Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology,99 (1992): 225-241
225
Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam
Radiocarbon chronology of Lake Bonneville, Eastern Great
Basin, USA
C h a r l e s G . O v i a t t a, D o n a l d R . C u r r e y b, a n d D o r o t h y
Sack c
aDepartment of Geology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA
bDepartment of Geography, Universityof Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112, USA
CDepartment of Geography, Universityof Wisconsin, Madison, W153706, USA
(Received May 7, 1992; revised and accepted August 24, 1992)
ABSTRACT
Oviatt, C.G., Currey, D.R. and Sack, D., 1992. Radiocarbon chronology of Lake Bonneville, Eastern Great Basin, USA.
Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol., 99: 225-241.
Lake Bonneville occupied a series of connected topographically-closed structural basins in the eastern Great Basin from
about 30 ka to 12 ka. The following synthesis of Lake Bonneville history is based on a critical evaluation of the stratigraphic
and geomorphic contexts of 83 radiocarbon ages of a variety of samples, including wood, charcoal, dispersed organic matter,
mollusk shells, and tufa. The lake began to rise from levels close to average Holocene levels after about 28 ka. By 22 ka it had
transgressed approximately 100 m; between 22 and 20 ka it regressed about 45 m in the Stansbury oscillation and the Stansbury
shoreline was formed. Transgression after 20 ka proceeded in two phases--a rapid phase from 20 to 18 ka, and a slower phase
from 18 to 15 ka. The lake overflowed intermittently at its highest level (the Bonneville shoreline) from about 15 to 14.5 ka,
then catastrophically dropped 100 m during the Bonneville Flood to the level of the Provo shoreline, which it occupied until
about 14 ka. Subsequent closed-basin regression was rapid and complete by 12 ka, and was followed by a modest transgression
to form the Gilbert shoreline between 10.9 and 10.3 ka. The Lake Bonneville record is an accurate proxy of the changing
water balance in the Bonneville basin during the late Pleistocene, although the nature of the climatic changes during this period
are still uncertain.
Introduction
T h e Bonneville lake b a s i n consists o f a n u m b e r
o f t o p o g r a p h i c a l l y closed s t r u c t u r a l basins in the
eastern G r e a t Basin t h a t were h y d r o l o g i c a l l y connected d u r i n g m a j o r lacustral episodes. L a k e
Bonneville, the m o s t recent m a j o r lake to have
f o r m e d in the Bonneville basin (Fig. 1), rose a n d
fell t h r o u g h its transgressive/regressive cycle d u r i n g
the p e r i o d f r o m a b o u t 30 to 12 ka. A l t h o u g h o t h e r
Q u a t e r n a r y lakes existed in the b a s i n at v a r i o u s
times p r i o r to the Bonneville cycle ( M o r r i s o n , 1966;
E a r d l e y et al., 1973; Scott et al., 1983; O v i a t t a n d
Currey, 1987; O v i a t t et al., 1987), L a k e Bonneville
was the deepest a n d m o s t extensive lake in the
Correspondence to: C.G. Oviatt, Department of Geology,
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA.
0031-0182/92/$05.00
series, a n d the only one k n o w n to have overflowed.
A f t e r over 100 years o f research (Sack, 1989)
b e g i n n i n g with G . K . G i l b e r t (1874, 1882, 1890),
the g e o m o r p h o l o g y , s t r a t i g r a p h y , a n d c h r o n o l o g y
o f L a k e Bonneville are n o w well d o c u m e n t e d .
Nevertheless, significant questions r e m a i n u n a n swered, a n d w o r k is c o n t i n u i n g in o r d e r to better
u n d e r s t a n d this huge p a l e o h y d r o l o g i c system that
p r o v i d e s v a l u a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t late Pleistocene p a l e o c l i m a t e s in the G r e a t Basin. In this p a p e r
we present a revised t i m e / a l t i t u d e curve for the rise
a n d fall o f L a k e Bonneville b a s e d on analysis o f
83 r a d i o c a r b o n ages a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f their
s t r a t i g r a p h i c a n d g e o m o r p h i c contexts. This curve
is u p d a t e d a n d refined f r o m that o f C u r r e y a n d
O v i a t t (1985), a n d can be r e g a r d e d as an a c c u r a t e
r e c o r d o f the c h a n g i n g h y d r o l o g i c b a l a n c e in the
Bonneville basin d u r i n g the late Pleistocene.
© 1992 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved
226
Fig. 1. Map of Lake Bonneville at its highest level (the
Bonneville shoreline). Labelled features are: Z = Zenda
threshold; R R P = Red Rock Pass threshold; H V = Hansel
Valley; O R B T = Old River Bed threshold; S D = Sevier
Desert; S P = Sand Pass; T V = Tule Valley; P B = Pavant
Butte; T H = Tabernacle Hill basalt flow; G S L = Great Salt
Lake; U L = Utah Lake; S L = Sevier Lake. Collection
localities for radiocarbon samples are numbered (see Table 1).
Although it is certain that lake-level changes were
caused by changes in the relative proportion of
inflow to the lake versus evaporative outflow,
discussion of the causes of the climate changes is
largely speculative at this point, and is beyond the
scope of this paper.
Methods
The time/altitude curve (Fig. 2) was constructed
in the following way. Radiocarbon ages (Table 1)
C.G. OVIATT ET AL.
were compiled from our research in the lake basin,
the published literature, and unpublished data.
Each age was evaluated on the basis of the type
of material that was dated and the quality of the
stratigraphic and geomorphic information available. Many more radiocarbon ages have been
reported in the literature than are listed in Table 1
and plotted in Fig. 2. We have used only those
ages that appear to be free of significant errors
due to contamination, sampling problems, or
analytical difficulties, and for which stratigraphic
and/or geomorphic data provide a basis for an
accurate estimate of water level during their
deposition. In order of decreasing reliability, the
dated materials from Lake Bonneville sediments
are wood, charcoal, dispersed organic matter,
gastropod shells, ostracode valves, tufa, and marl
or other carbonate sediments.
Although radiocarbon ages on wood or charcoal
are generally preferable to carbonate-carbon ages,
their interpretations are not always straightforward. For instance, Lowell et al. (1990) found
that five radiocarbon ages on a cluster of in situ
tree stumps overlain by glaciogenic sediments near
Cincinnati, Ohio, had a maximum range of 1000
yr, including two ages from a single stump that
differed by about 500 yr. It is likely that the .trees
were all killed by the advance of the glacier, but
the age of the advance cannot accurately be
determined from any single sample age. The cause
of the 1000-yr discrepancy between ages was not
determined, but was presumed to be due to
counting errors, contamination, or fractionation
(Lowell et al., 1990, p. 8). Wood samples from
the Bonneville basin are probably susceptible to
the same problems noted by Lowell et al. (1990),
but wood or charcoal samples are generally
considered less subject to problems than other
materials.
Dispersed organic matter in sediments or soils
is generally not as favorable for dating as discrete
organic-carbon samples, such as wood, charcoal,
or plant fragments, because the origin of the
dispersed organic matter and the probability of
contamination are uncertain. However, in many
cases dispersed organic matter is preferable to
carbonate carbon for dating.
With a few exceptions, carbonate-carbon ages
227
RADIOCARBON CHRONOLOGY OF LAKE BONNEVILLE. EASTERN GREAT BASIN, USA
F
% ~
--,~--
15001
~-
I -°"2z
'~"~/~
1400
28 j ~
~ - 5 °1
oT~H
~.h
~67
.
o
a
~:
:
.%,
L
P
/;
1300
A_~
i
IV
-
2o
i
;5
llle
],
20
AGE
Hid
I masswe
iK'-mu d
15
i I l i c l HIb
I
Irecord
I
I0
(ka}
Fig. 2. Time-altitude diagram of Lake Bonneville. Solid circles indicate radiocarbon ages of discrete organic-carbon samples
(wood, charcoal, plant fragments); solid squares indicate dispersed organic matter in sediments or soils. Open circles are ages of
mollusk shells or ostracode valves, and open squares are ages of tufa, marl, or soil carbonate. Horizontal bars connected to
symbols indicate l-tr errors based on lab counting statistics. Numbers adjacent to the ages are keyed to Table 1. The circle and
arrow around age 60 indicates that it is a minimum-limiting age for the Bonneville Flood event. See text for an explanation of the
lettered segments of the curve. Roman numerals along the bottom indicate correlative lithostratigraphic units and ostracode zones
of Spencer et al. (1984) and Thompson et al. (1990) from Great Salt Lake core C. CS ash = Carson Sink silicic volcanic ash; T
ash = Thiokol basaltic ash; W ash = Wono silicic ash; PB ash = Pavant Butte basaltic ash; TH ash = Tabernacle Hill basaltic
ash.
are largely used to c o m p l e m e n t the c h r o n o l o g y
that is based on organic-carbon ages. C a r b o n a t e c a r b o n samples have the advantage o f having
been precipitated directly in the lake water, rather
than having formed outside the lake and later
buried by the transgressing lake or transported to
the lake by some mechanism. However, there are
potentially a larger n u m b e r o f problems associated
with c a r b o n a t e samples than with organic-carbon
samples. Sources o f potential error in carbonate
samples include the hard-water effect, inclusion o f
dead c a r b o n in detrital grains (in marl or tufa
samples), fractionation, and post-depositional contamination with y o u n g e r carbon.
A l t h o u g h the hard-water effect is difficult to
assess, Benson (1978) has estimated that it probably results in errors o f less than 200 r a d i o c a r b o n
yr for Lake L a h o n t a n . Broecker and K a u f m a n
(1965) subtracted 500 yr from all their published
ages for c a r b o n a t e samples from Lake Bonneville
to a c c o u n t for the estimated hard-water effect.
F o r this paper we have assumed that any errors
due to the hard-water effect are relatively small
and p r o b a b l y do not exceed analytical errors in
most cases. In Table 1, 500 yr are added back to
ages published by Broecker and K a u f m a n (1965)
to make them comparable with other ages o f
carbonate material from Lake Bonneville.
F o r some carbonate-sediment and tufa samples
attempts have been made to reduce the probability
o f c o n t a m i n a t i o n from detrital sources o f dead
carbon. F o r instance, aragonitic marl from Stansbury Island (age 7) was dispersed in water and
allowed to settle. The < 10 ~tm fraction was dated.
C o n t a m i n a t i o n from Paleozoic carbonates in the
nearby bedrock is considered unlikely because
most detritus settles out o f the water column near
the shoreline and is not transported into deep
water. Possible c o n t a m i n a t i o n from y o u n g c a r b o n
sources is more difficult to assess for this kind o f
sample. Tufa samples have similar potential problems. A tufa sample collected from a shallow
228
¢.~. o v ] a v r E'r a t .
.o
8
~~~i ~.~~~~~~~ ~~~~~i
~~
i~ ~_~°~~i ~~~~.~ ,0~~ ~ ~ ~o~ ~o~
.@
°i
0
_o
0
+1+~
+i
+1
+i~
+1
+i
+~
+~.~0
0
~ ~ ~,~i ii~ ~ ~ i~-i~~
RADIOCARBON
CHRONOLOGY
OF LAKE
BONNEVILLE.
EASTERN
GREAT
229
BASIN. USA
o
~-~
~.~
-
_
-
.:~
:
~
-
~-~
-~_~
~
-~_
_~
~
-
~
~.~
~
-
-
~-~ ~
~
~
~
:~-
~~_~
_~
~~-
~
~
.;
~
~
~
.;
..I
=
~
~
0
~
~
o~
z
-
z
~
~,
~
~
.~ ~
.~
~
~
~
_
o
o
~,
~=
~
.
z
~.~
~..
~
~.~
~z~
o
~
o
o
<
4-1 4-1
4-1
4-1
+1
+1
4-1
4-1
q-I 4-t
4-1
+1
÷1
+1
+1
+1
q-I 4-1 4-i +1
+1
+1
4-1
r--
,
~.
,,
~
~
,
~
~
~
-
.;~ ~ ~- .> ~
~
.~
~=
<~
~=
~
.-
~,
~
~!
~
~
~
~-' ~" ~
~
~
~
,
~
~-
,,
4-1
4-1 4-1
o¢
<
4-1
+l
4-1
230
C.G. OVIATI" ET AL.
~-
o~~
.
~
~
~
.=
"~
-
.
.~
.
.
.
.~ ~'~~
, ~ ,_
~
~ ~a
~
~"
_
[--, v
~
~"
~"
~
_
~-~-~
ou
,~o~
~
.
•
ozozc~
I
~
_
~
~_~
,~'_
~
~.~,
~
~
~
o
~
~o - ~
.
. . . .~,~-
~
.~
~fl ~
~,.~
" ~ ~,
~,~
. . . . . . .
~
o-~.
~:
~-.
~-~_~
~
~ _ ~~ ', ~~. o_
I
ooo-~
~.
~" ~
~,
•~- ~
.~.~
~
. . . .
-H
+1 +1
o~
-~-~
o
-u
gi
_
~_
~_
_
_~_~_~
_
~_
:
_
_
~_
_~
+1
+1
+1 +1
+1
+1
+1
~
,~" , ~
,~"
e~~
~
~
2
2
2
_,i ~
~
<
"4-1
~w
,A
+I
+1
+1
+I
+I
+1
+1
~I
-
"
+1 +1
+1 4-1
+l
~
.
RADIOCARBON CHRONOLOGY OF LAKE BONNEVILLE, EASTERN GREAT BASIN. USA
_
-
~
•~
~
~
_~
.~-
o ~.~,~
~
~
~,~
5
o
l=
~
,-,
,~
~
,~
"E
.~
E
<
•~ l~ ~ ~
+I
+[
4-I
+I
4-I
4-I
4-I
+I
~-~
I~,~
~m--- N
231
232
overhang on the margin of the Tabernacle Hill
basalt flow (age 58) was crushed to coarse sand
size, and the outer 50% of the tufa fragments
were dissolved in an attempt to remove any young
precipitates in pores. In addition, because basalt
contains no carbon, the probability of detrital
contamination was low, and the overhang protected the tufa from meteoric water that might
have brought in dissolved CO2 during the Holocene. An adjustment for 6z3C content accounts
for fractionation, so that the most likely sources
of error for this sample are the hard-water effect,
which may amount to only a few hundred years,
and analytical errors. However, it is rare that
error sources can be controlled so thoroughly,
and most tufa samples from Lake Bonneville
(Broecker and Orr, 1958; Broecker and Kaufman,
1965) have not been used in the construction of
Fig. 2.
Shells of mollusks and ostracodes can give fairly
reliable ages in some cases. In mollusks the
problem of replacement of the original aragonite
with calcite has been assessed for some samples
(Table 1) by X-ray diffraction. Contamination of
ostracode valves with young (meteoric) carbon is
more difficult to assess because of their small size
and Mg-calcite composition. All shell samples are
potentially susceptible to the hard-water effect.
C.G. OVIATr ET AL.
Fractionation can be accounted for using the 61sC
content and adjusting the age relative to the
standard of - 25%0 for wood grown in equilibrium
with the atmosphere. However, in some cases
mollusk-shell ages are anomalously old or young,
even where X-ray analyses indicate no calcite, and
613C adjustments have been made. It is difficult
to predict which shell samples will give anomalous
results prior to the dating analysis. Shell ages that
seem consistent with other stratigraphic information and other radiocarbon ages are used in Fig. 2;
anomalous ages have been avoided.
Each age used in the construction of Fig. 2 was
also critically examined in terms of its stratigraphic
context and its relationships with the ages of other
samples. Figure 3 illustrates the kinds of stratigraphic settings (in Roman numerals) from which
samples have been obtained. The interpretation
of water depth at the time a sample was deposited
depends on its stratigraphic setting and on geomorphic and sedimentologic controls specific to each
locality. Therefore, samples must be studied on a
case-by-case basis. Some generalizations about
stratigraphic settings are given in Table 2; consult
Table 1 for more specific information.
One standard deviation based on laboratory
counting statistics is plotted as a horizontal line
through the age symbols in Fig. 2. Ages of
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram showing idealized stratigraphic settings for radiocarbon samples. Types of stratigraphic settings (Roman
numerals) are listed in Table 2. This diagram is schematic only and is not meant to represent actual stratigraphic relationships. See
Fig. 2 for explanation of symbols.
RADIOCARBONCHRONOLOGYOF LAKEBONNEVILLE,EASTERNGREATBASIN,USA
233
TABLE 2
Types of stratigraphic settings illustrated in Fig.3
Type
Description
Interpretation of sample altitude and age relative to lake level 1
I
soil buried by Bonneville deposits
lagoon facies in gravel barrier
complexes
top of the transgressive littoral facies
or base of the deep-water facies
deep-water marl or calcareous mud
facies; samples taken from cores
deep-water marl or calcareous mud
facies; samples taken from outcrops
oolitic sand; samples taken from
cores
spring or marsh deposits buried by
Bonneville deposits
tufa attached to bedrock or other
nonqacustrine deposits
tufa attached to lacustrine gravel
deposits
regressive-phase littoral sand or
gravel
deltaic deposits, both transgressivephase and regressive-phase
sample altitude _>lake level; sample age _>age of lake transgression
sample altitude < lake level; sample age > age of lake transgression
II
IIl
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
sample altitude _<lake level; sample age < age of lake transgression
sample altitude < lake level; sample age not directly related to age of
transgression
sample altitude < lake level; sample age not directly related to age of
transgression
sample altitude < lake level; sample age < age of lake transgression
sample altitude > lake level; sample age _>age of transgression to that altitude
sample altitude __<lake level; sample age = age of lake at that altitude
sample altitude < lake level; sample age = age of late at that altitude
sample altitude < lake level; sample age = age of regression to that altitude
sample altitude < lake level; sample age >_age of lake at that altitude
1Sample altitude is the altitude at which it was deposited. In this table it is assumed that all samples give accurate radiocarbon
results. However, large variations in sample reliability and in the physical stratigraphic or paleontologic evidence for water depth
at different localities make interpretations difficult. It is rare that water depth is known for any given time with a precision less
than about 10 m.
carbonate samples adjusted for their 613C content
are indicated in Table 1. Ages of samples analyzed
by the accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS)
technique have also been adjusted for ~13C. All
reported ages are based on the Libby half-life
(5568 yr), and no attempt has been made to
calibrate (e.g. Bard et al., 1990) the ages themselves
or the interpreted lake-level curve. Bard et al.
(1990) indicate that radiocarbon ages of corals
are younger than the U - T h ages of the same
samples. The age differences range from about 3.5
kyr at 20 ka to about 1 kyr at 10 ka. Thus the
Bonneville chronology is compressed relative to
U - T h years, and the compression is greater near
20 ka than near 10 ka.
Our interpretations of the ages of events in the
history of Lake Bonneville are generally given to
the nearest 500 radiocarbon yr B.P., because in
most cases greater precision is not warranted. In
general, as more ages become available on multiple
samples from the same stratigraphic interval, some
ages can be rejected as unreliable, but the precision
of the interpretation decreases because variability
between ages that are considered reliable cannot
always be explained adequately (e.g. Lowell et al.,
1990). Therefore, we generally interpret the ages
of events with a precision of no better than about
500 yr or + ~250 yr, and in some cases even
500 yr may be too precise.
In Fig. 2 radiocarbon ages are plotted against
adjusted altitude, which approximately accounts
for the effects of differential isostatic rebound in
the basin. During and following the removal of
the Lake Bonneville water load, the basin
rebounded by an amount proportional ) o / t h e
water depth (Gilbert, 1890; Crittende~, 1963;
Currey, 1982; Bills and May, 1987). In the area
of the greatest water load near the center of the
basin the Bonneville shoreline is 74 m and the
Provo shoreline is 59 m higher than their lowest
points along the margin of the lake (Currey, 1982).
The adjusted altitudes listed in Table 1 and plotted
234 .
in Fig. 2 are approximately free of the effects of
isostatic rebound. They are estimated using the
following empirical formula:
Za = Z r - [ ( Z r - 1200)/(Zb-- 1200)][Zb-- 1552]
where Za is a particular rebound-free adjusted
altitude, Zr is the modern (rebounded) altitude of
the sample or feature in question, Zb is the local
altitude of the Bonneville shoreline determined
from Currey (1982) or from field studies, and
1552 is the assumed unrebounded altitude of the
Bonneville shoreline in meters (Currey, 1982). The
constant 1200 represents the approximate basinfloor altitude at the beginning of the Bonneville
lake cycle. Values for Za, Z , and Zb are in meters.
This formula provides a simple linear method
for comparing radiocarbon ages of samples deposited at localities having different isostatic histories,
although it does not give altitude estimates with
high precision. The formula is a simplification of
a complex, nonlinear geophysical system, but at
the level of the reconstruction attempted here, the
results are considered accurate. Independent estimates of the unrebounded altitudes of shorelines
are generally within about 10 m of the results
obtained with the formula. Note that in Table 1
there is no altitude adjustment applied to samples
deposited at very low altitudes in the basin (ages
1, 2, 3, and 6). Low-altitude points in the basin
would have been isostatically depressed by the
water load at the lake maximum, but would have
rebounded to approximately their original altitude
with evaporation of the lake. In addition, no
adjustment is applied to ages 5 and 11, which are
for buried soils not directly related to the
Bonneville lacustrine deposits.
For paleoclimatic interpretations it may be more
appropriate to analyze lake surface area as a
function of time than lake level as a function of
time (Benson and Paillet, 1989). However, lake
level vs. time is plotted in Fig. 2 because it is
more convenient to use, and in the Bonneville
basin the relationship between lake-surface altitude
and surface area is linear (Currey, 1990, fig. 16).
For this basin, lake-level altitude is as good a
paleoclimatic proxy as surface area.
The ages of stratigraphic units defined by
Spencer et al. (1984) and Thompson et al. (1990)
C.G. OVIATT E T AL.
are shown along the bottom of Fig. 2 (Roman
numerals). These units were defined on the basis
of lithologic changes and ostracode zonation in
cores from Great Salt Lake. Accelerator-mass
spectrometer (AMS) ages of organic carbon from
core samples (Thompson et al., 1990) are plotted
in a row at a single altitude near the bottom of
the diagram.
Summary of Lake Bonneville history
Overview
Important events in the history of the lake are
described below and are keyed to Fig. 2 by means
of letters A-M. Figure 2 is drawn as a smooth
curve, although if it were possible to determine
the precise history of all lake-level changes, the
curve would record many small transgressions and
regressions on the order of tens of meters over
tens to hundreds of years. Such small fluctuations
are typical of closed-basin lakes. For instance,
Great Salt Lake has fluctuated through a maximum vertical range of about 6 m during the 144
yr of historic record (Arnow and Stephens, 1990).
As a closed-basin lake responding to short-term
climatic changes, Lake Bonneville would have
fluctuated on similar scales. Several fluctuations
on the order of a few tens of meters have been
suspected in the Lake Bonneville stratigraphic
record (Currey and Oviatt, 1985) but they are not
included here because additional research is needed
to document them completely. Figure 2 shows
only those fluctuations for which well-documented
data are currently available at multiple localities.
One exception is the Keg Mountain oscillation (G
in Fig. 2), which is shown as a dashed line despite
lack of definitive widespread stratigraphic
evidence.
Early transgressivephase (30-26 ka)
Lake Bonneville began to rise from levels close
to those of Holocene Great Salt Lake about 30
ka. The earliest part of the transgressive phase (A
in Fig. 2) is poorly known and is inferred from a
few radiocarbon ages and lake-level interpretations
derived from sediment cores (Spencer et al., 1984;
RADIOCARBON CHRONOLOGY OF LAKE BONNEVILLE, EASTERN GREAT BASIN. USA
Thompson et al., 1990). Oolitic sand and carbonate
mud dated at 31.7 ka (age 1) suggests that the
lake was no deeper than about 3 m at this time.
However, the reliability of this age is difficult to
judge because the carbonate sediments could have
been out of equilibrium with the atmosphere
during their precipitation or could have been
contaminated relatively easily after deposition,
and we have not evaluated these problems for
this sample. Everitt (1991) reported an age of 28.2
ka (age 2) on wood collected in a core of sediments
from Farmington Bay near the eastern shore of
Great Salt Lake. The wood was at the base of a
clay bed interpreted as the deep-water deposits of
Lake Bonneville. If this interpretation is correct,
and if the wood age itself can be regarded as
accurate (it has a large 1-a error estimate), it
suggests that Lake Bonneville was still at a level
lower than the modern level of Great Salt Lake
at 28 ka. The Carson Sink silicic volcanic ash
(about 29 ka) has been reported from a Great
Salt Lake sediment core (Spencer et al., 1984;
Thompson et al., 1990), but it has not been found
in surface exposures in the Bonneville basin.
Although the core lithology indicates that the lake
was low, the precise level at the time of ash
deposition is unknown.
The transgression from low lake levels to
moderate lake levels (about 1320 m) apparently
was very rapid. As discussed below, the lake had
transgressed to an altitude of 1323 m or slightly
higher by 26.5 ka, indicating an average transgression rate of approximately 40 m kyr-~ after 28
ka. This conclusion is tentative because little
information is available for this time period, but
it is supported by field observations. For instance,
in sediment cores (Spencer et al., 1984; Thompson
et al., 1990) and in surface exposures, the "Thiokol" basaltic ash is only a few cm above littoral
or shallow lake deposits at the base of a marl or
calcareous mud sequence that marks the beginning
of deep-lake deposition. Ostracodes (Limnocythere
staplini) first appear at the base of this marl
(Thompson et al., 1990) indicating that the lake
did not become fresh enough to support them
until it had reached an altitude close to 1323 m.
The abrupt contact between shallow lake deposits
and deeper-water deposits at many localities
235
suggests rapid transgression. Segment A on the
curve is drawn with a dashed line to indicate our
uncertainty during this part of the chronology.
Better data are available for the next interval
of the early transgressive phase (segment B). Early
in this interval the (informally named) "Thiokol"
basaltic ash was erupted from an unknown source
into the northern arm of the lake (Oviatt and
Nash, 1989). The best estimate of the age of the
Thiokol ash comes from a 26.5 ka acceleratormass spectrometer (AMS) age of organic carbon
in lake sediments from Great Salt Lake Core C
(Thompson et al., 1990). The organic carbon
sample (age 4) was collected directly above a
silicic volcanic ash identified as the Wono ash
(Spencer et al., 1984), which lies a few centimeters
above the Thiokol ash in the same core. Therefore,
we plot the Thiokol and Wono ashes at 26.5 ka
(following Thompson et al., 1990) even though
Davis (1978) reported the age of the Wono as
closer to 25 ka.
Although we plot the Wono ash in Fig. 2, we
are not positive of its identification. Microprobe
analyses of glass shards in a sample (provided by
R.M. Forester in 1989) presumed to be Wono
from core C of Spencer et al. (1984) and Thompson
et al. (1990) do not match the type Wono and
are highly variable (W.P. Nash, pers. comm.,
1991). The ash from core C thought to be Wono
may be reworked Tertiary ash, which is common
throughout the Bonneville sequence in the northern part of the basin. More work is needed to
confirm the presence of the Wono ash in the
Bonneville basin.
The upper altitudinal limit of the Thiokol
basaltic ash in Lake Bonneville deposits, and
therefore a minimum estimate of the lake level at
the time of its eruption, has been measured in
Hansel Valley in northern Utah (Fig. 1). In an
exposure of the open-water marl facies of Lake
Bonneville (the white marl; Gilbert, 1890) in West
Gully (Robison and McCalpin, 1987), we have
traced the Thiokol ash upslope to the point where
it lies at the base of the marl section directly
above the pre-white-marl unconformity. The altitude at this point is 1336 m, and therefore we
estimate the isostatically rebounded altitude of the
lake level, which was probably slightly higher than
236
this point, at approximately 1340 m. The adjusted
altitude is about 1323 m (Table 1). Although this
estimate could be improved with further work on
the Thiokol ash, it is a reasonable first approximation of the lake level at 26.5 ka;
The best age control near the end of segment
B comes from two wood samples collected from
lagoon (age 12) and gravel barrier (age 9) sediments
near Salt Lake City. These samples pre-date the
Stansbury oscillation. The type of material and
the stratigraphic and geomorphic contexts indicate
that the lake level was at or slightly above the
wood samples when they were deposited.
Stansbury oscillation (22-20 ka)
During the period from 22 to 20 ka Lake
Bonneville oscillated at least once, and possibly
several times, through a vertical distance of about
45 m (C in Fig. 2; Oviatt et al., 1990). In
association with this oscillation, tufa was deposited
in the shore zone and algal-laminated sediments
were deposited offshore (Oviatt et al., 1990;
Thompson et al., 1990). The Stansbury oscillation
involved changes in surface area and water volume
on the order of 5000 km 2 and 1000 km 3, respectively (Oviatt et al., 1990). It represented a major
change in the hydrologic budget of Lake
Bonneville caused by a change in climate, although
the nature of that climatic change is still uncertain.
The Stansbury shoreline (Gilbert, 1890) was
formed during the Stansbury Oscillation (Currey
et al., 1983; Green and Currey, 1988).
Middle transgressive phase (20-18 ka)
Immediately following the Stansbury oscillation
Lake Bonneville rose at a rapid rate (segment D).
The average rate of transgression from 20 ka to
18 ka was approximately 60 m kyr -1 (0.06 m
yr- 1). For comparison, average transgression rates
for Great Salt Lake during historic time for
periods of 4-20 yr range between about 0.2-1 m
yr- 1 (calculated from data in Arnow and Stephens,
1990). However, a much greater volume of water
is required to raise lake level a unit vertical
distance at altitudes above the Stansbury shoreline
than at altitudes close to the modern Great Salt
C.G. OVIATT ET AL.
Lake (Currey, 1990, fig. 16). Therefore, Great Salt
Lake transgression rates are not directly comparable to long-term rates in Lake Bonneville in terms
of water-volume flux. When it is considered that
Lake Bonneville was probably fluctuating through
vertical intervals of up to several tens of meters,
its maximum transgression rates on shorter time
scales may have been considerably greater than
the long-term average.
Currey and Oviatt (1985) inferred several fluctuations and stillstands during the time interval
of segment D. We have not attempted to show
them here because, although they are probable,
they have not been thoroughly tested by basinwide integrated stratigraphic and geomorphic
studies.
A large number of radiocarbon ages on wood
help to constrain the transgression shown as
segment D on the curve. Most of these samples
were collected from lagoon and barrier deposits
(type II; Fig. 3), although some were collected
from soils buried beneath Bonneville deposits
(type I). The ages can be regarded as indicating
that the transgression was equal in age or slightly
younger than the samples if the trees were killed
by the transgression. It is also possible that some
wood samples from lagoon or barrier sediments
could have been reworked from older deposits
and that the wood ages do not closely constrain
the age of the transgression. Usually it is difficult
or impossible to determine whether the wood was
killed by the transgression, and even in cases
where the temporal relationship between the death
of the tree and the lake transgression can be
determined with confidence, the accuracy of the
radiocarbon age should be interpreted conservatively.
A number of carbonate-carbon ages, mostly for
shell samples, are plotted in Fig. 2 in the age
range from about 21 to 18 ka. We regard these
as minimum-limiting ages on the trangression.
Most of these are from type 11I stratigraphic
settings (Table 2; Fig. 3).
Late transgressive phase and Bonneville and Provo
shorelines (18-14 ka)
After 18 ka the average rate of transgression
decreased (segment E) to about 17 m kyr-1 (0.02
RADIOCARBON CHRONOLOGY OF LAKE BONNEVILLE. EASTERN GREAT BASIN, USA
m yr-1), and the lake transgressed to its highest
level of 1552 m (unrebounded; Currey, 1982),
where the Bonneville shoreline was formed (F in
Fig. 2). The lake had transgressed to within about
15 m of its highest level by the time of the
eruption of the Pavant Butte basaltic ash (about
15.5 ka) in the Sevier Desert (Oviatt and Nash,
1989). By sometime after 15.3 ka (age 50) the lake
was approaching the low point on the basin rim
at Zenda, Idaho (Fig. 1; Currey, 1982), and began
to overflow into the Snake River drainage basin.
Although five radiocarbon ages are shown close
to the culmination of Lake Bonneville (Fig. 2,
ages 50, 52, 55, 56, 59), age 50 is considered the
most important. It was determined on a single
small piece of charcoal collected from the top of
a buried pre-Bonneville soil 6 m below the crest
of a spit at the Bonneville shoreline near Kanosh,
Utah (Oviatt, 1991a). It clearly indicates that the
transgression to the highest level at this locality
had to be after 15.3 ka. The other ages, although
helpful, are on less reliable material [charcoal
mixed with soil material (ages 56 and 59), tufa
(age 55)], or do not permit a clear interpretation
of water level at the time of deposition (age 52;
Scott, 1988). We plot the initiation of overflow at
about 15 ka (Fig. 2).
During the period of overflow at high stages
large gravel barriers and spits were formed at
three successively higher levels at favorable localities near the center of the basin where isostatic
depression was proceeding more rapidly than at
the point of overflow on the basin rim (Gilbert,
1890; Currey, 1980b, 1990; Currey and Burr,
1988). Intermittent overflow may have continued
for as long as 500 yr while the Bonneville shoreline
formed. Catastrophic failure of the alluvial-fan
threshold near Zenda, Idaho, dropped the lake
approximately 100 m during the Bonneville Flood
(H in Fig. 2; Gilbert, 1890; Malde, 1968; Currey,
1982; Jarrett and Malde, 1987). During continued
overflow across the bedrock threshold at Red
Rock Pass the Provo shoreline was formed.
The Keg Mountain oscillation (G in Fig. 2;
Currey et al., 1983; Currey and Burr, 1988; Currey,
1990) is shown as a dashed line in Fig. 2 because
definitive stratigraphic evidence for it has proved
elusive. The hypothesized oscillation is believed
237
to consist of an approximately 40-m noncatastrophic regression from overflowing conditions at the Bonneville shoreline followed by a
transgression again to overflow immediately prior
to the Bonneville Flood. The Keg Mountain
oscillation was originally suggested as a hypothesis
to help explain the observed configurations of the
rebounded Bonneville and Provo shorelines, which
appear to reflect some sort of isostatic unloading
prior to the Bonneville Flood. That is, the
shorelines are not parallel; the center of the basin
apparently rebounded as much as 15 m relative
to the lake margin after the development of the
Bonneville shoreline and prior to the completion
of development of the Provo shoreline (Currey,
1990). Both the stratigraphic record of the Keg
Mountain oscillation and the isostatic histories of
the Bonneville and Provo shorelines need further
work.
Immediately following the Bonneville Flood the
Provo shoreline (I) formed at a level stabilized
by overflow across the Red Rock Pass (Fig. 1)
bedrock threshold (Gilbert, 1890). Provo shoreline
deposits stratigraphically overlie marl deposited
during the transgressive and deep-water phases of
Lake Bonneville. At a number of localities the
Provo shoreline consists of a broad depositional
platform made up of a series of prograded gravel
beach ridges that form "ramps" that climb slightly
in altitude lakeward (rise of about 3-6 m) (Gilbert,
1890; Burr and Currey, 1988). Interrupting these
ramps are one to three short descending steps on
the order of 5 m or less. The formation of the
Provo shoreline, including its duration and the
mechanisms that produced the ramps need additional research.
Only a few radiocarbon ages constrain the age
and duration of overflow at the Provo shoreline.
The most reliable age obtained directly from the
Provo shoreline is 14.3 ka (age 58), which is
derived from carefully prepared dense tufa collected from .an overhang on the margin of the
Tabernacle Hill basalt flow in the Black Rock
Desert (Fig. 1; Oviatt and Nash, 1989; Oviatt,
1991a). The basalt flow was erupted into the lake
while it stood at the Provo level (Gilbert, 1890),
and the tufa was deposited at the flow margin
soon after the eruption. Because this is the only
238
age so far considered reliable on Provo shoreline
materials, and because it is on tufa, corroborative
ages are needed to confirm its validity. However,
Cerling (1990) has found that basalt boulders
carried and eroded by the Bonneville Flood in
Idaho have essentially the same exposure age (14.4
ka; age 57) as the Tabernacle Hill flow as
determined by cosmogenic aHe. The 3He age is
supported by an AMS 14C-determination of the
age of organic matter in rock varnish collected
from boulders transported by the Bonneville Flood
in Idaho (age 60; Dorn et al., 1990). At 14.1 ka,
the rock varnish age is considered a minimum age
for the Flood (Dorn et al., 1990). Based on these
ages, and because it is constrained between 15.3
ka (age 50) and 14.3 ka (age 58), the Bonneville
Flood is plotted at 14.5 ka in Fig. 2.
The best available age for the end of Provo
shoreline occupation is 13.9 ka (age 61). However,
because this age is from mollusk shells in deltaic
sediments that were deposited below the shoreline,
the accuracy of the age and its relationship to the
shoreline itself are difficult to assess. We estimate
the end of Provo shoreline formation at about 14
ka.
Post-Provo regressivephase (14-10 ka)
After about 14 ka the basin again became
hydrologically closed as overflow ceased and the
lake began to regress rapidly from the Provo
shoreline. During this phase the water level fell
below thresholds separating three major Lake
Bonneville subbasins. As a result, Tule Valley and
the Sevier basin (Fig. 1) became isolated from
Lake Bonneville, which had become restricted to
lower northern subbasins. Independent Lakes Tule
(L; Fig. 2) and Gunnison (K) formed in Tule
Valley and the Sevier basin, respectively. The Sand
Pass threshold between Tule Valley and the Great
Salt Lake basin (Fig. 1) is 22 m below the Provo
shoreline, and below this altitude Lake Tule may
have regressed faster than the main lake because
the ratio of its hydrologic input to its evaporative
output was much less than that for the main lake
(Sack, 1990), which was receiving large volumes
of water from major rivers. Tule Valley had no
significant input from runoff. The regression of
C.G. OVIA'I'I" ET AL.
Lake Tule is shown in Fig. 2 (L) as a dashed line
with a slightly steeper slope than the Bonneville
regression (J). Age 62 is on tufa that is interpreted
to have precipitated in the photic zone of Lake
Tule during its regression (Sack, 1990). The
anomalously old age of the tufa may be accounted
for by the presence of 14C-depleted water from
springs on the lake bottom that may have
discharged near where the tufa was precipitating.
The Old River Bed threshold (Fig. 1) separates
the Sevier Desert basin from the Great Salt Lake
basin at a modern altitude of about 1400 m.
Because the Sevier basin had a relatively large
input from the Sevier and Beaver Rivers relative
to its evaporative output, Lake Gunnison (K)
overflowed for several thousand years and produced the now-abandoned river channel referred
to as the Old River Bed (Gilbert, 1890; Oviatt,
1988; 1989). After about 10 ka Lake Gunnison
desiccated to the floor of Sevier Lake playa
(Oviatt, 1988).
Lake Bonneville. in the Great Salt Lake basin
regressed rapidly from the Provo shoreline after
about 14 ka at an average rate of 80-90 m kyr- 1
(J, Fig. 2). This was a drop of about 175 m in 2
kyr. The curve is drawn with an increasing rate
of decline in an attempt to fit the available data
points, but more work is needed to refine this
part of the chronology. However, it is clear that
by about 12 ka the lake had dropped to very low
levels (M), possibly lower than average modern
levels of Great Salt Lake. In our view the low
stage at about 12 ka should be regarded as the
end of the Bonneville lake cycle because subsequent
fluctuations were much lower in magnitude. A
subsequent transgression of Great Salt Lake to
the Gilbert shoreline complex (N) culminated
between 10.9 and 10.3 ka (Currey, 1990). Since
10 ka Great Salt Lake has fluctuated at levels
lower than the Gilbert shoreline (Currey, 1990).
Discussion
This paper refines our previous interpretations
of Lake Bonneville history (Currey and Oviatt,
1985), although here we have attemiated to focus
on only the best-documented evidence. Some of
the hypotheses proposed previously regarding
RADIOCARBONCHRONOLOGYOF LAKEBONNEVILLE,EASTERNGREATBASIN.USA
smaller-scale details of the lake history (Currey
and Oviatt, 1985; Currey and Burr, 1988; Currey,
1990) have promise and are being tested. The
interpretations presented here are consistent with
many of the interpretations of Scott et al. (1983),
Spencer et al. (1984), Benson et al. (1990), and
Thompson et al. (1990). However, our interpretations are inconsistent with those of Morrison
(1991), especially with regard to the age of the
Stansbury shoreline and the Draper lake cycle (a
hypothesized lake expansion almost to the level
of the Provo shoreline between 10 and 8 ka).
Despite Morrison's (1991) claims, we are aware
of no convincing evidence that the Stansbury
shoreline formed during the regressive phase, or
that a lake cycle resembling the Draper ever
occurred. See the following references concerning
the Stansbury shoreline (Currey et al., 1983;
Oviatt, 1987, 1991b; Green and Currey, 1988;
Oviatt et al., 1990; Thompson et al., 1990).
References dealing with evidence that does not
support the hypothesis of a Draper lake cycle
include: Miller et al. (1980), Scott et al. (1983),
Spencer et al. (1984), Oviatt and McCoy (1986),
Oviatt (1986a, b, 1987, 1989, 1991b, c), Currey
(1990), Thompson et al. (1990), and Oviatt et al.
(in press).
The Lake Bonneville chronology presented here
is considered to be one of the most accurate and
complete proxy records of late Pleistocene climate
change in western North America. Although short
stillstands may have occurred due to rapid surfacearea expansion into small subbasins (Currey and
Oviatt, 1985), these probably had minor effects
(at the temporal and spatial scales considered
here) on the stratigraphic and geomorphic records
of the lake. Clearcut paleohydrologic and paleoclimatic information can not be extracted from the
record for the period of overflow at the Bonneville
and Provo shorelines, but this period accounted
for less than 1000 yr out of the 20,000-yr history.
Ongoing research will further refine the precision
and accuracy of the Lake Bonneville chronology,
and will elucidate fine-scale details of the lake
history. The relative importance of changes in
temperature, precipitation, and other climatic
variables in causing water-level changes in Lake
Bonneville is still unknown. However, we feel that
239
the construction of stratigraphicaily based chronologies, such as the one presented here, is a first
step in understanding late Pleistocene climatic
changes. By comparing chronologies from different
proxy records, which show how different environmental systems responded to the same climatic
factors, we can learn a great deal about the nature
of late Pleistocene climates.
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgment is made to the Donors of The
Petroleum Research Fund, administered by the
American Chemical Society, for the partial support
of this research. Partial funding was also provided
by the Utah Geological Survey. We are grateful
to Rick Forester, Dave Miller, and Bill Nash for
assistance. Willie Scott and an anonymous
reviewer provided helpful comments on the manuscript.
References
Arnow, T. and Stephens, D., 1990. Hydrologic characteristics
of the Great Salt Lake, Utah: 1847-1986. U.S. Geol. Surv.
Water-Supply Pap., 2332, 32 pp.
Bard, E., Hamelin, B., Fairbanks, R.G. and Zindler, A., 1990.
Calibration of the 14C timescale over the past 30,000 years
using mass spectrometric U-Th ages from Barbadoes corals.
Nature, 345: 405-410.
Benson, L.V., 1978. Fluctuation in the level of pluvial Lake
Lahontan during the last 40,000 years. Quat. Res., 9:
300-318.
Benson, L.V. and Paillet, F.L., 1989. The use of total lakesurface area as an indicator of climatic change: Examples
from the Lahontan basin. Quat. Res., 32: 262-275.
Benson, L.V., Currey, D.R., Dorn, R.I., Lajoie, K.R., Oviatt,
C.G., Robinson, S.W., Smith, G.I. and Stine, S., 1990.
Chronology of expansion and contraction of four Great
Basin lake systems during the past 35,000 years. Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol., 78: 241-286.
Bills, B.G. and May, G.M., 1987. Lake Bonneville: Constraints
on lithospheric thickness and upper mantle viscosity from
isostatic warping of Bonneville, Provo, and Gilbert stage
shorelines. J. Geophys. Res., 92: 11,493-I 1,508.
Bright, R.C., 1963. Pleistocene lakes Thatcher and Bonneville,
southeastern Idaho. Thesis. Univ. Minnesota, 292 pp.
Bright, R.C., 1966. Pollen and seed stratigraphy of Swan
Lake, southeastern Idaho: Its relation to regional vegetational history and to Lake Bonneville history. Tebiwa,
J. Idaho St. Univ. Mus., 9: 1-47.
Broecker, W.S. and Kaufman, A., 1965. Radiocarbon chronology of Lake Lahonton and Lake Bonneville. lI. Great
Basin. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 76: 537-566.
240
Broecker, W.S. and Orr, P.C., 1958. Radiocarbon chronology
of Lake Lahontan and Lake Bonneville. Geol. Soc. Am.
Bull., 69: 1009-1032.
Burr, T.N. and Currey, D.R., 1988. The Stockton bar. Utah
Geol. Min. Surv. Misc. Publ., 88-1: 66-73.
Cerling, T.E., 1990. Dating geomorphic surfaces using cosmogenic 3He. Quat. Res., 33: 148-156.
Crittenden Jr., M.D., 1963. New data on the isostatic
deformation of Lake Bonneville. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof.
Pap., 454-E, 31 pp.
Currey, D.R., 1980a. Radiocarbon dates and their stratigraphic
implications from selected localities in Utah and Wyoming.
Encyclia, J. Utah Acad. Sci., Arts Lett., 57:1 I0-115.
Currey, D.R., 1980b. Coastal geomorphology of Great Salt
Lake and vicinity. Utah Geol. Min. Surv. Bull., 116: 69-82.
Currey, D.R., 1982. Lake Bonneville: Selected features of
relevance to neotectonic analysis. U.S. Geol. Surv. OpenFile Rep., 82-1070, 30 pp. (and 1:500,000 map).
Currey, D.R., 1990. Quaternary palaeolakes in the evolution
of semidesert basins, with special emphasis on Lake
Bonneville and the Great Basin, U.S.A.. Palaeogeogr.,
Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol., 76: 189-214.
Currey, D.R. and Burr, T.N., 1988. Linear model of thresholdcontrolled shorelines of Lake Bonneville. Utah Geol. Min.
Surv. Misc. Publ., 88-1: 104-110.
Currey, D.R. and James, S.R., 1982. Paleoenvironments of
the northeastern Great Basin and northeastern Basin rim
region: A review_of geological and biological evidence. In:
D.B. Madsen and J.F. O'Connell (Editors), Man and
Environment in the Great Basin. Soc. Am. Archeol. Pap.,
2: 27-52.
Currey, D.R. and Oviatt, C.G., 1985. Durations, average rates,
and probable causes of Lake Bonneville expansions, stillstands, and contractions during the last deep-lake cycle,
32,000 to 10,000 years ago. In: P.A. Kay and H.F. Diaz
(Editors), Problems of and Prospects for Predicting Great
Salt Lake Levels. Cent. Publ. Affairs Admin., Univ. Utah,
pp. 9-24 (also in Geogr. J. Korea, 10: 1085-1099).
Currey, D.R., Oviatt, C.G. and Czarnomski, J.E., 1984. Late
Quaternary geology of Lake Bonneville and Lake Waring.
Utah Geol. Assoc. Publ., 13: 227-237.
Currey, D.R., Oviatt, C.G. and Plyler, G.B., 1983. Lake
Bonneville stratigraphy, geomorphology, and isostatic deformation in west-central Utah. In: Geologic Excursions in
Neotectonics and Engineering Geology in Utah. Utah Geol.
Min. Surv. Spec. Stud., 62: 63-82.
Davis, J.O., 1978. Quaternary tephrochronology of the Lake
Lahonton area, Nevada and California. Nev. Archeol. Surv.
Res. Pap., 7, 123 pp.
Dorn, R.I., Jull, A.J.T., Donahue, D.J., Linick, T.W. and
Toolin, L.J., 1990. Latest Pleistocene lake shorelines and
glacial chronology in the western Basin and Range Province,
U.S.A.: Insights from AMS radiocarbon dating of rock
varnish and paleoclimatic implications. Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol., 78: 315-331.
Eardley, A.J., Shuey, R.T., Gvosdetsky, V., Nash, W.P.,
Picard, M.D., Grey, D.C. and Kukla, G.J., 1973. Lake
cycles in the Bonneville basin, Utah. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull.,
84: 211-216.
C.G. OVIATTET AL.
Everitt, B., 1991. Stratigraphy of eastern Farmington Bay:
Utah Geol. Surv. Surv. Notes, 24: 27-29.
Gilbert, G.K., 1874. Preliminary geological report. Appendix
D to G.M. Wheeler. Progress-report upon geographical and
geological explorations and surveys west of the one hundredth meridian in 1872. Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC.
Gilbert, G.K., 1882. Contributions to the history of Lake
Bonneville. In: J.W. Powell, Report of the Director of the
United States Geological Survey. Rep. Secr. Interior, 47th
Congr., 1st Session, House Ex. Doc. 1, 3, 5, pp. 167-200.
Gilbert, G.K., 1890. Lake Bonneville. U.S. Geol. Surv.
Monogr., 1,438 pp.
Green, S.A. and Currey, D.R., 1988. The Stansbury shoreline
and other transgressive deposits of the Bonneville lake cycle.
Utah Geol. Min. Surv. Misc. Publ., 88-1: 55-57.
Isgreen, M.C., 1986. Holocene environments in the Sevier and
Escalante Desert basins, Utah: A synthesis of Holocene
environments in the Great Basin. Thesis. Univ. Utah, 134 pp.
Ives, P.C., Levin, B., Robinson, R.D. and Rubin, M., 1964.
U.S. Geological Survey radiocarbon dates VII. Radiocarbon,
6: 37-76.
Ives, P.C., Levin, B., Oman, C.L. and Rubin, M., 1967. U.S.
Geological Survey radiocarbon dates IX. Radiocarbon, 9:
505-529.
Jarrett, R.D. and Malde, H.E., 1987. Paleodischarge of the
late Pleistocene Bonneville Flood, Snake River, Idaho,
computed from new evidence. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 99:
127-134.
Jennings, J.D., 1957. Danger cave. Univ. Utah Anthropol.
Pap., 27, 328 pp.
Libby, W.F., 1955. Radiocarbon dating. Univ. Chicago Press,
175 pp.
Lowell, T.V., Savage, K.M., Brockman, C.S. and Stuckenrath,
R., 1990. Radiocarbon analyses from Cincinnati, Ohio, and
their implications for glacial stratigraphic interpretations.
Quat. Res., 34: 1-11.
Madsen, D.B. and Currey, D.R., 1979. Late Quaternary glacial
and vegetation changes, Little Cottonwood Canyon area,
Wasatch Mountains, Utah. Quat. Res., 12: 254-270.
Malde, H.E., 1968. The catastrophic late Pleistocene Bonneville
Flood in the Snake River Plain, Idaho. U.S. Geol. Surv.
Prof. Pap., 596, 52 pp.
Marsters, B., Spiker, E. and Rubin, M., 1969. U.S. Geological
Survey radiocarbon dates X. Radiocarbon, I I: 210-227.
Mehringer Jr., P.J., 1977. Great Basin late Quaternary
environments and chronology. In: D.D. Fowler (Editor),
Models and Great Basin Prehistory: A Symposium. Univ.
Nevada, Desert Res. Inst. Publ. Soc. Sci., 12:113-167.
Miller, R.D., 1980. Surficial geologic map along part of the
Wasatch Front, Salt Lake Valley, Utah. U.S. Geol. Surv.
Map MF-1198 and pamphlet, 13 pp.
Miller, R.D., Van Horn, R., Scott, W.E. and Forester, R.M.,
1980. Radiocarbon date supports concept of continuous low
levels of Lake Bonneville since 11000 yr B.P. Geol. Soc.
Am. Abstr. with Program, 12: 297-298.
Morrison, R.B., 1965. New Evidence on Lake Bonneville
Stratigraphy and History From Southern Promontory Point,
Utah. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap., 525-C: C110-C119.
Morrison, R.B., 1966. Predecessors of Great Salt Lake. In:
RADIOCARBON CHRONOLOGY OF LAKE BONNEVILLE. EASTERN GREAT BASIN, USA
W.L. Stokes (Editor), The Great Salt Lake. Guidebook
Geol. Utah, 20: 77-104.
Morrison, R.B., 1991. Quaternary stratigraphic, hydrologic,
and climatic history of the Great Basin, with emphasis on
Lakes Lahontan, Bonneville, and Tecopa. In: R.B. Morrison
(Editor), Quaternary Non-glacial Geology: Conterminous
U.S. The Geology of North America. Geol. Soc. Am.,
Boulder, K-2, pp. 283-320.
Oviatt, C.G., 1984. Lake Bonneville stratigraphy at the Old
River Bed and Leamington, Utah. Thesis. Univ. Utah,
122 pp.
Oviatt, C.G., 1986a. Geologic Map of the Honeyville Quadrangle, Box Elder and Cache Counties, Utah. Utah Geol.
Min. Surv. Map 89 (1:24,000).
Oviatt, C.G., 1986b. Geologic map of the Cutler Dam
quadrangle, Box Elder and Cache Counties, Utah. Utah
Geol. Min. Surv. Map 91 (1:24,000).
Oviatt, C.G., 1987. Lake Bonneville stratigraphy at the Old
River Bed, Utah. Am. J. Sci., 287: 383-398.
Oviatt, C.G., 1988. Late Pleistocene and Holocene lake
fluctuations in the Sevier Lake basin, Utah, USA. Jour.
Paleolimn. l:9 21.
Oviatt, C.G., 1989. Quaternary geology of part of the Sevier
Desert, Millard County, Utah. Utah Geol. Min. Surv. Spec.
Stud., 70, 41 pp.
Oviatt, C.G., 1991a. Quaternary geology of the Black Rock
Desert, Millard County, Utah. Utah Geol. Min. Surv. Spec.
Stud., 73.
Oviatt, C.G. 1991b. Quaternary geology of Fish Springs Flat,
Juab County, Utah. Utah Geol. Surv. Spec. Stud., 77.
Oviatt, C.G., 1991c. Quaternary stratigraphy of the Sevier
River delta, Utah. In: C.G. Oviatt (Editor), Guidebook to
Lake Bonneville Stratigraphy and Quaternary Volcanism in
the Sevier and Black Rock Deserts, Utah. Guidebook,
Friends of the Pleistocene, Rocky Mountain Cell, October
11-13, 1991, pp. I-6 (unpublished).
Oviatt, C.G., and Currey, D.R., 1987. Pre-Bonneville Quaternary lakes in the Bonneville basin, Utah. In: R.E. Kopp
and R.E. Cohenour (Editors), Cenozoic Geology of Western
Utah. Utah Geol. Assoc. Publ., 16: 257-263.
Oviatt, C.G., Currey, D.R. and Miller, D.M., 1990. Age and
paleoclimatic significance of the Stansbury shoreline of Lake
Bonneville, northeastern Great Basin. Quat. Res., 33:
291-305.
Oviatt, C.G. and McCoy, W.D., 1986. New radiocarbon and
amino acid age constraints on Holocene expansions of Great
Salt Lake, Utah. Am. Quat. Assoc. (AMQUA) Programs
with Abstr., pp. 103.
Oviatt, C.G., McCoy, W.D., and Reider, R.G., 1987. Evidence
24l
for a shallow early or middle Wisconsin lake in the
Bonneville basin, Utah. Quat. Res., 27: 248-262.
Oviatt, C.G., and Nash, W.P., 1989. Late Pleistocene basaltic
ash and volcanic eruptions in the Bonneville basin, Utah.
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 101: 292-303.
Oviatt, C.G., Sack, D. and Felger, T.J., in press. Quaternary
geology of the northern Sevier Desert, Millard and Juab
Counties, Utah. Utah Geol. Surv. Spec. Stud.
Robison, R.M. and McCalpin, J.P., 1987. Surficial geology of
Hansel Valley, Box Elder County, Utah. In: R.E. Kopp and
R.E. Cohenour (Editors), Cenozoic Geology of Western
Utah. Utah Geol. Assoc. Publ., 16: 335-349.
Rubin, M. and Alexander, C., 1960. U.S. Geological Survey
radiocarbon dates V. Radiocarbon, 2: 129-t85.
Rubin, M. and Berthold, S.M., 1961. U.S. Geological Survey
radiocarbon dates V1. Radiocarbon, 3: 86-98.
Sack, D., 1989. Reconstructing the chronology of Lake
Bonneville: An historical review. In: K.J. Tinkler (Editor),
History of Geomorphology. Unwin Hyman, London,
pp. 223-256.
Sack, D., 1990. Quaternary geology of Tule Valley, westcentral Utah. Utah Geol. Min. Surv. Map 124 (1:100,000).
Scott, W.E., 1988. Transgressive and high-shore deposits of
the Bonneville lake cycle near North Salt Lake, Utah. Utah
Geol. Min. Surv. Misc. Publ., 88-1: 38-42.
Scott, W.E., McCoy, W.D. and Shroba, R.R. 1982. Guidebook
for the 1982 Friends of the Pleistocene, Rocky Mountain
Cell, Field Trip to Little Valley and Jordan Valley, Utah.
U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rep.,, 82-845.
Scott, W.E., McCoy, W.D., Shroba, R.R. and Rubin, M.,
1983. Reinterpretation of the exposed record of the last two
cycles of Lake Bonneville, western United States. Quat.
Res., 20: 261-285.
Smith, G.R., Stokes, W.L. and Horn, K.F., 1968. Some late
Pleistocene fishes of Lake Bonneville. Copeia, 4: 807-816.
Spencer, R.J., Baedecker, M.J., Eugster, H.P., Forester, R.M.,
Goldhaber, M.B., Jones, B.F., Kelts, K., McKenzie, J.,
Madsen, D.B., Rettig, S.L., Rubin, M. and Bowser, C.J.,
1984. Great Salt Lake, and precursors, Utah: The last 30,000
years. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol., 86: 321-334.
Thompson, R.S., Toolin, L.J., Forester, R.M. and Spencer,
R.J., 1990. Accelerator-mass spectrometer (AMS) radiocarbon dating of Pleistocene lake sediments in the Great Basin.
Palaeogeogr., Palaeoctimatol., Palaeoecol., 78: 301-313.
Trautman, M.A. and Willis, E.H., 1966. Isotopes, Inc.
radiocarbon measurements V. Radiocarbon, 8: 161-203.
Varnes, D.J. and Van Horn, R., 1984. Surficial geologic map
of the Oak City area, Millard County, Utah. U.S. Geol.
Surv. Open-File Rep. 84-115, 3 sheets.