Geological Fieldwork Techniques course 2002, 2005 , 2008 , 2011
tutor: Mike Horne FGS
for the Centre for Life Long Learning
Conclusions
Here is a list of the class achievements, conclusions and comments.
Achievements
Measuring the cliff section at Filey Brigg
Fieldwork at North and South Newbald - leading to the production of a geological map . Also, logging a local quarry with a new exposure (2002) - which revealed palaeo-karst structures in the top of the limestone.
Measuring the exposure at Skipsea Withow Mere - in 3 dimensions.(2002, 2008 and 2011) which led to a publication by Tracey Marsters.
2D recording of Boulder Clay (2005)
Conclusions
Doing fieldwork well takes longer than you expect!
Working in teams of three seems to be the most efficient method.
We have gathered a large amount of data to interpret - so the assessment will be changed in future to reflect this.
That it is possible for amateurs to carry out detailed fieldwork, with little previous experience and without the need for expensive equipment.
That it does require a certain amount of planning, time management and team coordination to get useful results.
That interpretation begins in the field. We have to decide how much detail we should include in the logging, whether we do it to the nearest mm, cm, 10 cm or metre. This will depend on our purpose and the amount of time we have (perhaps restricted by tide). The visit may be the first of many or a one off. Decisions have to be made about naming, description and the boundaries of geological evidence. It is better to record too much detail rather than too little - we do not have to use it all later, but it might save having to revisit the site.
Interpretation is also needed later when using the data - considerations about the raw data collected, what should be merged or ignored, etc.
But in spite of this it is possible to correlate one person's finished work with another's, or with published work.
By doing accurate logging or mapping ourselves we realise that all finished work is a mixture of accurate data and interpretation based on the evidence available at the time of the fieldwork. We can appreciate the difference between the data and the interpretation. We realise that the availability of the evidence changes with time as old exposures are lost, new ones appear and temporary exposures are a matter of luck!
Because of this amateurs can produce valuable information because they can revisit the area many times over a number of years whereas the professional's work is often one off and limited by time.
Also after you have made your own maps, logged sections and done other research you will look at other people's published maps and works in a completely different way!
Doing accurate fieldwork forces you to make notes in a methodical way, producing a record for the future and making you take notice of things you would have probably ignored.
If done properly your observations are as valid as any one else's.
In fact -- one has to consider the accuracy and standards of other people's work. When this fieldwork is carried out in groups each group is very likely to interpret the evidence differently -- for example at Filey the same bed could be described as a calcareous sandstone by one group and a sandy limestone by another! This becomes obvious when the student groups start to compare their data.
This provides the students the chance to reflect on standardisation and quality control. If there are differences noticed in the records of the same section recorded by different groups on the same day -- what does that say about published records?
Comments
Above all - fieldwork is fun and can be addictive! Members of the class revisited sites by themselves and wished to continue the projects started after the class ended for their own satisfaction.
"If we knew what we are doing there wouldn't be any need for research!!"
copyright Mike Horne - 2019
Hull Geological Society Home Page Geology Courses Homepage