Comments on: Claremont Chert, close up

By: Johnny Reb

Johnny Reb — Sat, 03 May 2008 05:35:10 +0000

I’m sure it is destroyed, but I still think it’s very interesting to know where the actual location is. Also, I dont know if the eastern portal of it would even be accessible.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:21:33 +0000

Johnny, I understand that the west side of the tunnel is destroyed beyond repair for safety reasons, but that the east end is somewhat intact, although inaccessible. But soon I’ll put something up about it.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 20:04:50 +0000

Thin section? Why, I’d need a thin-section machine; and if I could do that I’d need a microscope next, and then a lab, and there’d be no end to the trouble and expense. But I’ll bet that there’s plenty of original detail still in these rocks. The unit is mostly turned vertical, but with the shear confined to distinct joints every 5-10 centimeters there would be little disturbance in something like this hand specimen.

By: Johnny Reb

Johnny Reb — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:00:25 +0000

Sorry this is unrelated, but I wanted to make sure you saw it.

I would be really interested to see you talk about the geology and history of the spot where the “old tunnel” is/was above the caldecott tunnel. It’s at the junction between Skyline and Old Tunnel roads. As far as I can tell, the old tunnel appears gone. But, the location is very interesting, with an old flagpole, a sign for the “intercounty tunnel” and what look like some suggestive depressions in the land.

Love the blog. Keep it up!

By: Ken Clark

Ken Clark — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 13:19:08 +0000

Have you ever taken a thin section of it? some times the relict texture can be preserved, including microfossils.