1 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2023 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 ABSTRACT In the northeastern Great Basin, USA, thirteen new optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) ages and one infrared stimulated luminescence (IRSL) age show that two deep pluvial lakes preceded the Bonneville lake cycle in Cache Valley during marine oxygen-isotope stages (MIS) 6 (123-191 ka) and 4 (56-71 ka), respective- ly. Our new data define quantitative hydrographs of the Little Valley and Cutler Dam lake cycles in both Cache Valley and the main Bonneville basin. In western Cache Valley, excavation of a faulted, east-plunging spit has sequentially exposed these deposits and overlying MIS 3 Fielding humid-over-arid double geosols that end westward at a strand of the east-dipping Dayton-Oxford normal-fault zone. Lithologically identical double paleosols in eastern Cache Valley overlie a variety of deposits, including dated Little Valley lake beds, and persist above the Bonneville shoreline. Six new ages show that the Little Valley lake cycle in Cache Valley began before 169 ka and ended after 143 ka, and its highest shoreline was above 1493 m. The >25 kyr duration of this pluvial lake cycle rivals the combined durations of the two subsequent lake cycles, during MIS 4 and MIS 2. The Cutler Dam lake rose at least to ~1450 m by ~67 ka in Cache Valley. In the type area in the main Bonneville basin, west of Cutler Nar- rows, four averaged IRSL dates from Cutler Dam lake beds show that the lake level there had dropped to ~1340 m by ~59 ka. The Little Valley lake rose at least 40 to 50 m above the local Provo shoreline whereas the Cutler Dam lake missed reaching the Provo shoreline by ~13 m. Beneath central Cache Valley, southeast of the study area, there are two laterally extensive, confining lay- ers of silty clay with an intervening sandy gravel layer, all overlying thick gravelly sediment. Both confining layers enclose additional thin and discontinuous gravel layers with adjacent oxidized clays. These alternating coarse and fine sediments are probably correlative with the exposed MIS 6 to MIS 1 deposits and, possibly, older lake cycles. Implications and Hydrographs for Two Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes and Double Geosols from 14 OSL-IRSL Ages in Cache Valley, NE Bonneville Basin Robert Q. Oaks, Jr., Susanne U. Jänecke, Tammy M. Rittenour, Thad L. Erickson, and Michelle S. Nelson Geosciences Department, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, boboaks@comcast.net INTRODUCTION Cache Valley is a narrow, elongate north-trending graben that straddles the Utah-Idaho border (Williams, 1948, 1958, 1962; Evans and Oaks, 1996; Janecke and Evans, 1999; Oaks, 2000; Janecke and others, 2003; Carney and Janecke, 2005). It is sepa- rated from the main Bonneville basin by a bedrock- cored horst upthrown between the Wasatch (west) and West Cache (east) fault zones. Cutler Narrows connects the two basins (Figure 1B). The Bear River fully entered Cache Valley through Oneida Narrows (Figure 1A) ~45 to 55 ka (Pederson and others, 2016) due to diversion by volcanic eruptions in Gem Valley in SE Idaho (Bright, 1963, 1967; Link and others, 1999; Janecke and Oaks, 2014; Utley, 2017). PREVIOUS WORK Pre-Bonneville Lakes in Cache Valley The last three lake cycles of the Eastern Great Ba- sin coincide with even-numbered marine-isotope stages (MIS) (Lisiecki and Raymo, 2005). These are the Little Valley (~123 to 191 ka, MIS 6), Cutler Dam (~ 56 to 71 ka, MIS 4), and Bonneville (~14 to 29 ka, MIS 2) lake cycles (Scott, 1988; Scott and others, 1982, 1983; McCoy, 1981, 1987; Oviatt and McCoy, 1988, 1992; Oviatt and others, 1987, 1992; Kaufman and others, 2001; Hart and others, 2004). Well- devel- oped interglacial paleosols separate some but not all of the lake beds. A dated and formally defined paleo- sol is called a geosol. 10.31711/ugap.v51i.142 2 Figure 1. A) Major features of the greater Cache Valley region, N-central Utah and SE Idaho. Green box outlines area in Figure 1 B. Red line NE from College Ward, south central Cache Valley, shows location of Figure 6. JH = Junction Hills; CBD = Cache Butte Divide. B) Landscape of Cache Valley area showing sites of pre- Bonneville deposits dated with AAR, OSL, and IRSL. Type area of Cutler Dam unit is along Bear River, SW of Cutler Narrows. Bonneville shoreline is lowest white; Provo shoreline is between blue and green shading. White box outlines area in Figure 2. R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes 3 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 Bright (1963, 1967) and McCoy (1981) identified lacustrine gravels below a paleosol beneath gravels of Lake Bonneville at the Ramsbottom gravel pit in Ida- ho, NE Cache Valley (Figure 1B). From that site and nearby Smart Mountain, Idaho, Scott and others (1982, 1983) derived amino-acid racemization (AAR) data from snail shells in the older lake beds beneath the paleosol that were correlative with AAR data from the Little Valley lake cycle in the main Bonne- ville basin. Highest Altitudes of Pre-Bonneville Lakes Oviatt and others (1987), Oviatt and McCoy (1988, 1992), and Kaufman and others (2001) con- cluded that the Cutler Dam unit, in exposures up to 15 m thick SW of Cutler Narrows, was deposited in marshy to shallow lacustrine conditions with ostra- cods indicative of fluctuating brackish conditions. The highest outcrop is at ~1340 m. The highest prob- able Little Valley gravels in the main Bonneville ba- sin, which were not dated, are about half-way be- tween the local Bonneville and Provo shorelines (Scott and others, 1982, 1983). Incision of Cutler Narrows The Bear River flows SW through Cutler Nar- rows, the deep and narrow canyon of the Bear River across the narrowest part of the Cache Butte Divide (Figure 1B). This canyon is cut into hard Paleozoic bedrock, is up to 392 m deep, and coincides with the highest bedrock along the Cache Butte Divide (Maw, 1968). Its bedrock channel is 1.8 km long. Nearshore gravels of the Cutler Dam lake cycle in Cache Valley are ~110 m higher than somewhat younger marshy deposits in the main Bonneville ba- sin. From that, Oaks and others (2019, 2020) conclud- ed that most of the bedrock excavation of the lower part of Cutler Narrows, from an elevation between the highest levels attained by Cutler Dam and Little Val- ley pluvial lakes down to the present level near 1314 m, coincided with eastward flow during the Bonne- ville flood, ~17.4 ka (Marrero, 2009). From their analysis of digital-elevation models (DEMs), Nelson (2012) and Chen and Maloof (2017) proposed that the Stansbury oscillation (~26 to 24 ka in Oviatt, 2015), may have reached into lower parts of Cache Valley through Cutler Narrows, across an area of ~300 km2. If so, Cutler Narrows was already deep- ly incised to below the Stansbury level before Lake Bonneville existed, allowing Lake Bonneville to os- cillate as a 5-10 m deep lake in lower Cache Valley. METHODS Introduction Our study emphasizes a Staker-Parson gravel pit that we call the Newton Hill pit, in west-central Cache Valley (Figures 1, 2). Our emphasis is primari- ly on pre-Bonneville lakes, so the literature on Lake Bonneville is cited only where pertinent. All altitudes are above mean sea level. Those within the Newton Hill pit are tied to an altitude at a nearby section cor- ner and based on electronic distance meter (EDM) and hand-level surveys. Altitudes of the original sur- face there and altitudes elsewhere are based on U.S Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic maps, GPS readings, Caltopo Lidar, and Google Earth Pro. We report present altitudes without correction for post-Bonneville rebound or tectonics because Bonne- ville rebound is <10-20 m in our study area in Cache Valley and rebound of pre-Bonneville deposits cannot be computed without better pre-Bonneville hydro- graphs. Age Control We obtained 12 OSL (optically stimulated lumi- nescence of quartz) and IRSL (infrared stimulated lu- minescence of feldspar) ages from the Newton Hill pit, one from the SE part of Hyde Park, Utah, and one from Muley Hill in Millville, Utah. The latter two are in the east side of Cache Valley (Figures 1A, 1B; Ta- ble 1). A metal tube was pounded horizontally into the sediment except at Muley Hill, where matrix sand was collected from gravel beds using double black plastic bags under red light at night. Surrounding sed- iment was obtained to establish both background data and moisture content for each sample. Lab analyses at the Utah State University OSL lab by Michelle Nel- son were done under the supervision of Tammy Rit- tenour, with standard procedures outlined in the notes of Appendix 1. Recalibration and new standards for OSL dating changed the OSL and IRSL dates reported earlier by us (Oaks and others, 2014, 2019, 2020). One previous pluvial lake bed dated at ~96 ka (N = 1; the Newton Hill beds), instead formed during the earlier Little Valley Lake cycle (sample USU-1083; Table 1; Ap- pendix 1). Construction of Map and Geologic Cross Sections The evolving exposures of the pit walls were sur- veyed with a Leica model TC600 laser total station in 4 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes Figure 2. Digital-elevation model of LIDAR data of the Newton Hill area. A western strand of the Dayton- Oxford fault zone intersects the pit (DO). Farther west, several Newton fault scarps are left unlabeled to show their clear topographic expression. B = Bonneville shoreline, P = Provo shoreline. Contour interval 20 m. Blue is lower, brighter colors higher. M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 Table 1. OSL & IRSL sample information and ages for Staker-Parson gravel pit (SE flank of Newton Hill), SE Hyde Park, and NE Millville, Cache County, Utah. See Appendix 1 for details for these samples. USU‐  Sample  Number  Age in ka  and  Method  Hand‐Level  from EDM Con‐ trol in Feet  EDM  Al tude  in Feet  Sample  Al tude  in Meters  Stra ‐  graphic  Unit  Loca on  1983 NAD  Comments; ~65 m W correc on  from 1983 GPS data to 1927 North  American datum for USGS topo‐ graphic maps in 1960s  Date and  Collectors  859  15.42  + 1.39 OSL N.D. Map ~4790  4737  Depth ~53  1444  Late Qlbp  ~ N 41° 52.614'  ~W 111° 57.426'  NW edge of pit; silt & sand beds  dip E; below ~4800' Qlbp highest  shore  9‐15‐2010  TR & MN  3243  NE Millville,  Utah  20.98  + 3.04 OSL GPS ~5083  Map ~5085  Google ~5087  N.D. Depth 3'  ~1550  Early Qlbb  N 41° 41.2048'  W 111° 48.2467'  3' below crest of Muley Hill, Mill‐ ville, Utah; dissected older delta  between Provo and Bonneville lake  stands  11‐19‐2019  RO & TC &  TR  1082  21.35  + 3.48 OSL ~4665  Map ~4775  <4672  Depth ~115  ~1422  Early Qlbb  N 41° 52.5244'  W 111° 57.3198'  Center of pit; laminated silty sand  over Qlv gravel; 10' above USU‐ 1083  12‐2‐2011  RO & TE  854  21.72  + 2.78 OSL ~4748  Map ~4785  N.D. Depth ~37  ~1447  Early Qlbb  N 41° 52.4478'  W 111° 57.3978'  Temporary road near S‐center  edge of pit; silty sand & clay above  Qfg geosol, below Qlbp gravel  9‐7‐2010  TR & RO  855  39.28  + 3.72 OSL ~4739  Map ~4810  N.D. Depth ~71  ~1444  Qfg  N 41° 52.478'  W 111° 57.393'  S‐center of pit; red colluvium:  sandy gravelly mud at top of loess  geosol  9‐7‐2010  TR & RO  1084  53.51  + 6.44 OSL N.D. Map ~4875  4865  Depth ~10  1483  Qfg? Qcd?  N 41° 52.5045'  W 111° 57.5009'  High W pit margin; white reworked  ash and fine sand in NNW‐SSE  channel, under E‐dipping gravel &  soil, over 4° W‐dipping Qlv gravel  12‐5‐2011  RO  856  66.82  + 5.94 OSL ~4729  Map ~4810  N.D. Depth ~81  ~1441  Qcd  N 41° 52.479'  W 111° 57.388'  S‐center of pit; gravel below Qfg  red paleosol base; 9.8' below USU‐ 855  9‐7‐2010  TR & RO  858  67.70  + 6.46 OSL ~4709  Map ~4790  N.D. Depth ~81  ~1435  Qcd  N 41° 52.473'  W 111° 57.382'  S‐center of pit; very fine to medi‐ um sand below gravel, ~25   be‐ low Qfg geosol base  9‐15‐2010  TR & MN  2895  SE Hyde  Park, Utah  142.8  + 13.1 OSL N.D. Map ~4865  Google ~4898  N.D. Depth 9.25  ~1493  Qlv  N 41° 47.8341'  W 111° 47.8214'  N‐S ver cal wall; fine to coarse  sand within pale green marl below  Qfg white caliche geosol below  Qlbb lag gravel under fine to very  fine sand with snails  7‐27‐2018  RO  1083  144.3  + 14.5 OSL ~4655  Map ~4780  <4673  Depth ~125  ~1419  Qlv  N 41° 52.5243'  W 111° 57.3310'  Center of pit; gravel 8.4' below  base of Qlbb sand of USU‐1082  12‐2‐2011  RO & TE  3202  150.0  + 25.9 OSL ~4690'  Map ~4885  N.D. Depth ~195 ~1430  Qlv  N 41° 52.5570'  W 111° 57.4022'  W‐center of pit; pebbly sand 3.0’  below base of Qfg red geosol, with  thin Qcd between  10‐28‐2019  RO  2490  155.6  + 21.4 IRSL ~4735  Map ~4840  N.D. Depth ~105  ~1443  Qlv  N 41° 52.5203'  W 111° 57.4165'  W‐center of pit in WSW cut; sand  and gravel in cobble gravel, 22'  lower than base of overlying chan‐ nel to W  9‐26‐2016  RO & TE  857  161.5  + 16.8 OSL N.D. GPS 4824 Map ~4865  N.D. .  Depth ~44  ~1470  Qlv  N 41° 52.492'  W 111° 57.477'  SW pit in WSW cut; sand & pebble  groundmass in cobble gravel; EDM  4821 later at graded site  9‐15‐2010  TR & MN  2491  169.4  + 28.6 OSL ~4678   Map ~4805  N.D. Depth ~127  ~1426  Qlv  N 41° 52.5548'  W 111° 57.3882'  NW pit near S end of headwall;  pebbly sand below Qcd calcareous  sandy mud intertonguing upward  with sandy pebbly cobble gravel  clinoforms above  9‐26‐2016  RO & TE  OSL = optically stimulated luminescence on quartz sand; IRSL = infrared stimulated luminescence on feldspathic sand; ka = thousands of years ago; Google = Google Earth Pro; EDM = total station, electronic distance measurements with laser; GPS = global-positioning-system measurement; HL = hand level used from EDM base station; N.D. = no data; Map: original surface altitudes are interpolated from 1964 U.S. Geological Survey 7.5' Newton [C.I. = 5'] and Trenton [C.I. = 20'] topographic quadrangles; Qlbp = Provo highstand lake stage; Qlbb = Bonneville highstand lake stage; Qfg = Fielding emergent interval with multistory hu- mid over arid geosols, and perhaps higher N-S channel; Qcd = Cutler Dam lake stage; Qlv = Little Valley lake stage; MN = Michelle S. Nelson; RO = Robert Q. Oaks, Jr.; TC = Tomas Capaldi; TE = Thad L. Erickson; TR = Tammy M. Rittenour. Note: Qcd and early Qlbb lakes in Cache Valley may have been separated at Cutler Narrows from lower coeval lakes in the main Bonneville basin.   5 6 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes 2016. Thereafter, new contacts were surveyed with an Abney hand level from the EDM base station. These data, combined with our 12 OSL and IRSL ages from the central and western parts of the pit, were used to construct a map and four composite stratigraphic sec- tions across much of the Newton Hill pit (Figures 3, 4). Correlations are tied to: (1) continuous and isolat- ed exposures of the Fielding double geosols (Oviatt and McCoy, 1988) at the top of dated Cutler Dam lake beds in the central part of the pit, and westward atop dated Little Valley beds; (2) a thick green marl low within Bonneville deposits; and (3) an overlying pink marl. Quantitative Hydrographs Our new data (Table 1) and prior AAR data (Appendices 2, 3, 4) and thermoluminescence (TL) data, tied to altitudes (Appendix 5), constrain our quantitative hydrographs (Figure 5) of the Cutler Dam and Little Valley lake cycles in both Cache Val- ley and the main Bonneville basin. These hydro- graphs update schematic plots of Scott and others (1982, 1983), McCoy (1987), Oviatt and others (1987), and Hart and others (2004), for these two pre- Bonneville lake cycles. Our results align with far more detailed hydrographs of the Bonneville lake cy- cle in the main Bonneville basin of Currey and Oviatt (1985), Oviatt and others (1992), Nelson (2012), and Oviatt (2015, 2020). Our data also constrain the pre- Bonneville, post-Cutler Dam age of newly identified red-over-white double Fielding geosols in the Newton Hill pit and lithologically similar paleosols in eastern Cache Valley. RESULTS Overview of Newton Hill Gravel Pit On the SE flank of Newton Hill, central Cache Valley, Utah (Figure 3), our ongoing studies have de- lineated the internal architecture of an east-plunging, nose-shaped compound spit deposited atop an east- sloping, eroded face of Little Valley gravel during the Cutler Dam and Bonneville lake cycles. The most continuous exposures lay between ~1408 m and ~1462 m, mostly below the prominent, higher Provo shoreline (Janecke and Oaks, 2011a, 2011b) at ~1463 m at this locality. Scattered exposures continued to ~1487 m. Exposures in the south-central part of the pit in 2006 were so extensive that the key stratigraph- ic relations and the overall architecture of the deposits were unambiguous (Figure 6). The spit’s original crest flattened uphill westward into a wave-cut and wave-built platform at the higher Provo shoreline of Lake Bonneville (Figure 2). The crest of the spit was parallel to and slightly north of the southern boundary of the gravel pit (Figure 6D). Pre-Bonneville sediment is mostly exposed in the central and western half of the gravel pit. Little Valley Lake Beds Stratigraphic Relationships In the Newton Hill pit, Little Valley gravel is overlain by the upper red geosol at sample site USU- 2490 (Figure 7A). At sample site USU-2491, there is no geosol between Little Valley pebbly sand and overlying Cutler Dam sandy mud (Figure 7B). At USU-1083 (Figures 4B, 4D) and at USU-857 (Figure 4A), Little Valley gravel is overlain by Bonneville deposits, with no geosol between. At USU-2895 Lit- tle Valley marl is overlain by a Fielding-like caliche paleosol beneath offshore Bonneville deposits. At USU-3202 Little Valley gravel is overlain by thin sediment of Cutler Dam lake cycle, then the upper Fielding geosol, beneath laminated fine-grained Bonneville deposits (Figures 4A, 4D). Although un- dated, at USU-1084 probable Little Valley gravel un- derlies a local channel with ashy sand under surficial gravels with modern soil. We did not find the base of the Little Valley deposits, nor identify pre-Little Val- ley units. Downward excavation ceased in the central part of the Newton Hill pit because of a noncommer- cial green marl 4 to 6 m thick according to two pit op- erators. The Little Valley deposits are primarily pebble to cobble gravels and sandy gravels with low dips (Figure 7A). Discontinuous exposures west of the Dayton-Oxford fault strands reached at least 8 m thick. Locally there are thin marls and sand beds. In Hyde Park, Utah, in eastern Cache Valley (Figure 1), at sample site USU-2895, a pale green Lit- tle Valley marl with a thin, calcareous, fine- to coarse sand lens is overlain by a white Bk paleosol 0.55 m thick, in turn overlain by a thin lag cobble gravel fol- lowed upward by 2.0 m of Bonneville light brown, thinly laminated, silty very fine sand with snails (cf. nearby exposure at Figure 8A). Elsewhere in eastern Cache Valley, weakly laminated to structureless marls and minor fine sands dominate probable Little Valley deposits. These undated older lake beds under- lie the double Fielding geosols and Bonneville depos- its, and persist at least up to ~1530 m, which is about 40 to 45 m below the local Bonneville shoreline (Figure 8B). M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 7 Figure 3. Map of Staker-Parsons gravel pit SE of Newton Hill shows locations of OSL and ISRL age dates; contours of the tops of the extensive red Fielding geo- sol in the S and W, the pink/white/green shrinking marl in the N and SE, the laminated green clay between them; locations of geologic cross sections A - A' to D - D' in Figure 4, and locations of Figures 6A, B, C and 7A, B. R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes 8 Figure 4. Geologic cross sections A - A' to D -D’ show extents of identified geologic units, original surface, OSL and IRSL age dates, pre-Bonneville lake depos- its, and intersections with other geologic cross sections. See Figure 3 for locations. 9 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors Figure 5. Hydrographs showing changes in shoreline levels in the main Bonneville basin and Cache Valley since 200 ka compared with simultaneous climatic changes. Dates with error bars, ages of ashes and chrons, and sources are from Table 1 and Appendices 2 and were revised from Oaks and others (2019). 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 10 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes Figure 6. A) Original exposure of Cutler Dam (Qcd) gravel overlain by the double Fielding geosols (Qfg), be- neath deep-water Bonneville and younger Provo deposits (Qlb). B) Exposures W from the above site showed lateral continuity of this sequence in the hanging wall of the Dayton-Oxford fault. The fault dips toward viewer. Figure C) Details of Qcd, Qfg, and Qlb at sample site USU-856. D) Map showing camera positions of Figures 6A, B, C. Locations shown in Figure 3. M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 11 Figure 7. A) Little Valley (Qlv) deposits. Truncated channel in upper left has curved sand laminae dipping toward the deepest part. Fielding red geosol here ex- tended over Qlv. Staff = 1.50 m. Sample USU-2490 is the same altitude as the highest exposures of Cutler Dam (Qcd) deposits ~170 m SE, but below the highest (projected) Qcd ~1450 m ~120 m south B) Northwest edge of Newton Hill pit shows erosional unconformity (yellow) between Little Valley lake beds (Qlv) and overlying Cutler Dam beds (Qcd). There is no paleosol along this contact. Gravel and fines of the Cutler Dam lake cycle preserve bottomset, foreset, and topset beds (orange base) that formed in the east-plunging spit. Deposits are cut by two subsequent faults or slumps (red). Marker beds within the spit are color-coded. See Figure 3 for locations. Both photos 9-26-2016. R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes and Double Geosols 12 Figure 8. A) Double paleosols in eastern Cache Valley (Figure 1B) that lithologically match our dated Qfg in the Newton Hill pit. Here they are overlain by Bonneville lag gravel (Qlbg) and sand (Qlbs). Underlying alluvial-fan deposits (Qafo) were not dated, so subaerial exposure and soil-forming could have begun before MIS 3. Location is at yellow dot in 8B. B) Lateral extent of exposures of double paleosols in east Cache Valley. Latitude and longitude indicate the mid- point of this image (+). Black dot marks site of ~143 ka OSL age (USU-2895) sampled within fine-grained Little Valley lake beds (Qlv) beneath a calcrete. Qt fluvial terrace is offset 9 m across a strand of the East Cache fault zone at the black arrow. 13 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 Age Control (N=6) Five exposures of pre-Bonneville lake gravels in the Newton Hill pit and one exposure in Hyde Park, Utah returned OSL and IRSL ages coeval with the Little Valley Lake cycle (MIS 6). The oldest age of ~169 ka (USU-2491) is from the north-central part of the Newton Hill pit, whereas the youngest age of ~143 ka (USU-2895) is from Hyde Park at ~1493 m. The latter is also the age determination from the high- est elevation. The Little Valley lake cycle flooded Cache Valley to elevations well above ~1493 m, pos- sibly as high as ~1530 m, and attained altitudes many tens of meters higher than expected (cf. Scott and oth- ers, 1983). The youngest beds dated in the Newton Hill pit (USU-1083; Table 1) are essentially the same age as that from Hyde Park. Cutler Dam Lake Beds Stratigraphic Relationships In the south-central part of the Newton Hill pit, east-sloping foresets of sandy, well-rounded, pebble to cobble gravels underlie the Fielding geosols. The foresets there were >6 m high and extended horizon- tally about 200 m (Figure 6A). To the north, expo- sures of these spit gravels are about 6 to 10 m thick and flatten into finer bottomset beds (Figure 7B). There are sharp erosional contacts locally within the foresets (Figure 6A). The highest exposures reach ~1443 m, but early photos (Figure 6B) and projection in Figure 4D suggest that the highest lake beds may have reached ~1450 m (Appendix 5). Bedding in the S-central part of the pit and the shape of the overlying pink marl (Figure 3) indicate that the spit probably was mainly east-plunging, yet part of this spit also extended northward (Figures 4A, 4B, 4D, 6B). Gravels to the north intertongue with underlying green, silty, fine-sandy laminated marl 2 m thick (Figure 7B). Most gravel lenses there thin downward and pinch out to the north between interca- lated marl layers that thin upward and pinch out to the south. Two fault or slump surfaces offset the gravels in the north. These offset the contact between topsets and foresets (Figure 7B). Age Control (N=2) Two samples from this deposit in the south- central part of the Newton Hill pit yielded OSL dates of ~67 ka (USU-856, -858). These are coeval with the Cutler Dam lake cycle and MIS 4 (Figures 3, 4, 5; Ta- ble 1). Ashy Channel Fill Near the former west margin of the Newton Hill pit, a white reworked ashy fine sand filled a scour be- low thin surficial gravel and modern soil, ~1483 m. Satellite imagery (8-11-2011) in Google Earth Pro shows this narrow channel trended NNW-SSE. Prob- able Little Valley beds below this channel dip ~4o west and roll over eastward to dip gently east. The upper part of the probable Little Valley beds are trun- cated eastward at the pre-Cutler Dam erosional face (Figure 7A). This subaerial channel fill yielded an OSL age of ~54 ka (USU-1084), during MIS 3 (Table 1; Figures 3, 4C). This is older than the upper Field- ing geosol but younger than the Cutler Dam gravels exposed lower in the Newton Hill pit and the shallow- water Cutler Dam muds in the type area southwest of Cutler Narrows (Figure 5). Double Fielding Geosols In Newton Hill Pit Stratigraphic Relationships In the original south-central part of the pit, two successive geosols developed above and partly within the top of underlying gravel foresets of the Cutler Dam lake cycle (Figure 6A). This unit consists of an upper, humid-climate, red-weathering, loess- dominated interval and a lower, arid-climate, white caliche interval. The contact between the two geosols is primarily erosional, but locally gradational. In one place the upper geosol is separated from overlying deep-water Bonneville deposits by a thin gravel wedge up to 1 m thick (Figure 6C). The lower of the two geosols typically has only an eroded lower Bk horizon, up to 1.5 m thick, above the Cutler Dam foreset gravels. This geosol pinches out east and west of the south-central part of the pit, and does not reach the east strand of the Dayton-Oxford fault westward in the pit (Figures 6B, 6C). Calcite in the lower geosol penetrated down into the Cutler Dam foreset gravels beneath (Figure 6A). It has amalga- mated subhorizontal stringers of carbonate and amor- phous nodules. Pieces of the eroded caliche are com- mon in the lower part of the red geosol above (Figure 8A). The eroded upper contact of the caliche has dis- tinct channels up to 15 cm deep filled with, and over- lain by, as much as 2.5 m of the red geosol. The upper geosol is mainly loess and slightly peb- bly loess, although locally it contains abundant collu- vium. It has considerable organic material, exhibits downward displacement of clay, has a distinctive red- dish soil hue (10R5.5/4), displays little cementation, and has a few vertical calcite stringers, but lacks cali- che nodules except those reworked into the base 14 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes (Figure 6C). Its top has a less prominent erosion sur- face than its base. This upper geosol thickens to 5 m or more westward, near the hanging wall of the Day- ton-Oxford fault (Figures 6B, 7A), and locally on the north flank of the Cutler Dam spit, where the caliche geosol is absent (Figures 4A, 4D). There its upper part is colluvial gravelly mud overlying 2 to 3 layers of gravelly loess with weak subsoils. Locally in the north it pinches out eastward beneath a gray modern soil at the original surface of the pit. Where absent in the east part of the pit, and local- ly in the north part of the pit, the upper contact of the double geosols is marked by a lag gravel or the green marl (Figures 4A, 4D) at the base of the Bonneville deposits above Cutler Dam foresets. Surveyed con- tacts of the top of the reddish geosol suggest that it probably rose at least to ~1463 m in the west part of the pit (Figures 4A, 4B, 4C). It descended to below ~1441 m in the SE part of the pit, and to below ~1444 m locally northward (Figures 3, 4D). Erosion proba- bly removed these geosols from the lower and higher parts of the present Newton Hill pit before Bonneville deposits were laid down. The absence of the Fielding geosols in the footwall of the Dayton-Oxford fault makes it challenging to estimate the throw across the fault, although it must be >2 m. Age Control (N = 1) In the S-central part of the pit, the middle part of the red geosol, ~1444 m, contains a lens of sandy sed- iment that yielded an OSL age of ~39 ka (USU-855) (Figures 3, 4B, 6C). This dates to the penultimate in- terglacial, MIS 3c (Lisiecki and Raymo, 2005). Double Geosols in Eastern Cache Valley In Hyde Park and North Logan, Utah, in eastern Cache Valley, we found numerous examples of pre- Bonneville double paleosols in many trenches for utilities and in basement and landscape excavations (Figure 8B). These paleosols are essentially identical to those in the Newton Hill pit, with a red clay-rich paleosol over an eroded white caliche paleosol. Sev- eral of the lower exposures have only the eroded low- er white Bk paleosol, locally with a very thin, eroded, red paleosol above. Detailed local mapping with an Abney hand level near sample site USU-2895 demon- strated an undulose paleotopography beneath the paleosol with lateral changes in the underlying sedi- ments uphill and laterally. All exposures lie above the highest Cutler Dam deposits in the Newton Hill pit. In eastern Cache Valley, either the double paleo- sol, loess deposits, or a gravel lag underlie the Bonne- ville offshore sand with snails (west, lower) and Bonneville gravel or post-Bonneville colluvial gravel (east, higher), respectively (Figure 8B). The white ca- liche paleosol overlies dated Little Valley marl (~143 ka; USU-2895) at ~1493 m in Hyde Park, and both paleosols overlie undated alluvial-fan debris flow de- posits at ~1526 m in exposures farther east (Figure 8A). Exposures of these widespread double paleosols were recorded through a vertical range of at least 124 m and a horizontal separation of at least 2.7 km NNW -SSE (Figure 8B). The highest exposure, at ~1607 m, is above the Bonneville shoreline (41.78501, - 111.77766). Our current concept of the spatial and stratigraphic relations of the lake cycles and interven- ing paleosols is shown in Figure 9. Bonneville Lake Beds Stratigraphic Relationships Bonneville deposits originally blanketed the spit in the area of the Newton Hill pit (Figure 2). In the southern exposures, topsets and foresets of sandy peb- ble to cobble gravels of the Bonneville lake cycle (Figure 6A) grade downward into finer bottomsets that overlie more than 3 m of transgressive deep- water marls and laminated silty sand (Figure 6C). Northward, where the pre-Bonneville relief was low- er, deposition included lower green marls and a single higher pink marl that form distinctive marker beds (Figures 3, 4) between thicker Bonneville gravels (Figure 10). The pink marl is a calcareous, very fine sandy, clay-rich silt. It is plastic, weakly laminated, and thin (tens of cm thick). It is either pink through- out (oxidized reddish orange (5R7/2) or greenish-gray to whitish color at the base. It might be Gilbert’s “white marl”, which dates from the highstand of Lake Bonneville. Its red stain may be due to iron supplied by the proximal Bear River. Locally, a lower green Bonneville marl directly overlies Cutler Dam deposits where the Fielding ge- osols are absent (Figures 4A, 4D), but there are other traceable pale greenish marls higher in the Bonneville sequence. Several marls produced low-angle slip sur- faces that repeat layers within the Bonneville deposits in small slumps and slides (Figure 10). These might have been triggered by earthquakes, the Bonneville flood, or both. Age Control (N=4) Near the south-center margin of the pit, gently east-dipping, gray, laminated silty sand yielded an OSL age of ~22 ka (USU-854) (Figures 3, 4B, 4C). 15 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 Figure 10. Exposure of distinctive marls within Bonneville (Qlb) nearshore gravels in Newton pit. The pink marl is widespread in the Newton Hill pit whereas the underlying laminated green marl is more restricted. Thad Erickson = 1.8 m. NW part of pit. The stratigraphic position and gravel of the slump above the pink marl suggests a possible trigger by the Bonneville flood. The pink marl records the deepest water depths. Figure 9. Schematic cross sec- tion of the relative geometries of deposits of three pluvial lakes in Cache Valley, intervening dou- ble soils, the modern geosols, and the modern surface soil on the double paleosols above the Bonneville shoreline in eastern Cache Valley and the Newton Hill pit. Qlb = Bonneville lake cycle; Qlbb = Bonneville shore- line; Qlbp = Provo shoreline; Qfg = double Fielding geosols; Qcd = Cutler Dam lake cycle; Qlv = Little Valley lake cycle; MIS = marine oxygen-isotope stage. Although we found no distinct MIS 5 paleosol devel- oped on Qlv, it might be incor- porated in the base of Qfg above Qcd deposits. Above the Bonne- ville shoreline, modern soil is developing on and augmenting exposed Qfg. Horizontal scale is tens of kilometers. Concept from Oviatt and others (1987). Any paleosols within lake cycles are omitted. Altitudes are not cor- rected for rebound. 16 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes These deep-water deposits sharply overlie an uncon- formity and the upper Fielding geosol (Figure 6B). A laminated silty sand lens in cobble gravel from the lower part of Bonneville deposits, in the central part of the pit, yielded a slightly younger OSL age of ~21 ka (USU-1082). There the Bonneville deposits direct- ly overlie eroded Little Valley gravels (USU-1083) with no paleosol between (Figures 4B, 4D). A sand bed intertongued with northeast-dipping gravel beds in the north-central part of the pit yielded a post-flood Provo age of ~15 ka (USU-859) (Figure 3). At Muley Hill in Millville, Utah, gravel atop an eroded delta, at ~1550 m, between the Bonneville and Provo levels, yielded an age of ~21 ka (Table 1). Subsurface Evidence of Pluvial Lakes Drillers’ logs from >1000 water wells across the center of Cache Valley southeast and east of Newton Hill document two gravelly layers and two clay-rich layers in the subsurface. An upper confining silty clay (marl?) unit ~18 m thick, an intervening, persistent gravel unit ~9 m thick, and a lower confining silty clay unit ~9 m thick, overlie thick underlying gravel and sand (Williams, 1962; Bjorklund and McGreevy, 1971; Clyde and others, 1984; Kariya and others, 1994; Robinson, 1999; Thomas and others, 2011). Figure 11 shows these relations along part of U.S. Highways 89/91 (Figure 1). Within the upper confin- ing layer there are typically two horizons of non- persistent gravels associated laterally with oxidized brown silty clays. Gray, blue, or black silty clays lie both above and below these gravel and oxidized in- tervals. The lower confining layer also encloses lenses of gravels and related oxidized horizons. These clays overlie sandy gravels of Pleistocene age and un- derlying older gravels in the Salt Lake Formation that cumulatively reach ~150 m to 300 m thick between Smithfield, Wellsville, and Hyrum (Robinson, 1999) (Figure 1A). These coarse sediments are the Principal Aquifer in Cache Valley (Figure 11). The unoxidized clays probably are deep-water lake deposits. They likely are coeval with the three la- custrine deposits in the Newton Hill pit, and perhaps earlier pluvial lakes in the main Bonneville basin (Williams, 1962), including older lake cycles identi- fied in the Saltair and Burmester cores (Eardley and Gvosdetsky, 1960, Eardley and others, 1973; Wil- liams, 1994; Oviatt and others, 1999). The gravels and oxidized muds at distinct levels within the unox- idized muds either indicate interglacial epochs or ma- jor oscillations within long pluvials (Williams, 1962; this study). In the southwest part of Figure 11, a per- sistent gravel within the upper confining layer may be a chance intersection laterally along a former stream channel. Figure 11. Geologic cross section showing alternating pluvial fines (blue) and interglacial gravel and sand deposits (orange) beneath the low part of Cache Valley. This section is through College Ward in central Cache Valley, Utah, along U.S. Highways 89/91. Qlb = Bonneville; Qcd? = Cutler Dam; Qlv? = Little Valley. See Figure 1A for location. Question marks indicate that correlations with other lake cycles are possible. Williams (1962) first documented these repeating coarse and fine intervals of lacustrine and fluvial deposits in drill holes in five geologic cross sections across the Utah part of Cache Valley. 17 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 Elsewhere in Cache Valley, the underlying Salt Lake Formation has many different lithologies. These include conglomerates, tuffaceous green (zeolite- bearing) to dark and light gray shales, sandstones, siltstones, thick to thin, pale brown very fine crystal- line (micritic) limestones, oolitic limestones, and dia- base (Adamson and others, 1955; Goessel and others, 1999; Oaks and others, 1999; Janecke and Evans, 1999; Janecke and others, 2003). These distinctive li- thologies are repeated by extensional folds and nor- mal faults, so that the Salt Lake Formation commonly exhibits tilts. Dips as high as 78° distinguish the Salt Lake Formation from the overlying Quaternary de- posits (Oaks, 2000). DISCUSSION Correlations Related to the Hydrographs Overview of the Hydrographs Data for the hydrographs in Figure 5 are in Table 1 and Appendices 1 to 5. The hydrographs for Cache Valley and the main Bonneville basin show good cor- relation of lake highstands and lowstands in both ba- sins and also with the O-isotope marine record of cli- matic fluctuations for MIS 6 through MIS 1. The Lit- tle Valley lake rose higher than the local Provo shore- line, whereas the Cutler Dam lake cycle did not rise quite as high (Figure 9). The MIS 5 interglacial persisted for ~55 kyr, twice as long as the ~27 kyr- long MIS3 interglacial. The isotopic data also suggest that MIS 5 was warmer than MIS 3 (Figure 5). Yet there are no distinct, wide- spread soils associated with MIS 5 in Cache Valley, and the only possible exceptions elsewhere are the Promontory/Dimple Dell geosols in the Little Valley pit and other parts of the main Bonneville basin (Scott and others, 1983). It is noteworthy that well-dated Fielding humid soil and the underlying arid soil, both of which are widespread in Cache Valley, formed during the relatively short and mild interglacial MIS 3 before the Bonneville lake cycle, yet they are excep- tionally thick and robust paleosols (Figures 3, 5, 6, 8). The lake was at least 150 m deep during the 68 to 67 ka part of the Cutler Dam lake cycle, in the early part of MIS 4, yet it coincided with a relatively minor oscillation in the climate record (Lisiecki and Raymo, 2005). This seems anomalous compared with the cli- matic and hydrologic conditions that favored deep lakes during MIS 6 and MIS2. The oscillations of benthic marine isotopes are only about 60% as intense during MIS 4 as during MIS 6 and MIS2 (Figure 5). Perhaps deep lakes can form with less Milan- kovitch forcing than glaciers. Alternatively, added water may have begun to flow across a waterfall in Oneida Narrows into Cache Valley then, followed ~20 kyr later by the complete, final diversion of the Bear River into the Bonneville basin (Pederson and others, 2016). A complex history of incision of Onei- da Narrows is suggested by one or more widespread subsurface gravels below a mud layer under surficial gravel from Oneida Narrows through several kilome- ters downstream in drillers’ logs of water wells (Oaks, 2010). Little Valley Lake Cycle The age and duration of the Little Valley lake cy- cle is constrained by our six new absolute ages, five published AAR estimates, one published TL age, and one extrapolation from the estimated rate of for- mation of the overlying Promontory paleosol (Figure 5; Table 1; Appendices 2, 3, 4). Combination of all the data for the main Bonneville basin (blue dashes in Figure 5) suggests that the Little Valley lake cycle might have persisted 20-30 ky into interglacial MIS 5. However, an end closer to 123 ka, at the end of MIS stage 6, is more likely based on the climate record and our new absolute ages (preferred model in Figure 5). In the main Bonneville basin, altitude control for the Little Valley lake cycle is limited, with some cor- rected for rebound, others not (McCoy, 1981, 1987; Scott and others, 1982, 1983). The highest probable but undated Little Valley gravels in the main Bonne- ville basin are at ~1512 m in the Geneva quarry at Point of the Mountain, south of Salt Lake City (Scott and others, 1983) and at ~1517 m in the Little Valley pit, where they were initially misidentified as “Alpine” by Morrison (1965, 1966) and reinterpreted by Scott and others (1983). These older lake beds are about half way between the local Bonneville and Pro- vo shorelines (Scott and others, 1983). In Cache Valley the highest dated Little Valley deposits, at ~1493 m in Hyde Park are sandy, weakly laminated marl, and undated deposits traced uphill from dated beds in the upper Newton Hill pit, at ~1483 m. These also lie between the Bonneville and Provo shorelines. Thus, the highest level attained by the Little Valley pluvial lake is not certain, but eleva- tion ranges are high and roughly similar in both ba- sins (Appendix 5). Active tectonics in both basins may have raised or lowered individual sites, which is especially critical for older lakes. Further discovery of higher shoreline exposures and absolute ages are needed to determine if the actual highest water levels of the Little Valley lake cycle were the same or dif- ferent across Cutler Narrows. 18 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes Cutler Dam Lake Cycle Our ages of Cutler Dam deposits in Cache Valley confirm that this pluvial lake rose at least 110 m above that of marshy sediments in the type area (Oviatt and McCoy, 1988, 1992) in the main Bonne- ville basin SW of Cutler Narrows (Figures 1B, 6B; Appendix 5). Two IRSL ages from Cutler Dam de- posits and two from the base of the Fielding geosol in the type area averaged ~59 ka (Kaufman and others, 2001). This is younger than the average of ~67 ka for two OSL ages near the higher level in Cache Valley. Although the error limits of the ages from both sites overlap slightly (Figure 5; Table 1; Appendix 2), the central ages differ. These data may indicate a drop to the lower level near the end of MIS 4, consistent with the climatic data (Figure 5). Additional OSL age control from distal Cutler Dam beds in the Newton Hill pit would further con- strain the hydrograph in Figure 5. Re-dating lake beds between those of the Little Valley and Bonneville lake cycles in Hansel Valley (Robison and McCalpin, 1987) with OSL might show that they are coeval with the Cutler Dam lake cycle, which seems likely. Fielding Double Geosols Our dated samples of the upper Fielding geosol and the ashy sand channel fill indicate that subaerial deposition replaced the Cutler Dam lake after the end of MIS 4, at ~56 ka. Our double geosols are similar to the sequence described by Kaufman and others (2001, p. 324) in the type area SW of Cutler Narrows. Their Figure 2 showed three successive geosols that com- prise their Fielding geosol, described in the figure as: “Massive red-brown silt and clay; at least three petro- calcic horizons, each topped by a snail-rich horizon; oxidized rootlets on blocky weathered surfaces”. The similarity of our double geosols to descrip- tions of the Promontory and Dimple Dell double pale- osols in the Little Valley pit (Morrison,1965) is also striking. There, a lower caliche geosol and an upper red (10YR) loess-derived geosol lie between Little Valley and Bonneville deposits. All exposures there are above the highest known Cutler Dam lake beds in Cache Valley. Despite the similar lithologic features and nearly identical stratigraphic relationships, the Promontory and Dimple Dell geosols are interpreted to be much older, ~104 ka (Scott and others, 1983; their Table 5). If so, the Promontory and Dimple Dell palesols are significantly older than the Fielding geosols. Absolute ages are needed to resolve this puzzle. An OSL age is needed in Hyde Park within the double paleosols there, to determine if these paleosols are definitely coeval with, or differ in age from, the dated upper Fielding geosol in the Newton Hill pit. Bonneville Lake Cycle The final diversion of the Bear River into Cache Valley ~ 45 to 55 ka (Pederson and others, 2016) was too late to raise the Cutler Dam lake, and all earlier lakes, above a divide ~2 km north of Red Rock Pass, at the north end of Cache Valley (Gilbert, 1890) (Figure 1A). Its final addition raised Lake Bonneville higher than earlier lakes, to overtop that divide (Bright, 1963; Hochberg, 1996; Bouchard and others, 1998; Link and others, 1999; Janecke and Oaks, 2014; Pederson and others, 2016; Utley, 2017). An earlier overflow across Oneida Narrows (Oaks, 2010) may have raised the Cutler Dam lake above that ex- pected from the O-isotope data (Figure 5). Our two OSL ages of ~21 ka in the Newton Hill pit, at ~1422 m and ~1447 m, lie within the wide en- velope of 14C dates with confidence intervals for the rising limb of the Bonneville transgression in the main Bonneville basin (cf. Oviatt, 2015, 2020). How- ever, both are minimum depths for the lake level at those times. Furthermore, well-rounded gravels at Muley Hill, with an age of ~21 ka, at ~1550 m eleva- tion, is close to the local Bonneville shoreline at ~1573 m (Figure 9), and above the Oviatt envelope of dates. Janecke and others (2013) obtained a 14C age ~22 ka in nearshore sands at ~1500 m in a gravel pit at the mouth of Green Canyon in eastern Cache Val- ley, between Logan River and City Creek (Figure 1A), somewhat above the Oviatt envelope. Thus, although the age-altitude data from Cache Valley plotted in Figure 5 might suggest a slightly earlier rise of Lake Bonneville during its transgres- sion, the data do not differ enough from those com- piled in Oviatt (2015, 2020) to be compelling. More precise and diverse age control is needed to improve the earlier curve for Lake Bonneville, which was compiled from 14C age determinations. We believe that a prolonged Bonneville highstand during oscillatory (?) overflow to the north, is needed to explain high, steep, wave-cut bedrock cliffs at the Bonneville shoreline throughout the Bonneville basin (Janecke and others, 2019). Significant time is also required to backfill Gem Valley, Oneida Narrows, lower Bear River-Mink Creek Canyon, and finally de- posit the large Bonneville delta north of Preston, Ida- ho, with a surface area of >125 km2 in Cache Valley (Figures 1A, 1B). The Bonneville delta of the Bear River back-filled a reach that was ~55 km long, be- tween Gem Valley and northeast Cache Valley (Janecke and Oaks, 2011b). 19 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 Implications for Incision of Cutler Narrows It is unclear if Cutler Narrows was incised well below the ~1450 m Cutler Dam gravels of Cache Val- ley before the Bonneville flood because the evidence is incomplete and inconclusive. Sr isotopes indicate likely entry of water of the Bear River west of Cutler Narrows during both the Little Valley and Cutler Dam lake cycles (Hart and others, 2004). The flow could have been through a fully incised Cutler Nar- rows, with lakes at the same or similar levels on both sides, or as flow across a lip near or slightly below the ~1450 m Cutler Dam gravel of Cache Valley that sep- arated lakes with different levels. Although Oviatt and McCoy (1988, 1992), Oviatt and others (1987), and Kaufman and others (2001) found no deep-water Cutler Dam deposits in ~15 m of shallow-water Cut- ler Dam deposits west of Cutler Narrows, such could be present in the subsurface there. Several arguments suggest that deep incision al- most to the modern level of the Bear River is a rea- sonable interpretation of the existing data. These ar- guments include: (1) the >4 Ma age of the east side of the horst block, so that considerable time was availa- ble to incise the canyon at Cutler Narrows; (2) the short and low canyon in Cutler Narrows, compared to dozens of deeper and longer canyons cut by streams with a fraction of the discharge nearby (e.g. Logan Canyon), which include some carved by now minor and intermittent streams (e.g. Weston Canyon); and (3) subsurface fluvial (?) sand and gravel deposits, hundreds of meters thick, that alternate with clay and silt that settled from lakes (Williams, 1962). This fa- cies pattern continues from the Quaternary units down into the underlying Pliocene Salt Lake For- mation (~12 to ~2[?] Ma; Goessel and others, 1999; Oaks and others, 1999; Janecke and others, 2003) (Figure 11). The thick and laterally continuous fluvial (?) gravels beneath the center of Cache Valley sug- gest protracted external drainage because continuous playa and lake deposits would have formed if there had been a long-lived barrier in Cutler Narrows. Wil- liams (1962) also argued that external drainage during most of the Pleistocene is required to produce the consistently thin Quaternary deposits beneath Cache Valley. To determine if pre-Little Valley lakes extended through Cutler Narrows and how high they reached relative to those in the main Bonneville basin, abso- lute ages are needed from more lake beds between the Provo and Bonneville shorelines in both basins. A continuous core where the Quaternary deposits are thickest in Cache Valley, perhaps near the location of Figure 11, could provide further age control. Altogether, we conclude that the narrow, low horst between Cache Valley and the main Bonneville basin was probably breached early because it is nei- ther high enough nor wide enough to separate high pluvial lakes for an extended period of time (Figure 1). Much, possibly nearly all, of the excavation of Cutler Narrows in bedrock probably took place before the Little Valley lake cycle (Oaks and others, 2014, 2019, 2020; cf. Maw, 1968, Hunt, 1982). Complete resolution could come from finding: (1) ~59 ka Cutler Dam shallow-water lake beds in Cache Valley near the same elevation as the Cutler Dam beds in the type section; or (2) high-elevation Cutler Dam beds in the main Bonneville basin that date from ~67 ka; or (3) that the dated Cutler Dam gravels be- tween 1450 - 1410 m in Cache Valley are coeval with the low- elevation shallow-water deposits in the main Bonneville basin. CONCLUSIONS Our 14 new OSL and IRSL ages establish the first evidence of Cutler Dam lake deposits and double Fielding geosols, and provide the first absolute ages of Little Valley deposits in Cache Valley. Our quanti- tative hydrographs show firm correlation of deposits in Cache Valley with the Little Valley (MIS 6), Cutler Dam (MIS 4), Fielding (MIS 3), and Bonneville (MIS 2) units in the main Bonneville basin. None of our contacts between dated sediment of the Little Valley and Cutler Dam lake cycles preserve paleosols. In contrast, our double Fielding geosols lie between well-dated Cutler Dam and Bonneville de- posits up to the highest near-shore gravel deposits of the Cutler Dam lake cycle in the Newton Hill pit (Figures 6, 7A). Higher in the Newton Hill pit and in Hyde Park (Figure 8A) double paleosols lie between the Little Valley and Bonneville deposits. Above the Bonneville shoreline in North Logan (Figures 8B, 9) they lie above pre-Bonneville loess and alluvial-fan deposits. These paleosols consistently exhibit an eroded arid-climate white calcic Bk horizon overlain by a loessic humid-climate red soil, and thus are pro- visionally correlated here with the dated Fielding ge- osols in the Newton Hill pit despite the absence of ad- ditional geochronology. Drillers’ logs of water wells identify two thick, confining clay-rich layers separated by a continuous gravel layer. These overlie thick gravels of the grav- els of the Principal Aquifer of Cache Valley (Figure 11). Each confining clay sequence contains local gravels with adjacent oxidized clays that may indicate emergence due to oscillations within protracted lake cycles or interglacial episodes between pluvials. Lake deposits older than Little Valley may be present here. The majority of incision of Cutler Narrows proba- 20 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes bly predates the Little Valley lake cycle. Although the evidence for when Cutler Narrows was cut below the ~1450 m Cutler Dam deposits in Cache Valley is in- complete, we believe that the evidence supports early incision to near its present depth. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank reviewers Jeremiah Bernau, Paul Inkenbrandt, Daren Nelson, Jack Oviatt, an anony- mous reviewer, and editor Hugh Hurlow for construc- tive suggestions for improvements to the text, figures, and tables, for pertinent references we had missed, and for valuable insights. James P. Evans aided us in many ways in addition to careful reviews. We bene- fited greatly from Staker-Parsons’ permission to visit their Newton Hill pit repeatedly through 17 years, and thank Sam Waterman and Steve Tucker for their keen interest in our work, knowledge of layering in the pit before our first visit in 2006, and willingness on occa- sion to clean faces or excavate areas of interest be- tween loading customers’ trucks. Our colleague Alex- is Ault discovered the double palesols in SE Hyde Park, Utah. Tomas Capaldi assisted in collecting sam- ple USU-3243. Hugh Hurlow and Mike Vanden Berg deftly and kindly shepherded this manuscript to com- pletion. REFERENCES Adamson, R.D., Hardy, C.T., and Williams, J.S., 1955, Tertiary rocks of Cache Valley, Utah and Idaho: Utah Geologic Association Guidebook 10, p. 1-22. Auclair, M., Lamothe, M., and Huot, S., 2003. Meas- urement of anomalous fading for feldspar IRSL using SAR: Radiation Measurements, v. 37, p. 487-492. Bjorklund, L.J., and McGreevy, L.J., 1971. Ground- water resources of Cache Valley, Utah and Idaho: Utah Department of Natural Resources, Technical Publication 36, 72 p. Bouchard, D.P., Kaufman, D.S., Hochberg, A., and Quade, J., 1998, Quaternary history of the Thatcher Basin, Idaho, reconstructed from 87Sr/86Sr and amino acid composition of lacustrine fossils - Implications for the diversion of the Bear River into the Bonneville Basin: Palaeogeogra- phy, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 141, p. 95-114. Bright, R.C., 1963, Pleistocene Lakes Thatcher and Bonneville, southeastern Idaho: Ph.D. dissertation (unpublished), University of Minnesota, Minneap- olis, 292 p. Bright, R.C., 1967, Late-Pleistocene stratigraphy in Thatcher basin, southeastern Idaho: Tebiwa, v. 10, p. 1-17. Buylaert, J.P., Murray A.S., Thomsen, K.J., and Jain, M., 2009, Testing the potential of an elevated temperature IRSL signal from K-feldspar: Radia- tion Measurements, v. 44, p. 560–565. Carney, S.M., and Janecke, S.U., 2005, Excision and the original low dip of the Miocene-Pliocene Ban- nock detachment system, SE Idaho: Northern cousin of the Sevier Desert detachment?: Geologi- cal Society of America Bulletin, v. 117, p. 334- 353. Chen, C.Y., and Maloof, A.C., 2017, Revisiting the deformed highstand of Lake Bonneville: Quater- nary Science Reviews, v. 159, p. 169-189. Clyde, C.G., Jeppson, R.W., and Liu, Win-Kai, 1984, A groundwater model of Cache Valley, Utah. Utah Water Research Laboratory, Utah State Uni- versity, Logan, Utah, Hydraulics and Hydrology Series, UWRL/H-84/04, 115 p. Currey D.R., and Oviatt, C.G., 1985, Durations, aver- age rates, and probable causes of Lake Bonneville expansions, still-stands, and contractions during the last deep-lake cycle, 32,000 to 10,000 years ago: Geographical Journal of Kore, v. 10, p. 1085- 1099. Eardley, A.J., and Gvosdetsky, V., 1960, Analysis of Pleistocene core from Great Salt lake, Utah: Geo- logical Society of America Bulletin, v. 71, p. 1323 -1344. 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: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 84, p. 211-216. Ellis, N.R., and Jänecke, S.U. (advisor), 2018, LI- DAR results in a revised map and analysis of ac- tive faults in West Cache fault zone, Utah: Senior thesis (unpublished), Utah State University, Lo- gan, Utah, 32 p. https://works.bepress.com/ susanne_janecke/228/ Evans, J.P., and Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 1996, Three- dimensional variation in extensional fault shape and basin form: The Cache Valley basin, eastern Basin and Range province, USA. Geological So- ciety of America Bulletin, v. 108, p. 1580-1593. Galbraith, R.F., and Roberts, R.G., 2012, Statistical aspects of equivalent dose and error calculation and display in OSL dating—an overview and some recommendations: Quaternary Geochronol- ogy, v. 11, p. 1–27. Gansecki, C.A., Mahood, G.A., and McWilliams, M., 1998. New ages for the climactic eruptions at Yel- lowstone: Single-crystal 40Ar/39Ar dating identi- fies contamination: Geology, v. 26, p. 343-346. https://works.bepress.com/susanne_janecke/228/ https://works.bepress.com/susanne_janecke/228/ 21 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 Goessel, K.M., Oaks, R.Q., Jr., Perkins, M.E., and Janecke, S.U., 1999, Tertiary stratigraphy and structural Geology, Wellsville Mountains to Junc- tion Hills, north-central Utah, in: Spangler, L.E. and C.J. Allen, editors, Geology of northern Utah: Utah Geological Association Publication 27, p. 45 -69. Gilbert, G.K., 1875, Glacial epoch, in: Wheeler, G.M., Report upon geographical and geological exploration and surveys west of the one hundredth meridian, Volume III, Geology Part I, Report on the geology of portions of Nevada, Utah, Califor- nia, and Arizona, examined in the years 1871 and 1872: U.S. Government Printing Office, Washing- ton, D.C., p. 86-104. Gilbert, G.K., 1890, Lake Bonneville: U.S. Geologi- cal Survey, Monograph 1, 438 p. Guérin, G., Mercier, N., and Adamiec, G., 2011, Dose -rate conversion factors—update: Ancient TL, v. 29, p. 5-8. Hart, W.S., Quade, J., Madsen, D.B., Kaufman, D.S., and Oviatt, C.G., 2004, The 87Sr/86Sr ratios of la- custrine carbonates and lake-level history of the Bonneville paleolake system: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 116, p. 1107-1119. Hochberg, A., 1996, Aminostratigraphy of Thatcher basin, SE Idaho: Reassessment of Pleistocene lakes: M.S. Thesis (unpublished), Utah State Uni- versity, Logan, Utah, 107 p. Hunt, C.B., 1982, The anomalous transverse canyons of the Wasatch Range, in: Nielson, D.L., editor, Overthrust Belt of Utah: Utah Geological Associ- ation Publication 10, p.81-89. Huntley, D.J., and Lamothe, M., 2001, Ubiquity of anomalous fading in K-feldspars and the measure- ment and correction for it in optical dating: Cana- dian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 38, p. 1093– 1106. Janecke, S.U., and Evans, J.C., 1999, Folded and faulted Salt Lake Formation above the Miocene to Pliocene New Canyon and Clifton detachment faults, Malad and Bannock Ranges, Idaho: Field trip guide to the Deep Creek half graben and envi- rons, in: Hughes, S. S., and G.D. Thackray, edi- tors, Guidebook to the Geology of Eastern Idaho. Idaho Museum of National History, Pocatello, Idaho, p. 71-96. Janecke, S.U., S.M. Carney, M.E. Perkins, J.C. Ev- ans, P.K. Link, R.Q. Oaks, Jr., and B.P. Nash, 2003, Late Miocene-Pliocene detachment faulting and Pliocene-Pleistocene Basin-and-Range exten- sion inferred from dismembered rift basins of the Salt Lake Formation, southeast Idaho, In R.G. Raynolds and R.M. Flores, eds., Cenozoic Sys- tems of the Rocky Mountain Region: Rocky Mountain Section of the SEPM, p. 369-406. Janecke, S.U., and Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 2011a, Reinter- preted history of latest Pleistocene Lake Bonne- ville — Geologic setting of threshold failure, Bonneville flood, deltas of the Bear River, and outlets for two Provo shorelines, southeastern Ida- ho, USA, in: Lee, J. and Evans, J.P., editors, Geo- logical Field Trips to the Basin and Range, Rocky Mountains, Snake River Plain, and Terranes of the U.S. Cordillera: Geological Society of Ameri- ca Field Guide 21, p. 195-222. Janecke, S.U., and Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 2011b, New in- sights into the outlet conditions of Late Pleisto- cene Lake Bonneville, southeastern Idaho, USA: Geosphere, v. 7, p. 1369-1391. Janecke, S.U., Oaks, R.Q., Jr., Rittenour, T.M., Knight, A.J., and McNutt, D., 2013, Large lique- faction features and evidence for 4 earthquakes induced by Lake Bonneville in Cache Valley: A progress report: Presentation to Utah Fault Param- eters working group, annual workshop, Salt Lake City. Janecke, S.U., and Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 2014, Diversion[s] of the lower Bear River in Gem Valley, Idaho, by a tectono-volcanic valve: Late Cenozoic to Recent geologic and biotic history of the Snake River, Symposium volume with extended abstracts, p. 27 -28. Jänecke, S.U., Oaks, R.Q., Jr., Rittenour. T.M., Knight, A.J., Oakeson, J., and Ellis, N., 2019, Cache Valley: A critical part of Lake Bonneville, records possible triggers of the Bonneville Flood, protracted Bonneville high stand, liquefaction, and clustered earthquakes on East and West Cache Fault Zones, in: Lund, W.R., McKean, A.P., and Bowman, S.D. ( eds.), Proceedings Vol- ume: 2018 Lake Bonneville Geologic Conference and Short Course. Day 2, Sessions 5-8; Utah Geo- logical Survey. Miscellaneous Publication, MP- 170-2, p. 68-134. 8 p. article and 58 p. of presen- tation. https://ugspub.nr.utah.gov/publications/ misc_pubs/mp-170/mp-170-2.pdf Kariya, K.A., Roark, D.M., and Hanson, K.M., 1994. Hydrogeology of Cache Valley, Cache County, Utah, and adjacent part of Idaho, with emphasis on simulation of ground-water flow. Utah Depart- ment of Natural Resources, Technical Publication 108, 120 p. Kaufman, A., Broecker, W.S., Ku, T.-L., and Thur- ber, D.L., 1971, The status of U-series methods of mollusk dating: Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 35, p. 1155-1183. Kaufman, D.S., Forman, S.L., and Bright, J., 2001, Age of the Cutler Dam Alloformation (Late Pleis- tocene), Bonneville basin, Utah: Quaternary Re- search, v. 56, p. 322-344. https://ugspub.nr.utah.gov/publications/misc_pubs/mp-170/mp-170-2.pdf https://ugspub.nr.utah.gov/publications/misc_pubs/mp-170/mp-170-2.pdf 22 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes Link, P.K., Kaufman, D.S., and Thackray, G.D., 1999. Field guide to Pleistocene Lakes Thatcher and Bonneville and the Bonneville Flood, south- eastern Idaho, in: Hughes, S.S., and Thackray, G.D., editors, Guidebook to the Geology of East- ern Idaho: Idaho Museum of Natural History, Pocatello, Idaho, p. 251-266. Lisiecki, L.E., and Raymo, M.E., 2005, A Pliocene- Pleistocene stack of 57 globally distributed ben- thic 18O records: Paleoceanography and Paleocli- matology, v. 20, n. 1, PA 1003, 17 p. Marrero, S.M., 2009, Chlorine-36 production rate cal- ibration using shorelines from Pleistocene Lake Bonneville: Ph.D. dissertation (unpublished), New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, New Mexico, 201 p. Maw, G.G., 1968, Lake Bonneville history in Cutler Dam quadrangle, Cache and Box Elder Counties, Utah: M.S. thesis (unpublished), Utah State Uni- versity, Logan, Utah, 59 p. McCoy, W.D., 1981, Quaternary aminostratigraphy of the Bonneville and Lahontan basins: Ph.D. dis- sertation (unpublished), University of Colorado, Boulder, 336 p. McCoy, W.D., 1987, Quaternary aminostratigraphy of the Bonneville basin, western United States: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 98, p. 99-112. Mejdahl, V., 1979, Thermoluminescence dating— beta-dose attenuation in quartz grains: Archae- ometry, v. 21, p. 61–72. Miller, D.M., 2016, The Provo shoreline of Lake Bonneville, in: Oviatt, C.G. and Shroder, J.F., edi- tors, Lake Bonneville — a scientific update: De- velopments in Earth Surface Processes 20, Else- vier, New York, p. 127-144. Morrison. R.B., 1965, New evidence on Lake Bonne- ville stratigraphy and history from southern Prom- ontory Point, Utah: U.S. Geological Survey Pro- fessional Paper 525-C, p. C-110 – C-119. Morrison, R.B., 1966, Predecessors of Great Salt Lake, in: Stokes, W.L., editor, The Great Salt Lake: Utah Geological Society, p.77-104. Murray, A.S., and Wintle, A.G., 2000, Luminescence dating of quartz using an improved single aliquot regenerative-dose protocol: Radiation Measure- ments, v. 32, p. 57–73. Nelson, D.T., 2012, Geomorphic and stratigraphic de- velopment of Lake Bonneville’s intermediate paleoshorelines during the late Pleistocene: Ph.D. dissertation (unpublished), University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, 213 p. Nishizawa, S., 2010, The Bonneville Lake basin shoreline records of large lake and abrupt climate change events: Ph.D. dissertation (unpublished), University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, 151 p. Nishizawa, S., Currey, D.R., Brunelle, A., and Sack, D., 2013, Bonneville basin shoreline records of large lake intervals during marine isotope stage 3 and the latest glacial maximum: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 386, p. 374- 391. Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 2000, Geologic history of Tertiary de- posits between the Lower Bear River Drainage Basin and the Cache Valley Basin, north-central Utah, based on study of the Salt Lake Formation, the Collinston Conglomerate, and the Wasatch Formation, with applications to groundwater re- sources and fault-related geologic hazards: Final Report to Bear River Water Conservancy District, Box Elder County, and Utah Division of Water Resources, 116 p., Plates 5, 6A, and 6B, scale: 1:24,000. https://geodata.geology.utah.gov/pages/ download.php? direct=1&noattach=true&ref=5845&ext=pdf&k= Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 2010, Evaluation of the geologic set- ting and potential sites for water wells in the foot- hill region east, northeast, and southeast of Pres- ton City, Franklin County, southeastern Idaho. Report (unpublished) for J-U-B Engineering and Preston City, 44 p, 9 Figures, 2 Tables, 2 Appen- dices. Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 2012, Effect of structure and stratig- raphy of the Salt Lake Formation on availability of groundwater immediately east of Paradise, Utah, and possible sources of springs along the Little Bear River farther west: Report for Mark Alexander and Chad Magnum, Paradise Hills Es- tates HOA, 20 p., 20 Figs. Report submitted to the Utah State Engineer. Oaks, R.Q., Jr., Janecke, S.U., Rittenour, T.M., Nel- son, M.S., and Erickson, T.L., 2014, Up to four deepwater pluvial lakes in Cache Valley, Utah- Idaho, including the Cutler Dam lake cycle at ~1445 m and possible Little Valley lake cycle at ~1485 m: Evidence for possible excavation of Cutler Narrows prior to 420 ka: Late Cenozoic to Recent Geologic and Biotic History of the Snake River: Abstracts for the workshop on Late Ceno- zoic to Recent geologic and biotic history of the Snake River, March 24-26, 2014, Pocatello, Ida- ho; http://geology.isu.edu/SnakeRiver/ Proceedings.pdf (Symposium vol. with extended abstracts), p. 34-35. Oaks, R.Q., Jr., Janecke, S.U., Rittenour, T.M., Erick- son, T.L., and Nelson, M.S., 2019, OSL age da- ting of two, perhaps three, pre-Bonneville deep- water pluvial lakes in Cache Valley, Utah-Idaho: Implications of their unexpected high altitudes for excavation of Cutler Narrows from a level above https://geodata.geology.utah.gov/pages/download.php?direct=1&noattach=true&ref=5845&ext=pdf&k= https://geodata.geology.utah.gov/pages/download.php?direct=1&noattach=true&ref=5845&ext=pdf&k= https://geodata.geology.utah.gov/pages/download.php?direct=1&noattach=true&ref=5845&ext=pdf&k= http://geology.isu.edu/SnakeRiver/Proceedings.pdf http://geology.isu.edu/SnakeRiver/Proceedings.pdf 23 M.D. Vanden Berg, R. Ford, C. Frantz, H. Hurlow, K. Gunderson, G. Atwood, editors 2024 Utah Geological Association Publication 51 1494 m (4901'), down to the present 1314 m (4310') mainly during the Bonneville lake cycle: Utah Geological Survey Symposium on Lake Bonneville, 3-4 October, 2018. Oaks, R.Q., Jr., Janecke, S.U., Rittenour, T.M., Erick- son, T.L., and Nelson, M.S., 2020, Pre-Bonneville lakes in Cache Valley and excavation of Cutler Narrows across the Cache Butte Divide in the west, north-central Utah and southeastern Idaho: Rocky Mountain Section, Geological Society of America, 72nd Annual Meeting, Abstracts with Programs, v. 52, no. 3. https://doi: 10.1130/ abs/2020RM-346804. Oaks, R.Q., Jr., Smith, K.A., Janecke, S.U., Perkins, M.E., and Nash, W.P., 1999, Stratigraphy and tec- tonics of Tertiary strata of southern Cache Valley, north-central Utah, in: Spangler, L.E., and Allen, C.J., editors, Geology of Northern Utah: Utah Ge- ological Association Publication 27, p. 71-110. Oviatt, C.G., 1986a, Geologic Map of the Honeyville quadrangle, Box Elder and Cache Counties, Utah. Utah Geological Survey, Map 88, scale 1:24,000. Oviatt, C.G., 1986b, Geologic Map of the Cutler Dam quadrangle, Box Elder and Cache Counties, Utah. Utah Geological Survey, Map 91, scale 1:24,000. Oviatt, C.G., 2015, Chronology of Lake Bonneville, 30,000 to 10,000 yr B.P.: Quaternary Science Re- views, v. 110, p. 166-171. Oviatt, C.G., 2020, G.K. Gilbert and the Bonneville shoreline: Geology of the Intermountain West, v. 7, p. 301-320. https://doi.org/10.31711/ giw.v7.pp301-320. Oviatt, C.G., Currey, D.R. and Sack, D., 1992, Radio- carbon chronology of Lake Bonneville, eastern Great Basin, USA: Palaeogeography, Palaeocli- matology, Palaeoecology, v. 99, p. 225-241. Oviatt, C.G., Miller, D.M., Sack, D., and Kaufman, D.S., 1997, New explorations along the northern shore of Lake Bonneville, in: Link, P.K., and Kowalski, B.J., editors, Mesozoic to Recent Geol- ogy of Utah, Part 2: Brigham Young University Geology Studies, v. 42, p. 345-371. Oviatt, C.G., and McCoy, W.D., 1988, The Cutler Dam Alloformation — Deposits of a probable early Wisconsin lake in the Bonneville basin, in: Machette, M.N., editor, In the footsteps of G.K. Gilbert — Lake Bonneville and neotectonics of the eastern Basin and Range Province: Geological Society of America Guidebook for field trip 12, the Geological Society of America 100th annual meeting, Denver, Colorado: Utah Geological and Mineral Survey Miscellaneous Publication 88-1, p. 21-26. Oviatt, C.G., and McCoy, W.D., 1992, Early Wiscon- sin lakes and glaciers in the Great Basin, U.S.A., in: Clark, P.U. and Lee, P.D., editors, The last in- terglacial-glacial transition in North America: Ge- ological Society of America Special Paper 270, p. 279-288. Oviatt, C.G., McCoy, W.D. and Nash, W.P. 1994, Se- quence stratigraphy of lacustrine deposits: A Qua- ternary example fromthe Bonneville basin, Utah: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 106, p. 133-144. Oviatt, C.G., McCoy, W.D. and Reider, R.G., 1987, Evidence for a shallow early or middle Wisconsin lake in the Bonneville basin: Quaternary Re- search, v. 27, p. 248–262. Oviatt, C.G., and Nash, W.P., 1989, Late Pleistocene volcanic ash and eruptions in the Bonneville ba- sin, Utah: Geological Society of America Bulle- tin, v. 101, p.292-303. Oviatt, C.G., Thompson, R.S., Kaufman, D.S., Bright, J., and Forester, R.M., 1999, Reinterpretation of the Burmester core, Bonneville basin, Utah: Qua- ternary Research, v. 52, p. 180-184. Pederson, J.L., Janecke, S.U. Reheis, M.C., Kaufman, D.F., and Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 2016, The Bear River’s history and diversion: Constraints, unsolved prob- lems, and implications for Lake Bonneville’s rec- ord, in: Oviatt, C.G., and Shroder, J.F., editors, Lake Bonneville: A Scientific Update: Develop- ments in Earth Science Processes 20, Elsevier, Amsterdam, p. 28-59. Pederson J.L., Rittenour, T.M., Jänecke, S.U., and Oaks, R.Q., Jr., 2018, The Bear River’s diversion, the cutting of Oneida Narrows at 55-50 ka, and re- lations to the Lake Bonneville record; Utah Geo- logical Survey Symposium on Lake Bonneville, 3 -4 October, 2018. Rees-Jones, J., 1995. Optical dating of young sedi- ments using fine-grain quartz. Ancient TL, v. 13, p. 9-14. Robison, R.M., 1986, The surficial geology and neo- tectonics of Hansel Valley, Box Elder County, Utah: M.S. thesis (unpublished), Utah State Uni- versity, Logan, Utah, 120 p. Robison, R.M., and McCalpin, J.P., 1987, Surficial geology of Hansel Valley, Box Elder County, in: Kopp, R.S. and Cohenour, R.E., editors, Cenozoic geology of western Utah — Sites for precious metal and hydrocarbon accumulations: Utah Geo- logical Association Publication 16, p. 335-350. Robinson, J.M., 1999, Chemical and hydrostrati- graphic characterization of ground water and sur- face water interaction in Cache Valley, Utah: M.S. thesis (unpublished), Utah State University, Logan, Utah, 172 p. Scott, W.E., 1988, Deposits of the last two deep-lake cycles at Point of the Mountain, Utah, in: Ma- https://doi:%2010.1130/abs/2020RM-346804 https://doi:%2010.1130/abs/2020RM-346804 https://doi.org/10.31711/giw.v7.pp301-320 https://doi.org/10.31711/giw.v7.pp301-320 24 R.Q. Oaks, Jr., S.U. Jänecke, T.M. Rittenour, T.L. Erickson, and M.S. Nelson Implications and Hydrographs for 2 Pre-Bonneville Pluvial Lakes chette, M.N., editor, In the footsteps of G.K. Gil- bert — Lake Bonneville and neotectonics of the eastern Basin and Range Province: Geological So- ciety of America Guidebook for field trip 12, the Geological Society of America 100th annual meeting, Denver, Colorado: Utah Geological and Mineral Survey Miscellaneous Publication 88-1, p. 86-88. Scott, W.E, Machette, M.N., Shroba, R.R., and McCoy, W.D., 1982, Guidebook for the 1982 Friends of the Pleistocene Rocky Mountain Cell, Field Trip to Central Utah: modified from U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports 82-845 and 82-850, 100 p. Scott, W.E., McCoy, W.D., Shroba, R.R., and Rubin, M., 1983, Reinterpretation of the last two cycles of Lake Bonneville, western United States: Qua- ternary Research, v. 20, p. 261-285. Thomas, K., Oaks, R.Q., Jr., Inkenbrandt, P., Sabbah, W., and Lowe, M., 2011, Cache Valley principal aquifer storage and recovery, site assessment: Phase 1: Utah Geological Survey, Open-File Re- port 579, 34 p., appendices 23 p. Utley, B.L., 2017, The Dynamic relationship between the Bear River, Quaternary basaltic center, normal faults, and the resulting rearrangement of rivers in the northeast edge of the Great Basin, southeast Idaho: M.S. Thesis (unpublished), Utah State Uni- versity, Logan, Utah, 78 p. Williams, S.K., 1994, Late Cenozoic tephrochronolgy of deep sediment cores from the Bonneville basin, northwest Utah: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 106, p. 1517-1530. Williams, J.S., 1948, Geology of the Paleozoic rocks, Logan Quadrangle, Utah: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 59, p. 1121-1164. Williams, J.S., 1958, Geologic Atlas of Utah, Cache County: Utah Geological and Mineral Survey Bulletin 64, 98 p. Williams, J.S., 1962, Lake Bonneville — Geology of southern Cache Valley, Utah: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 257-C, 152 p. A-1 Appendix 1. Optically Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) and Infrared Stimulated Luminescence (IRSL) age-date information, Newton Hill Pit, SE Hyde Park, and NE Millville, Cache County, Utah, March 2023. USU‐  Sample  Number    Depth  (m)  Number of  aliquots1  Dose  rate  (Gy/ka)  DE 2 ±  2σ         (Gy)  Age3  ±  2σ (ka)  In‐situ    H2O  (%)3  Grain  size  (µm)  K (%)4  Rb  (ppm)4  Th  (ppm)4  U  (ppm)4  Cosmic  (Gy/ka)  OSL/  IRSL5  859    16.2    22 (57)  1.76  ± 0.07  27.11  ± 2.17  15.42  ± 1.39  5.9  (15%)  90‐150  1.14  ±0.03  52.0  ±2.1  6.2  ±0.6  1.7  ±0.1  0.05  ±0.01  OSL    3243    1  22 (30)  0.80  ± 0.04 6  16.74  ± 1.92  20.98  ± 3.04  1.81  150‐  250  0.59 ±0.01  0.26 ±0.01  0.51  ±0.01  15.0 ±0.15  5.9 ±0.06  11.7  ±0.12  1.76 ±0.2  0.67 ±0.07  1.32  ±0.1  1.0 ±0.1  0.7 ±0.04  1.0  ±0.1  0.25  ±0.02  OSL  1082  35.1  11 (42)  2.17  ± 0.09  46,31 ±  12.75 4  21.35  ± 3.48  7.4  150‐  250  1.48  ±0.04  66.5  ±2.7  8.8  ±0.8  1.9  ±0.1  0.02  ±0.00  OSL  854  11.3  24 (37)  2.98  ± 0.12  64.72  ± 9.88 4  21.72  ± 2.78  14.4  90‐150  1.91  ±0.05  97.2  ±3.9  12.3  ±1.1  2.4  ±0.2  0.08  ±0.01  OSL  855  21.6  24 (49)  3.90  ± 0.16  153.29 ±  15.01  39.28  ± 3.72  10.2  63‐150  2.41  ±0.06  119.5  ±4.8  14.6  ±1.3  3.4  ±0.2  0.04  ±0.00  OSL  1084  3.0  13 (32)  2.74  ± 0.11  146.65 ±  19.32  53.51  ± 6.44  12.7  75‐150  1.72  ±0.04  74.3  ±3.0  10.5  ±1.0  1.8  ±0.1  0.19  ±0.02  OSL  856  24.7  20 (42)  1.77  ± 0.07  118.71  ± 8.36  66.82  ± 5.94  1.9  125‐  250  1.03  ±0.03  40.9  ±1.6  6.8   ±0.6  1.9  ±0.1  0.03  ±0.00  OSL  858  24.7  16 (57)  1.56  ± 0.06  92.17  ± 9.47  67.70  ± 6.46  3.2  150‐  250  1.27  ±0.03  34.7  ±1.4  4.4  ±0.4  1.1  ±0.1  0.03  ±0.00  OSL  2895  2.8  16 (29)  1.22  ± 0.05  173.72  ± 14.76  142.8  ± 13.1  ‐  150‐  250  0.69  ±0.02  24.9  ±1.0  3.5  ±0.3  1.2  ±0.1  0.19  ±0.02  OSL  1083  38.1  15 (34)  1.14  ± 0.05  164.12  ± 19.32  144.3  ± 14.5  3.3  150‐  250  0.85  ±0.02  29.7  ±1.2  3.9  ±0.4  0.9  ±0.1  0.02  ±0.00  OSL  A-2 USU‐  Sample  Number    Depth  (m)  Number of  aliquots1  Dose  rate  (Gy/ka)  DE 2 ±  2σ         (Gy)  Age3  ±  2σ (ka)  In‐situ    H2O  (%)3  Grain  size  (µm)  K (%)4  Rb  (ppm)4  Th  (ppm)4  U  (ppm)4  Cosmic  (Gy/ka)  OSL/  IRSL5  3202  59.4  19 (34)  1.39  ± 0.06 7  208.47  ± 31.80  150.0  ± 25.9  7.6  63‐250  1.09  ±0.03  1.05  ±0.03  0.43  ±0.01  49.0  ±2.0  31.4  ±1.3  13.4  ±0.5  5.8  ±0.6  5.27  ±0.5  1.81  ±0.2  1.3  ±0.1  1.1  ±0.1  0.7  ±0.1  0.01  ±0.00  OSL  2490  32.0  15 (17)  2.29  ± 0.10 8,9  234.56  ± 25.82  155.6  ± 21.4  3.8  125‐  250  0.73  ±0.02  1.06  ±0.03  23.6  ±0.9  25.2  ±1.0  4.0  ±0.4  3.6  ±0.3  1.0  ±0.1  1.0  ±0.1  0.02  ±0.00  IRSL  857  13.4  20 (63)  0.94  ± 0.04  152.56  ± 19.30  161.5  ± 16.8  3.7  90‐250  0.66  ±0.02  22.0  ±0.9  2.6  ±0.2  0.6  ±0.1  0.07  ±0.01  OSL  2491  38.7  23 (36)  1.13  ± 0.05  191.02  ± 28.12  169.4  ± 28.6  3.8  125‐  250  0.74  ±0.02  19.6  ±0.8  4.0  ±0.4  1.0  ±0.1  0.01  ±0.00  OSL  1 Number of aliquots used in age calculation and number of aliquots analyzed in parentheses.  2 Equivalent dose (DE) calculated using the Central Age Model (CAM) of Galbraith and Roberts (2012), unless otherwise noted.  3 Assumed 10±3% for moisture content over burial history for in‐situ values <10%, excluding USU‐859.  4 Radioelemental concentrations determined using ICP‐MS and ICP‐AES techniques; dose rate is derived from concentrations by conversion factors from Guérin  et al. (2011).  5 OSL age analysis using the single‐aliquot regenerative‐dose procedure of Murray and Wintle (2000) on 1‐2mm small‐aliquots of quartz sand. IRSL age analysis  using the two‐temperature step (50°C, 225°C) pIR IRSL protocol of Buylaert et al. (2009) on 1‐2 mm small‐aliquots of potassium‐rich feldspar. IRSL age on  each aliquot corrected for fading following the method by Auclair et al.  6 Grain‐size based internal beta dose rate determined assuming 12.5% K and 400ppm Rb using Mejdahl (1979). Alpha contribution to IRSL dose rate determined  using an efficiency factor, or ‘a‐value’, of 0.09±0.01 after Rees‐Jones (1995).  7 Dose rate includes weighted average of radioelemental chemistry based on sand fraction (top value, 35%) and gravel fraction (bottom value, 65%). A-3 Appendix 2. Data for hydrographs. See Appendix 3 for AAR correlations supporting ~417 ka age for Qpp (Oviatt and others, 1999). A-4 Appendix 3. Amino-acid-racemization data interpolated betwen known ages of ashes, chrons and 14C and TL data in the Bonneville basin prior to our study. See Appendix 4 for data. A-5 Appendix 4. Sources for original AAR data used for Appendices 2 and 3. Kaufman and others (2001), West Side Canal; Thatcher Valley ID (Qmc); and Little Valley pit Unit  Sample  Fossils  (#  of  samples)  Racemization  (D/L) Table 5  (AIle/Ile)  14C age ka  Calibrated  Table 2  TL age ka 8 hr UV  Table 4  IRSL age ka 3+ hr  sun Table 4  Qlb  K‐1 (#6)  C (8)  Li (8)  0.202+0.009  0.154+0.014  14.5+0.4 a  12.2+1.3  12.0+1.2  Qlb  K‐2 (#5)  H (8)  Li (13)  0.184+0.011  0.221+0.016  ~24 b  19+2  23+2  Qlb  (?)  (#4)        63.0+6.0  25.4+3.6  32.4+3.1  (16 hr sun)  Qcd  (#3)      ~43 c      Qcd  K‐3 (#2)  C (14)  Li (9)  0.254+0.014  0.235+0.014    55.6+5.2  59.3+5.2  Qcd  K‐4 (#1)          59.0+5.5  Qmc  K‐5  C (12)  0.347+0.136  1.5 m above  St Helens ash  ~110 ka  Qlb  K‐6 (LV)  C (12)  0.237+0.015  20.2+0.3 d      Qlv  K‐7 (LV)  C (23)  0.414+0.021        a Fluminicola sp.  b Limnocythere spp.   c Heliosoma sp.  d Arenicola sp.  e Figure 5; interpolation based on Bouchard and others (1998) in Gem Valley near Thatcher ID  Oviatt and others (1999), Burmester core   Oviatt and others (1994b), Leamington Canyon Unit  Sample  Fossils  (#  of  samples)  Racemization  (D/L)  (Alle/Ile)  Ages in ka and basis  Qlb  O‐5  A (11)  0.16+0.03  14 ages between 14 & 21 (their Table 1)  Qlb  O‐6  L (7)  0.12+0.02    Qlv  O‐7  A (4)  0.40+0.06  230Th >90 ka & ~140 ka (their Table 1)  Unit  Sample  Fossils  (#  of  samples)  Racemization  (D/L)  (Alle/Ile)  Ages in ka and basis  Qlb  O‐1  C, Li (5)  0.25+0.01  ~20; numerous 14C ages  Qlv  O‐2  C, Li (52)  0.35+0.03  ~150+20; Scott and others (1983); 230Th & extrapolation from  Ca accumulation rate  Qpp  O‐3  C, Li (15)  0.48+0.02  ~417+55; Interpolation between Qlv& QlcB  QlcB  O‐4  C, Li (15)  0.55+0.02  ~620; below ~602 Lava Creek B ash, above ~760 Brunhes Chron  base  A-6 Oviatt and others (1987), West Side and Hammond Canals below Cutler Dam Unit  Sample  Fossils Racemization (# of samples) (D/L) (Alle/Ile)  Qlb f  O‐8  L  0.11+0.03  S  0.12+0.01  A  0.15+0.03  Qlb  O‐9 (#3, 5)  L (1)  0.06    S (1)  0.011  A (5)  0.10+0.005  Qcd  O‐10 (#5, 6)  L (2)  0.12+0.01      S (3)  0.15+0.01      H (3)  0.11+0.01           V (3)      0.14+0.01  Qlv f  O‐11  L  0.27+0.03    A  0.32+0.03  f Average for Bonneville basin from McCoy (1981) and this paper  Scott and others (1983) Cache Valley (Table 2) Unit  Sample  Location  Fossils Racemization (# of samples) (D/L) (Alle/Ile)  Qlb  S‐1 g  R  L (?)  0.08+0.01  Qlb  S‐2  R  L (?)  0.14+0.00  Qlb  S‐3  SM  L (1)  0.11  Qlb  S‐4  SM  A (1)  0.14  Qlv  S‐5 g  R  L (?)  0.24+0.01  Qlv  S‐6 g  R  A (?)  0.42+0.06  Qlv  S‐7  SM  A (?)  0.33+0.01  R = Ramsbottom pit; SM = Smart Mountain  Scott and others (1983) Bonneville Basin and Cache Valley, combined averages (Table 1) Locations: B, BC, G, JN, K, LC, LV, MC, MO, MU, OR, P, R, SM, W (See Appendix 3) Unit  Sample  Fossils Racemization (# of samples) (D/L) (Alle/Ile)  Qlb  S‐8  L (50) 0.11+0.03  Qlb  S‐9  A (35) 0.15+0.04  Qlb  S‐10 gh  L (33) 0.15+0.04  Qlb  S‐11 gh  A (28) 0.19+0.04  Qlv  S‐12     L (2)  0.30+0.02  Qlv  S‐13  A (13) 0.34+0.03  Qlv  S‐14 gh  L (10) 0.33+0.08  Qlv  S‐15 gh  A (28) 0.44+0.06  g 1980 preparation differed from the other samples and resulted in higher values  h  Table 5 and page 280: Assumed constant rate of addition of calcium to Promontory paleosol based on rate in  post‐Qlb soils = 70 ka to 120 ka plus 20 ka for burial by Qlb = 90 ka to 140 ka for top of Qlv.  230Th Qlv age:  > 105  ka from Kaufman and Broecker (1965, p. 4035). Oviatt and others (1999) assumed ~150+20 ka for average age of  Qlv (see above).  Scott and others (1988) Unit  Sample  Location  Fossils Racemization (# of samples) (D/L) (Alle/Ile)  Qlv  S‐16  G  A (?)  0.47+0.02  A-7 McCoy (1981; 1987) Unit  Sample  Location  # of  sample s  Fossils Racemization  (D/L) (Alle/Ile)  Qlb  M‐1  JV, LC, LV, M, P, SM, TM, U  L (22)  0.11+0.01  Qlb  M‐2  JV, LC, LV, M, SM  A (190  0.16+0.01  Qlb  M‐3  LC  S (2)  0.14+0.02  Qlb  M‐4 g  B, F, JN, L, O, P, PC, R, S, T  L (12)  0.15+0.02  Qlb  M‐5 g  B, H, JN, K, LC, LV, O, P, S, T  A (12)  0.19+0.02  Qlb  M‐6  S  V (3)  0.15+0.00  Qlv  M‐7  B, LV, SM  A (13)  0.32+0.03  Qlv  M‐7  SM  A (3)  0.33+0.01  Qlv  M‐8 g  G, JN, K, LV, R  L (10)  0.36+0.04  Qlv  M‐8 g  R  L (2)  0.25+0.01  Qlv  M‐9 g  G, JN, K, LV, R, W  A (28)  0.43+0.02  Qlv  M‐9 g  R  A (2)  0.42+0.02  Qlv  M‐10  LV  L (2)  0.29+0.07  Qpp  M‐11  LV  A (22)  0.42+0.06  Qpp  M‐12 g  LV  A (12)  0.55+0.05  Qpp  M‐13  LV  O (1)  0.58+0.05  QlcB  M‐14 g  LV  L? (2)  0.81+0.04  QlcB  M‐15 g  JN  P (5)  0.64+0.07  Correlations of matched samples for same fossils and same author(s) in Appendix 3. Color  Qlb  Qcd  Qmc  Qlv  Qpp  QlcB  unused  Unmatched  Green  K1Li  K3Li          K2Li  K2H  Green  K1C  K3C  K5C  K7C      K6C    Yellow  O9L  O10 L  O11L        O8L    Yellow  O5A  O7A              Yellow  O8A    O11A        O9A    Yellow  O9S  O10 S              Yellow  O1C, Li      O2C,Li  O3C,Li  O4C,Li      Red  S1(R)L      S5(R)L  S2(R) L      S3(SM)L  Red  S4(SM)A      S7(SM)A          Red  SSL      S14L          Red  S9A      S13A      S11 A  S6(R)A  Red  S10L      S12L          Red  S11A      S15A      S16 A    Blue  M1L      M19L        M13O M15P  Blue  M2A      M7A  M11A      M34S M6V  Blue  M4L      M8L    M14L?    M8(R)L  Blue  M5A      M9A  M12A      M7(SM)A  A-8 Appendix 5. Shoreline Altitudes of Lake Cycles in Main Bonneville Basin Compared to Coeval Shorelines in Cache Valley. Altitudes of Samples for These Lakes are Uncorrected for Isostatic Rebound. Main  Bonneville  Basin  Cache  Valley  Bay  Lake  Cycle  Location;  Source  Age  in ka  Shoreline  Altitude  Location; Source  Age in ka  Shoreline Altitude  Altitude  Difference in  Cache  Valley  Little  Valley  Point of Mountain  Scott and others,  1988  ~124  ~4954'  ~1510 m  Hyde Park cut wall  ~142.8  >4889'  >1490 m  < ‐65'  < ‐20 m  Little Valley  Big Cottonwood  Canyon, Scott and  others, 1983  ~175  ~4960'  ~1512 m  Newton Hill Pit  ~144.3  ~169.4  >4865'  >1483 m  < ‐95'  < ‐29 m  Little Valley?  Alpine under  Promontory  Geosol in Little  Valley Pit  Morrison,  1965b, 1966  Uncertain,  probably  Little  Valley  ~4986'  ~1519 m'  Millville Eroded  Delta Between  Bonneville  Highstand and  Provo Delta;  includes Muley Hill  Unknown;  might be  Little Valley  ~4975'  ~1516 m  ~ ‐11'  ~ ‐3 m  Hansel  Valley  West Gully;  Robison &  McCalpin, 1987  ~82  ~76  ~4400'  ~1341 m  Newton Hill Pit  None  None at pit level  None  Cutler Dam  Westside Canal;  Kaufman and  others, 1971  ~59.4  ~4396'  ~1340 m  Newton Hill Pit  ~66.82  ~67.70  ~4733' [4757']  ~1443 m [1450 m]  + 337' [361']  + 103 m [110 m]  Early  Bonneville  Oviatt, 2015 Data  Oviatt, 2020  Curve  ~21  ~4954'  ~1510 m  Muley Hill, Millville  ~20.98  ~5085'  ~1549 m  ~+131'  ~+40 m