Discussion of Papers Published Prior to 1957 - Lineament Tectonics and Some Ore Districts of the Southwest (1958) (211, p. 1169)

David LeCount Evans (Consulting Petroleum and Mining Geologist, Wichita, Kans.)-—Not only E. B. Mayo but also W. C. Lacy, who apparently urged the preparation of this analysis, is to be commended. Regional thinking of this type is needed to assure future success in the never-ending search for new mineralized and petroliferous districts. As is usually the case, here is a regional study that will be read by the mining geologist alone. It is ironic that several of the trends established in this study have suggested themselves in northern mid-continent, detailed, and regional studies. These, where established, have offered new keys to petroleum exploration and have provided a possible basis for unraveling a number of broad generalities. The oil geologists, active in Colorado, Kansas, and Oklahoma, would find much food for thought in Mr. Mayo's projections. To be more specific: 1) The parallelism between E. B. Mayo's Texas Lineament and the Amarillo Uplift, the Wichita Complex and the Arbuckle Complex of the Texas Panhandle and Southern Oklahoma is viewed with interest and appears especially significant when compared with the similar northwest trend of the Central Kansas Uplift, a major trend of production. 2) Considering the various northeast zones of Fig. 2, and with particular reference to Mayo's C-C, the Jemez Zone is on direct line with one of several northeast-southwest controls which the present writer has been using with some success in Kansas subsurface correlations. Considering zones of shearing, with no apparent vertical displacement, but suggesting strike-slip movement, because of the staggered effect on other features which cross such trends, Mayo's philosophy presents regional possibilities for lines of weakness, considered to this time of only local significance. 3) And, finally, in an area as distant from the Southwest as central Kansas, the north-south trends of the Fiarport-Ruggles anticline, the Voshel-Hol-low Nikkel-Burrton structures, the Dayton to Stut-gart trend, the north, slightly east trend of the Ne-maha structural complex, and others all seem to approach the north-south alignments, a through f, of Mayo's Fig. 3. Mayo's employment of structural intersections to pinpoint crustal weakness, to localize igneous activity and its accompanying mineralization is not, perhaps, a new concept, but it is a 1958 model, produced by tools improved from the ever-increasing accumulation of geological observations. The use of intersecting trends in petroleum geology is not a new idea, since much production in earlier days was encountered via the straight line projections of established trends to centers of intersection. A tragedy in this age of specialization is that iron curtains have been raised between groups, all seeking raw materials, all acolytes at the altar of structural geology, but all smugly content in and protected by the ivory towers of petroleum geology, engineering geology, mining geology, and geophysics. Mayo presents basic ideas which can stimulate mid-continent structural thinking and, in the case of cen- tral Kansas. he provides a key to replace the broad and overworked simple monoclinal, sinkhole-dotted, Karst topography credo, which is not finding its share of new oil in a state where the declining discovery ratio is disconcerting. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists would do well to add E. B. Mayo to its list of Distinguished Lecturers. Evans B. Mayo (author's reply)—In reply to David LeCount Evans' comments, it is pleasing to learn that some of the elements discussed in my paper may interest petroleum geologists as well as mining geologists. This should not be surprising, however, because the lineaments make up the framework of the continent, and the oil-bearing sediments must reflect to varying degrees adjustments of basement blocks along their boundaries. A further possibility that petroleum geologists must have considered is that the slow escape of heat from buried lineaments and their intersections has aided the separation of oil from the sediments and started the migration into traps. Regarding the specific points listed by Evans, the following are suggested: 1) The branch of Texas Lineament marked 1' (Fig. 3) is thought to extend eastward through the Capitan Mts., New Mexico, through the long Tertiary dikes east of Roswell, and beyond via the Matador and Electra ranges of the Red River Uplift, Texas. Its further continuation might be the eastern flank of the Ouachita Fold Belt. The Amarillo-Wichita-Arbuckle zone of uplifts appears to continue east-southeastward the Spanish Peaks belt (3-5, Fig. 3). The northwest-trending Central Kansas Uplift would not belong to the above set, except insofar as the Central Kansas Uplift is traversed by west-northwest folds, possible continuations of the Uinta belt (5-5, Fig. 3). 2) The possible continuations into Kansas of the Jemez zone are new to me and are most welcome suggestions. 3) Most of the nearly north-south Kansan structures mentioned by Evans are unfamiliar to me, but the Nemaha Uplift itself appears to be part of a very pronounced structure traceable from the Cerralvo Fault Zone, south of the Rio Grande, through the Bend Arch, Texas, and the Nemaha Uplift, into the Pre-Cambrian of Minnesota (?). This nearly meridional zone is crossed and broken by the Rio Grande Embayment and by the Red River-Wichita Syntaxis. Petroleum geologists realize the economic importance of these features. Perhaps it is inevitable that some papers of general interest be buried in the journals of specialized groups. Moreover, papers dealing with regional, or lineament, tectonics and its applications to exploration for economic mineral deposits are as yet few in the American literature. The opportunity to advance this field is open to all those who are not ultra-conservative and who have a lively curiosity, plenty of patience, and not too many business restrictions. In conclusion, much appreciation is extended to D. L. Evans for his comments.