Hull Geological Society

 

 

Obituaries
Membership
Publications
Home
Local Geology
Next Meeting
Contact us

 

Mike Horne FGS

Unfinished Works

This is unfinished work that has not been edited or peer reviewed by the Society.

Insights and queries regarding East Yorkshire Geology

A work in progress

updated 11th November 2022

Over the years whilst studying the geology of East Yorkshire there have been occasions when the “penny dropped” and an aspect of the geology became clear. Sometimes it is an insight and sometimes it is a question that I wish to solve. Here I list some of these in a crude stratigraphic order. Some of these insights may not be correct and it may not be possible to prove. They are included here to try to spark a debate. Please feel free to send in your thoughts on these matters and if you wish have them published on a discussion page on this website.

Carboniferous

On a Hull Geological Society field trip to Derbyshire I realised that the bands of chert in Carboniferous Limestone were very similar to the tabular flints in the Chalk, the rock is just a different colour!

I do not know enough about the really deep geology under East Yorkshire to comment on the controversy about fracking the Bowland Shales for gas.

Jurassic

Jurassic charcoal – the black fossil wood that can be seen in the Middle Jurassic sandstones of north Yorkshire (Deltaic Sandstone. Estuarine Series &c.) is likely to be fossilised charcoal from forest fires that has been washed into the rivers and deposited on the meanders. Sometimes pieces exhibit that crazed pattern that you can see on modern burnt wood, occasionally with the pitted bits infilled by a mineral.

Upper Cretaceous

Grey Bed. I really do not like the name Totternhoe Stone being used for the Grey Bed in the Cenomanian Chalk of the Northern Province. Firstly we are a long way away from Totternhoe. But more importantly, though I have never seen the Torrernhoe Stone myself, I have been told that it is very different deposit – thicker, a different texture and occurring in a localised trough (John Catt and Mick Oates).

The Market Weighton Structure

There is a density anomaly beneath the Market Weighton Area, the density of the rocks is slightly less than average. It has been assumed that there is a granite mass at depth, but it could also be a grabben or salt dome. This means that a structure running east-west has affected the deposition of rocks to the north and south. At Rifle Butts SSSI the effects on most of the Jurassic and Early Cretaceous is most obvious (Horne & Dutton 2021). In the area around Rifle Butts there was either an island at the time or more probably any shallow water deposits have been removed by erosion. The thickness of the rocks thickens to the north and south.

At times the types of rocks being deposited are quite different. For example, to the south in Middle Jurassic times there were shallow marine oolitic limestones and sandstones being deposited whereas to the north there we freshwater sands being deposited by meandering rivers and deltas, and dinosaurs wandered around. In the Early Cretaceous to the north the deeper marine Speeton Clay was being deposited and to the south shallow marine sandstones, ironstones and clays of similar age are to be found in Lincolnshire.

The Market Weighton Structure continued to affect the rest of the Cretaceous deposits, but less noticeably. In the Aptian there is the Carstone of Lincolnshire, it is not present at Rifle Butts (or perhaps is represented by small Lydian pebbles in the base of the Red Chalk Formation) to the north there are the A Beds of the Speeton Clay.

The Red Chalk is a few metres thick in Middlegate Quarry in north Lincolnshire, less than a metre thick at Rifle Butts SSSI and well over 10 metres thick at Buckton cliffs. The age of the base of the Red Chalk Formation probably varies across the region. The presences of stromatolites at Rifle Butts SSSI indicates that the water was very shallow there at one time. Please note that the reddish pink colouration at Buckton continues from the Albian into the earliest Cenomanian.

The thickness of the Cenomanian Ferriby Formation varies. It is almost as if true chalk depositional conditions have not yet been established. There is are nodular beds and hardgrounds. The nature and thickness of the Black Band Member varies. There are multiple black shales at some sites. The Turonian Welton Formation seems to be consistent in its stratigraphy and thickness in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. There does seem to be some evidence that the Chalk is thicker to the north in subsequent stages, implying that there was a subsiding basin to the north other the Market Weighton Structure. There are sedimentary structures that look like sub-marine slides at Selwicks Bay and the stratigraphy of the Marsupites Zone at Beverley Queensgate Quarry and the coastal sections does not really match up. The younger Chalks are less easy to compare as they only have coastal exposures.

Tertiary

Local geologists have searched for traces of the Tertiary in East Yorkshire for a long time. Robert Mortimer published a geological map of the area around Fimber in 1886 that shows Eocene and Oligocene deposits (a copy is on display in the Hull and East Riding Museum). J W Stather was fascinated by the quartzite pebbles of the Wolds. I think that the orange coloured silty sands that occur in some joints in the Chalk might be pre-Quaternary.

Some of the dry valleys probably follow Tertiary faults in the Chalk, such as the Kiplingcotes Spillway, the Humber Gap (I know it is not dry now) and the Great Wold Valley.

There is a very coarse orange sandstone that occurs as an erratic ion the Holderness coast that contains post-Mesozoic microfossils. Also there are thin streaks of a pale buff clay that can be in the tils occasionally that contains post-Mesozoic microfossils.

Quaternary

“Boulder Clay”. I like to still use the term Boulder Clay because it does what it says on the tin. Yes, I know that it is not just boulders (clasts over 256mm in diameter) and clay (sediment 2 micrometres and smaller) and it could be also called “pebble silt”, but it does get the concept of a diamict across to the public without too much explanation.

The Ice Age Misconception:

For a long time my understanding of the “ice Age” was that glaciers formed in valleys to the north, the ice plucked fragments of rock from the valley walls and ground the rocks of the valley floor to form clay-like flour. These glaciers met to form an ice sheet one or two kilometres thick that travelled at a “glacially” slow pace with the rock fragments and flour within it. The ice sheet then melted dumping the rock fragments and flour as the Boulder Clay we can see in Holderness.

Like most geology, once you start to study it in detail in the field the truth turns out to be much more complex that the simple textbook explanations. How do we explain the distribution of the glacial erratics and why are they rounded rather than angular rock fragments? How do some delicate fossils and soft sediments inclusions survive the glacial transportation? Why are there distinct layers in the sediments? How do we explain the folding and faulting that can be seen in the rafts?

It is very tempting to draw straight lines on a map to show the origin of the erratics and then to think that was their direction of travel during the (single or last) “ice age”. I think that the glaciers did not travel in straight lines and they made several journeys. So an erratic may well have been moved and deposited several times during the Ice Ages, just like we often have to change trains to reach our intended destinations.

It is also tempting to assume that the erratics came from present day inland exposures, for example Hildoceras from Whitby and Speeton Clay from Speeton in a straight line. Yet there are so many Speeton Clay fossils to be seen that the present exposures do not seem to be big enough to be the simple single source. And there are no exposures of Chalk containing black flints; the Yorkshire flints are grey and brittle. The black flints must come from younger Chalk that was previously exposed in the bed of the North Sea when the area was dry land. And if that is the case then the North Sea could very well be the source of the Speeton Clay material and most of the Mesozoic erratics, and why not some Tertiary erratics? This would also explain why some erratics are not evenly distributed throughout Holderness.

Some results from the Flamborough Quaternary Research Group, with the help of Mark Bateman, imply that the Last Glacial Maximum in our region was relatively quite brief and that during that period the ice travelled to North Norfolk to deposit a similar diamict. Could it be that a decaying ice sheet actually speeds up rather than simply dumping its load of boulders and clay where it is. How many times have seen warnings of a skid hazard “mud on road” signs. Wet mud is slippery so just imagine a large wet ice cube moving over it!

When we start to log and measure the sediments in the cliffs of Holderness we realise that there is a lot of lateral variation and structural geology. There are beds of gravels and thinly layered beds. There are thrust planes, some of which may be due to rotational slumping, but even then these could be exploiting an original weakness in the deposits. There are complex folds and faults that are evident in exposures of Chalk rafts and the red band. Sometimes directional indicators imply that the glacier was travelling in the wrong direction. This all points towards the conclusion that the glacier was not simply carrying the sediment clasts but it was pushing sediment around and was this sediment previous diamicts and the marine, estuarine and freshwater sediments from what is now the North Sea. Please remember that the ancient Chalk cliff line ran from Bridlington to Hessle via Driffield, Beverley and Cottingham: Holderness was part of the North Sea!

Dry Valleys in the Chalk. The Yorkshire Chalk although it is tough is pretty porous allowing water to drain through its joints. So I could not understand why there are valleys in the Wolds. On day I realised that during the ice ages the water in the Chalk would have frozen, so the rock was no longer porous.

Coastal erosion and climate change.

Holderness in 2500 CE

The cliffs of Holderness are made of unconsolidated boulder clay. The clays will dry up and crack during periods of drought. When wet the swell and can become fluid in places. They will undergo a process of rotational slumping, which if it is allowed to continue will settle to give a stable slope that will become vegetated. However the sea will erode the foot of the rotational slump, making it unstable and causing it to slump further, sometimes lubricated in f the ground is saturated. Eventually another slump will form behind and the process continues.  To prevent this the waves have to be encouraged to break before they reach the base of the cliff at high tide to reduce their energy or ideally not reach the base of the cliff at all because the beach is high. That is why groynes are used to trap the beach material and allow it to build up. However sea level rise due to global warming will counteract this. I predict that the rate of coastal erosion will probably increase. Once the sea breaks through the low cliffs in the Barmston area it will flood the Hull Valley and the Hornsea-Withernsea-Easington island will face erosion from all directions.

 Anthropogenic Places?

Hornsea Mere. It is generally agreed that the meres of Holderness originated as kettle holes, where a large block of ice remained in the boulder clay and as it melted left a depression. However Hornsea Mere just seems too big for me – could there have gravel or peat extraction there?

Filey Brigg. If you go to Filey Brigg you will have noticed large blocks of the sandy limestone that have beautiful trace fossils on them. The blocks are stacked up in an imbricated fashion. I have seen this pictured in a geography text book as being a natural feature caused by the prevailing current in the North Sea. I have noticed that on the northern side of the headland the exposures look very square. I wonder if this was actually a quarry with blocks of the tough stone being removed for use (perhaps for Scarborough Harbour walls) and the softer rock being stacked to one side because it was not wanted (like the Grey Bed is discarded in Middlegate Quarry)?

 

You are welcome to send me your thoughts and comments, and, if you wish, I will publish them.

You might like to compare this paper with G W Lamplugh’s 1898 Open Questions lecture.

Copyright - Hull Geological Society 2022

Registered Educational Charity No. 229147

Home