Circular 531, 69 p.

 R.A., 1997, Geologic mapping for environmental plan

Illinois State Geological Survey Circular 559, 79 p.

onal geologic mapping for environmental studies in

Survey Environmental Geology Notes 100, 43 p.

 stack-unit map [Superconducting Super Collider

gical Survey Open-File Map 263, scale 1:62,500.

.P., and Berg, R.C., in press, Three-dimensional geologic

ast-central Illinois: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic

9, scale 1:100,000. (Previews are available on the World

ov/ecill/.)

oper, T.H., and Milford, M.H., 1999, Sustaining our

a., American Geological Institute, 64 p.

82, 1987, 1992, Natural resources inventory.92, Census of agriculture, 1982, 1987, 1992.97, America’s private land, A geography of hope:

 Service, 80 p.

n, W.J., and Bruns, T.M., 1991, Aquifer systems of the

valley (Lafayette bedrock valley system) of Indiana, in

J.P., eds., Geology and hydrogeology of the Teays

ms: Geological Society of America Special Paper 258,

framework of the Midwestern Basins and Arches

 Michigan, and Illinois: U.S. Geological Survey

p., 2 pls.

in the White River basin, Indiana, 1992–96: U.S.

0, 34 p.

8, Ground water rule, vulnerability assessment study,

repared under U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

order 4, 29 p.

 1997, Wells in place (not annual construction) July 8,

ortrait in words and pictures: National Geographic,

3. 

Winter, T.C., Harvey, J.W., Franke, O.L., and Alley, W.M., 1998, Ground water and surface water—A single resource: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1139, 79 p.Construction MaterialsIllinois Department of Natural Resources, 1996, Rock River area assessment, v. 1,

Natural resources: Earth Resources, p. 20–27.

Langer, W.H., 1988, Natural aggregates of the conterminous United States: U.S.

Geological Survey Bulletin 1594, 33 p., 2 pls.

Langer, W.H., and Glanzman, V.M., 1993, Natural aggregate—Building America’s future:

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1110, 39 p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1999, Minerals information—Commodity statistics and information: Available on the World Wide Web at

http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity.

Coastal ErosionBerg, R.C., and Collinson, C., 1976, Bluff erosion, recession rates, and volumetric losses

on the Lake Michigan shore in Illinois: Illinois State Geological SurveyEnvironmental Geology Notes 76, 33 p.

Hill, C.L., Ryan, B.J., McGregor, B.A., and Rust, Marie, 1991, Our changing landscape—

Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1085, 44 p.

Williams, S.J., Dodd, K., and Gohn, K.K., 1995, Coasts in crisis: U.S. Geological Survey

Circular 1075, 32 p.

FloodsChrzastowski, M.J., Killey, M.M., Bauer, R.A., DuMontelle, P.B., Erdmann, A.L.,

Herzog, B.L., Masters, J.M., and Smith, L.R., 1994, The Great Flood of 1993—Geologic perspectives on flooding along the Mississippi River and its tributaries inIllinois: Illinois State Geological Survey Special Report 2, 45 p.

Holmes, R.R., Jr., and Kupka, Amanda, 1997, Floods of July 18–20, 1996, in northern

Illinois: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97–425, 29 p., 1 over-size sheet, 1diskette.

Miller, J.B., and Blumer, S.P., 1988, Flood of September 10 to 15, 1986, across the central

Lower Peninsula of Michigan, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary1986—Hydrologic events and ground-water quality: U.S. Geological Survey WaterSupply Paper 2325, p. 64–65.

Scientific Assessment and Strategy Team (SAST), 1994, Preliminary report of the SAST

[v. 1 of Kelmelis, J.A., ed.], Science for floodplain management into the 21st century:Washington, D.C., 272 p. (This report was also part V of the Report of the InteragencyFloodplain Management Review Committee to the Administration FloodplainManagement Task Force.)

U.S. Geological Survey, 1991, National water summary 1988–89—Hydrologic events

and floods and droughts: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2375, 591 p.
H IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND

G., 1985, Maps of hypothetical intensities for the

stimation of earthquake effects associated with large

 seismic zone: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File

Consortium, 1995, Earthquake hazards map, showing

aking and/or liquefaction: Illinois State Geological

n Ohio: Ohio Division of Geological Survey

., 1984, Earthquakes in the Illinois area: Illinois State

Emergency Services and Disaster Agency pamphlet, 4 p.

nson, C.A., and Hajic, E.R., 1997, Liquefaction evi

leistocene seismicity in the southern halves of Indiana

view: Seismology Research Letters, v. 68, no. 4,

uction Program, 1995, Recommended provisions for

dings, 1994 edition: Prepared by the Building Seismic

Emergency Management Agency, 290 p. 

natural hazards: National Geographic, v. 194, no. 1,

Measurement of seismic wave velocity in southern

ing and study of liquefaction potential: Illinois State

he National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program

ter

General aquifer sensitivity map, Villa Grove quadrangle,

 State Geological Survey Illinois Geological Quadrangle

 1:24,000. 

ur fragile environment—Lessons from geochemical

Circular 1105, 34 p.

Agency, 1998, Draft Illinois Source Water Assessment

tion, submitted to the United States Environmental

ursuant to Section 1453 of the Safe Drinking Water Act:

n Agency, 146 p.

Kincare, K.A., 1989, Geostatistical decision making process in plume modeling:

Proceedings Superfund 1989 Conference, Hazardous Materials Control ResearchInstitute, Silver Springs, Md., p. 181–189.

Soller, D.R., and Berg, R.C., 1992, Using regional geologic information to assess relative

aquifer contamination potential—An example from the Central United States: U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 92–694, scale 1:1,000,000.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999, Envirofacts warehouse: Available on the

World Wide Web at www.epa.gov/enviro/.

Ecosystem ChangeGannon, J.E., 1993, Restoration ecology—Longterm evaluation as an essential feature of

rehabilitation: Buffalo Environmental Law Journal, v. 1, p. 267–277.

Hartman, W.L., 1988, Historical changes in the major fish resources of the Great Lakes,

in Evans, M.S., ed., Toxic contaminants and ecosystem health—Great Lakes focus:New York, John Wiley, p. 103–131.

Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources and Nature of Illinois Foundation,

1994, The changing Illinois environment—Summary report of the Critical TrendsAssessment Project: Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources and Natureof Illinois Foundation, 89 p.

Kelson, J.R.M., Steedman, R.J., and Stoddart, S., 1996, Historical causes of change in

Great Lakes fish stocks and the implications for ecosystem rehabilitation: CanadianJournal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 53 (suppl. 1), p. 10–19.

Lane, E., and Rupert, F., 1996, Earth systems—The foundation of Florida’s ecosystems:

Florida Geological Survey poster.

Magnuson, J.J., Webster, K.E., Assel, R.A., Bowser, C.J., Dillon, P.J., Eaton, J.G., Evans,

H.E., Fee, E.J., Hall, R I., Mortsch, L.R., Schindler, D.W., and Quinn, F.H., 1997,Potential effects of climate changes on aquatic systems—Laurentian Great Lakes andPrecambrian Shield region: Hydrological Processes, v. 11, no. 8, p. 825–871.

Singer, D.K., Jackson, S.T., Madsen, B.J., and Wilcox, D.A., 1996, Differentiating climatic and successional influences on long-term development of a marsh: Ecology, v. 77,

no. 6, p. 1765–1778. 

Wilcox, D.A., 1995, Wetland and aquatic macrophytes as indicators of anthropogenic

hydrologic disturbance: Natural Areas Journal, v. 15, no. 3, p. 240–248.
CAPTIONS FOR FIGURES ON PAGES 10 AND 11

to bottom)

ago, Illinois, and Gary, Indiana, area. From Lineback

on. From Casey (1996).

aggregate resources. From Langer (1988).

cation of streets and homes lost by the erosion of the

ological Survey (unpub. data).

to bottom)

issouri River flood plain after the record flood of 1993.

rategy Team (1994, p. 107).

hquake hazards in the Central Great Lakes States.

ilable on the World Wide Web at

zmaps/250pga.pdf).

n area showing the potential vulnerability of ground

have the greatest risk, green areas have the least risk.

 the southern Lake Michigan area. The map shows the

 naturally occur if there were no human disturbance in

rvey (available on the World Wide Web at

map.html).

17

CAPTIONS FOR FIGURES ON PAGES 10 AND 11
What information is needed by managers and decisionmakers in the region?

E.J. Fellows, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

“For the National Watershed Assessment Project, geology is the major missing data layer.”

T.H. Tear, Director of Conservation Science, The Nature Conservancy of Illinois

“There has been a high rate of failure of restoring wetlands because sites have been selected that do not properly

link the site hydrology to its geologic setting. In response to this, the Illinois Nature Conservancy has identified

several areas that would be ideal to accomplish their restoration goals and insists that sites be in geologically

appropriate areas. Working with the Geological Survey in the early stages is important, and should be seen as an

essential and primary step in developing successful restoration projects.”

R. Duncan, Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

“Delineation of 5-year travel time [of ground water] requires the use of geology to see where the regulations need

to be applied.”

S. Esling, Associate Professor of Geology, Southern Illinois University

“The original attempt at siting a low-level nuclear waste repository failed because geology did not play a big

enough role in the process.”

B. Grant, Toxicologist, LaGrange County Health Department, Indiana 

“We run centuries old disposal methods of septic systems and manure spreading on much higher densities than

ever intended.”

T. Bruns, Director of Development Services, Indianapolis Water Company, Indiana

“You need to define geology and make it available in digital databases to serve customers.”

M. Johnson, Vice President, Northern Illinois Water Corporation 

“Regional geologic mapping is critical to integrated management of aquifers.”
Central Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition—

A State-Federal Partnership to Address Vital Societal Issues

The Illinois State Geological Survey (of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources), created in its modern

form by legislative mandate in 1905, provides objective scientific information to government, business, and the

public. The work is guided by two major objectives—

• To improve the quality of life for Illinois citizens by providing the scientific information and interpretations needed for developing

sound environmental policies and practices. 

• To strengthen the Illinois economy by promoting wise development of the State’s abundant mineral resources.

The Indiana Geological Survey, which is an institute of Indiana University, was established in 1837; it has a

statutory mission—

• To provide geologic information and counsel that contribute to the wise stewardship and economic development of the energy, mineral, and ground-water resources of Indiana.

The Indiana Geological Survey works to discover and promote the development and conservation of these resources; maintains geologic data bases and sample libraries; investigates geologic hazards and environmental issues; and disseminates information through

public education, maps and reports, and consultation with the public.

The Michigan Geological Survey Division (of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) is the oldest

Michigan State agency; it was established in 1837, the same year that Michigan was admitted to the Union. The

mission of the Michigan Geological Survey Division is— 

• To encourage conservation and protect natural resource values in developing the geological resources of the State, including fossil

fuels, minerals, and ground water. 

• To identify, develop, and disseminate geological information for the benefit of Michigan citizens.

The Ohio Division of Geological Survey (of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources) is Ohio’s oldest natural

resources agency; it was established in 1837 to investigate the geology and mineral resources of the State of

Ohio. The mission of the Ohio Division of Geological Survey is—

• To provide geologic information and services needed for responsible management of Ohio’s natural resources.

The U.S. Geological Survey, established in 1879, is an earth science organization within the U.S. Department of

the Interior; the USGS is recognized worldwide as scientifically credible, objective, and demonstrably relevant to

society’s needs. The mission of the USGS is—

• To provide the Nation with reliable, impartial information to describe and understand the Earth.

This information is used to minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral

resources; enhance and protect the quality of life; and contribute to wise economic and physical development.

Printed on recycled paper