In 1999, a group of senior geoscientists at the Hanford Nuclear Site, lead by Karl Fecht, published a 217-page geologic atlas on clastic dikes in the Pasco Basin of south-central Washington. It was meant to be a benchmark report for the ages, but fell flat for a number of reasons.
The format of the "atlas" is unlike most atlases. Instead of maps, it contains primarily bulleted text, photographs, tables, and diagrams formatted to a Powerpoint-like template. There are a total of 21 small maps, 19 of which cover the same area (Hanford Site and vicinity). Eleven maps show only point locations of the study sites. Two are reference maps and six present new syntheses. Recall, the volume is more than 200 pages in length.
Information in the report was compiled from geologic maps (Reidel and Fecht, 1994a, 1994b), various in-house and consultant reports, and the lead author's unpublished field notes. 83 locations were addressed, at least 15 of which occur on access-restricted land (no public access).
A typical sheeted clastic dike composed of sand and silt intrudes late Pleistocene Missoula Flood deposits at Latah Creek near Spokane, WA. Structures identical to this one are widespread along the route of Ice Age megafloods, especially in slackwater rhythmites. The dikes occur as far north as Hunters, WA and as far south as the central Willamette Valley, OR. Lewiston, ID and White Swan, WA appear to be the eastern and western limits on their distribution. No dikes are found east of the former ice dam location (Sandpoint, ID), in the Glacial Lake Missoula basin, or in sediments above local maximum stages (elevations) of Ice Age flooding.
Despite its confident title, the atlas does not actually tackle the question of clastic dike origin, a stated goal of the project. The report contains almost no data. In fact, it is unclear if any of the information resonated with other Hanford geoscientists following publication, much less with geologists from outside Hanford. Subsequent reports on dikes authored by Hanford researchers seem to have ignored its findings altogether. For example, it is unclear how the atlas overlaps, compliments, or contrasts with Murray et al. (2001) and Murray et al. (2007), which examined dikes at some of the same locations.
No technical editor is identified. Footnotes indicate early drafts received comments from 5 coauthors and 4 outside reviewers. None of the four reviewers had published previously on clastic dikes and would not be considered experts on the topic today. It appears to me Fecht wrote, assembled, and edited the entire thing himself. Or some intern did.
The atlas contains numerous photographs. Many are small, blurry, high contrast, or otherwise difficult to interpret. For example, Figures 3.3, 3.13, 4.7, 4.11, 4.12, 5.2, 5.11, 5.20, 5.25, 5.26, 5.29, 5.32, 6.5, and 7.7.
Terms used are often vague. For example, "random occurrence dikes", "multigenetic processes", "major erosional unconformity in the silt facies", "reference locations", "Hanford formation". At times, the author lingers over inconsequential phenomena such as "regular-shaped" vs. "irregular-shaped" polygonal networks and becomes mired in misguided attempts to classify the dikes by various and elaborate systems. The generous editor would consider most of the writing a rough draft.
The term "injection dikes" (title of report) was introduced 75 years earlier by Jenkins (1925) and "injection" was used by Allison (1941), Fryxell et al. (1965), and Beaulieu (1974), though none of these authors are given credit. Three papers on clastic dikes in south-central Washington (Cooley et al., 1996; Neill et al, 1997; Pogue, 1998), all published prior to the atlas were not cited, though they introduced new data, analysis, and contained some of the only actual measurements of dikes collected to date. Outsized deference is given to works by former Hanford colleagues throughout (Newcomb, 1962; Brown, 1968; Black, 1979; Burnham and Johnson, 2012, Appendix D).
If the dikes are merely curiosities, as some say, why spend 217 pages on them? If they are important to geology, why not conduct a proper study? Again, Fecht et al. contains almost no measurements.
The report concludes the dikes are "multigenetic" structures, an unsatisfying explanation that reflects a remarkable level of uncertainty given the lead author's 30-year career working on the surficial geology of the Pasco Basin, specifically the sediments that host clastic dikes.
In the end, Karl, Bruce, George and the rest of the team fail for two reasons.
First, debate over the origin of clastic dikes in Eastern Washington has remained active for nearly a century (Jenkins, 1925; Cooley, 2015). Yet debate is absent from articles written by Hanford geoscientists, including this one. For science to function, theories must be forwarded and critiqued by others. Readers must have the chance to see the evidence (in geology that means the outcrops), evaluate it, and respond. Authors must have the opportunity to address points of weakness raised by reviewers in order for their theories to be strengthened or abandoned. But Hanford authors have simply not engaged in the debate at all, which explains why "multigenetic" is their determined origin. Geology by committee, perhaps?
Second, lack of effort. It is mystifying how such a well-paid, well-supported federal geologist can spend his career working in flat terrain on Quaternary sediments exposed in large trenches and natural cuts located steps from his office door and not produce a robust, comprehensive, and original report on clastic dikes. Fecht et al. (1999) is a beautiful example of how not to do geoscience.
I've been investigating clastic dikes in Eastern Washington since 1995. The map above shows 488 locations I have personally examined and documented the presence/absence of dikes. Where dikes occur, I measure their widths and count their fill bands. Currently on my 8th field book of measurements.
The important questions with respect to clastic dikes in Eastern Washington is why, when, and how they formed where they did (i.e., what's the geologic trigger?). The dikes occur throughout a vast region and requirea dataset that reflects their distribution. I recognized this long ago and committed to doing the field work necessary. I do the hard yards. Not sure what's up with the guys from Richland.
Allison, I.S., 1941, Flint's fill hypothesis of origin of scabland , Journal of Geology, v. 49
Beaulieu, J.D., 1968, Geologic hazards of Hood River, Wasco, and Sherman Counties, OR, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Bulletin 91, p. 18
Black, R.F., 1979, Clastic dikes of the Pasco Basin, southeastern Washington, Rockwell-Hanford Operations Final Report, RHO-BWI-C-64
Braccini, E.; Boer, W.; Hurst, A.; Huuse, M.; Vigorito, M.; Templeton, G., 2008, Sand injectites, Oilfield Review 20, p. 34-49
Brown, R.E., 1968, A study of reported faulting in the Pasco Basin, Water and Land Resources Section, Environmental and Radiological Science Department Report #BNWL-662
Johnson, D.L.; Horwath Burnham, J.L., 2012, Appendix D in Introduction: overview of concepts, definitions, and principles of soil mound studies, in Horwath Burnham, J.L. and Johnson, D.L. (editors), Mima mounds: the case for polygenesis and bioturbation, Geological Society of America Special Paper 490, p. 1-19
Cooley, S.W.; Pidduck, B.K.; Pogue, K.R., 1996, Mechanism and timing of emplacement of clastic dikes in the Touchet Beds of the Walla Walla Valley, south-central Washington, Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 28, p. 57
Cooley, S.W., 2015, The curious clastic dikes of the Columbia Basin, in R.J. Carson, Many Waters: Natural history of the Walla Walla Valley and vicinity, Keokee Books, p. 90-91
Fecht, K.R; Bjornstad, B.N.; Horton, D.G.; Last, G.V.; Reidel, S.P; Lindsey, K.A., 1999, Clastic injection dikes of the Pasco Basin and Vicinity, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Restoration, Bechtell-Hanford Report BHI-01103
Fryxell et al. (1965) Ephrata to Pullman: Scabland tracts, loess, soils and human prehistory R. Fryxell; G.E. Neff; D.E. Trimble INQUA Field Conference Guidebook
Jenkins, O.P., 1925 Clastic dikes of eastern Washington and their geologic significance American Journal of Science 57, p. 234-246
Lupher, R.L., 1944, Clastic dikes of the Columbia Basin region, Washington and Oregon , Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 55
Murray, C.J.; Horton, D.G.; Ward, A.L.; Gee, G.W., 2001, Hydrogeologic influence of clastic dikes on vadose zone transport , Section 7.3.3, in T.M. Poston et al. (editors), Hanford Site environmental progress report for calendar year 2001, PNNL-13910
Murray et al., 2007, Influence of clastic dikes on vertical migration of contaminants at the Hanford Site , Vadose Zone Journal 6, p. 959-970
Newcomb, R.C., 1962, Hydraulic injection of clastic dikes in the Touchet Beds, Washington, Oregon & Idaho , Geological Society of the Oregon Country Newsletter 28, p. 70
Neill, A.R.; Leckey, E.H.; Pogue, K.R., 1997, Pleistocene dikes in Tertiary rocks: Downward emplacement of Touchet Bed clastic dikes into co-seismic fissures, south-central Washington, Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 29, p.55
Pogue, K.R., 1998, Earthquake-generated(?) structures in Missoula flood slackwater sediments (Touchet Beds) of southeastern Washington, Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 30, p. 398-399
Reidel, S.P.; Fecht, K. R., 1994a, Geologic map of the Priest Rapids 1: 100,000 quadrangle, WA: Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Open File Report 94-13
Reidel, S. P.; Fecht, K. R., 1994b, Geologic map of the Richland 1:100,000 quadrangle, WA: Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Open File Report 94-8
Russell, I.C., 1893, A geological reconnoissance in central Washington, U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 108