Search the Community

Is this a Bivalve or brachiopod? Seller lists it as both. Found near Somis California, no other information given

What the heck? Is this anything other than a weird formation/layering of various substances? It’s large, probably 8-10 inches from broad end to narrow tip and 3-4 inches thick. photo 1: from the “top side” photo 2: the side of the narrow end photo 3: the tip on the narrow end

California, beach find.

looks like a fish? but maybe i just got lucky? don't know how to differentiate, but even if it is a fish rock and not a fish fossil, ill still be happy with it! found on the beach in San Pedro CA.

I went out to the Marble Mountains with my brother recently and checked out the area to find trilobites. I’m a novice and this was my first fossil hunting trip, however, I couldn’t really get to the site due to nearby roads being closed off. Before I go back and hike to the site, what are some advice you guys can give for fossil hunting in general? More specific advice for a site like the Marble Mountains would be greatly appreciated! I recently bought tools and hope to get more into paleontology! Thanks

Hello! This is my first post. I'm happy to meet you all! I currently have a very modest fossil collection, but have been keeping my eyes peeled for some specimens that I was really excited about. I came across this fossil, which I was considering adding to my collection. It is described as a 200g fossil of a 60mm Anomalocaris appendage next to a small brachiopod. It was found in the Latham Shale in the Marble Mountains of California, and it's indicated that finding these is a very uncommon occurrence. I was wondering if anyone here might have insight as to if it's real, fake, or restored in any way. Thanks!

I found this bone on a beach in California. My questions are: 1. What is this bone and how old it is. 2. is the break that is fielded up with sedimentary rock was present in the original bone? If so, is it the way the bone is or it is a result of an injury? 3. Are the lines on the bone bite marks? it is around 6 by 6 cm. Thanks!

Seller says this Ammonite has a label saying it's from Topanga Canyon California. However the Topanga formation is Miocene and I am unsure if there are Mesozoic formations nearby. Seller couldn't give me a formation as it's from an old collection.

Hello everyone. Fairly new… just found these. Riverside County. Just trying to figure out what they are. They looked pretty interesting. Would anyone know what they are?

Lake Amador, California (If you need clearer photos just lmk)

I work at a college in Southern California. We've had a lot of donations recently to our science department and some of those donations include fossils. I was able to identify some of them, but there are a few that I am having some trouble with. Some of the other fossils that we received are: Sand dollars, clams, oysters, worm hole casts, a sea cow tooth, a shark tooth, crinoids, brachiopods, scallops, gastropods, and bryozoans. Very few of these fossils included where they were found. The two labels we received said that the sea cow/shark tooth were found in California, as well as some of the sand dollars. Aside from that, I do not know where the fossils were found or what rock layers they were found in. Below are pictures and descriptions of the seven fossils. The above pictures I believe are teeth. In the research that I have done, I think they might be crocodile or alligator teeth. The one on the left is slightly curved, but the one on the right is more straight. Both have four "layers"; a thin outer layer, a second (also thin) layer, a thicker third layer, and then a fourth layer that fills the middle. The surface is bumpy rather than smooth, which is unexpected in regards to teeth. The base (~1cm) is wider than the top (L: ~.5cm, R: ~1cm). Both are about ~2.5cm from base to top. The fossil on the left has a broken tip so it might be longer and more curved than it appears and the base is also broken on a diagonal. I have no real idea what to make of this fossil, but I am thinking that it might be a plant fossil. The top is ~1.5cm in width and the bottom is ~2mm in width. From top to bottom, the fossil is ~3cm. There is a ridge on both of the horizontal "limbs" as well as a half cm ridge starting at the slight dip at the top. What is visible of this fossil appears to be circular and ringed with smaller, inner rings and outer, larger rings. The diameter is ~1.5cm. A few of the other fossils that were donated were crinoids, so I was thinking this might be in the same realm as that, but it is so much larger than all of the crinoids that we were given. I am thinking that these might be clams because we were given an abundance of clams, but I am not certain. The one on the right has small, white crystals (possibly quartz) on the bottom of it. I tried to get a picture of the crystals, but they were far too small. I understand that this is super vague and might not be a lot to go on, but any help would be appreciated!

Hi all Please and thank, help needed,!i struggling to sort out my shark teeth collection. Can any ID this Bakersfield teeth that Doren gave to me. 1.2.3

These discolorations, perfectly flush with the rock surface, are in sandstone from the Matilija or Coldstone formation, I think. Some of the pattern suggests dendrites maybe, but perhaps it's organic in origin? About 8 cm long, 3 wide. Ventura County, CA. Thanks!

How Early Humans May Have Transformed L.A.’s Landscape Forever Science Friday, NPR, August 25, 2023 Uncovering Death by Fire 13,000 years ago Micheal Price, Sciences News, August 17, 2023 La Brea Tar Pits Reveal Clues to Mysterious Mass Extinction By Shana Hutchins, Futurity, August 18, 2023 The paywalled paper is: O’Keefe, F.R., Dunn, R.E., Weitzel, E.M., Waters, M.R., Martinez, L.N., Binder, W.J., Southon, J.R., Cohen, J.E., Meachen, J.A., DeSantis, L.R. and Kirby, M.E., 2023. Pre–Younger Dryas megafaunal extirpation at Rancho La Brea linked to fire-driven state shift. Science, 381(6659), p.eabo3594. Yours, Paul H.

Hi everyone! Pretty new to this forum but I’ve been fossil hunting for about 7 years now! Just wanted some help in this fossil identification that I found in Coalinga, California in the Central Valley! I usually find lots of fossilized bones, bivalves, oysters, and sand dollars- so I’m guessing it might be a sea creature? Or a bone? Or barnacle? I’m really not sure! Thank you ❤️❤️

I've been a lurker for a while. First time I've gotten the courage to post. Did I indeed find a shark's tooth, or are my teenagers right to patronize me? This was found on a beach in San Pedro, California.

New member, first time posting! This object was located a couple of winters ago in the foothills above Los Gatos, CA at about 700' MSL. A large oak tree had fallen over and in the rocks brought to the surface (from a depth of about 3') by the uprooted stump was what appeared to be some sort of a fossil jaw. The inner surface has cavities which very much look like the roots of teeth, especially molars. It reacted very strongly to a drop of dilute HCl acid. About 45 grams in weight. Other fossils found in this area are small "clam" shells, foraminifera, mineralized whale(?) bones, and once I found a shark tooth. Geology maps show this area is Miocene sedimentary but it's quite close to a boundary of Miocene/Oligocene sedimentary. I haven't a clue if this "jaw" is from a mammal, a fish, turtle, (???) or not a jaw at all. Very stout whatever it's from. Any ideas will be much appreciated. Regards, Paul

Hello everyone! I found this beautifully preserved imprint of a fish scale within the siltstone of the Cozy Dell Shale, Ventura County, CA. Middle Eocene. Wondering if there are any fish experts out here or how/if it is possible to narrow this down to any level of classification. thanks in advance!

I had the privilege of digging for seven hours on a parcel that was once part of Ernst Quarry, but had long been sold. Here are the best items that were found. There was more of either the same or broken, not shown. The matrix was extremely hard and difficult to extract, but the hard work was worth it. One of the Hooked Mako's has tiny 2d manganese dendrites that grew on it. One of my other favorites is a pathological Cow Shark. The 3 sections of the Ray Plate are rare for Sharktooth Hill. There are some interesting micro teeth as well.

A number of years back Tammy and I had a great day in the field digging for shark teeth at the Ernst Quarry in Bakersfield, CA. We were joined by longtime forum member Tony @ynot who drove down from northern CA to meet us. Those interested can read about that trip here: http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/60863-shark-tooth-hill-ernst-quarry-hunt-on-2016-01-22/ A number of the nicer loose teeth were wire-wrapped into necklace pendants and given away as presents and a few teeth still in the sandy matrix were prepped out for display (some of which are presently on display in an exhibit at the FLMNH display museum). The bulk of the rest of the interesting teeth are being donated to the FLMNH collection as the museum's collection was a bit deficient in STH material (a few larger teeth donated over 50 years ago). As these are going into the museum's collection I want to have good IDs on the specimens. The hooked Cosmopolitodus (Isurus) planus teeth are reasonably distinctive and I think I have a handle on at least the obvious curved uppers. The rest of them I am not certain of the proper ID and I'm hoping for some help from folks who are very familiar with this locality. I'm starting out with the larger white/mako teeth and then I'll be sorting through the smaller ones. If I have questionable teeth in some of the smaller ones I'll add additional photos. I've labeled all of the teeth with numbers and letters so that there will be no confusion in identifying which tooth we are discussing. Looking forward to getting these teeth sorted out and also learning a bit more about the shark fauna of a site that I've had the fun of collecting (if only once). Cheers. -Ken All of the teeth in image 1 look to be the Hooked-tooth White/Mako (Cosmopolitodus planus) and seem to be all from the upper right quadrant of the jaw. More help on these would be greatly appreciated: Thanks for looking. Cheers. -Ken

Found this several years ago at Sharktooth Hill in Bakersfield. Starting to go through some of the larger pieces I found. I’m thinking this might be a worn vertabra? Whale, dolphin? Maybe to worn for a definite ID

I found these three pieces on a beach in Mendocino County last week, and I've been trying to figure out what they are. The largest of three measures 46 mm long by 22 mm wide. I'm an entomologist by training, and do not have experience with fossils. I've shared these photos with a couple of friends who are knowledgeable about fish and marine biology, and one suggested that they might be opercular bones from fish, and another thought they might be parts of shells from Acus spp. bivalves. I would appreciate any information or even speculation about what these might be or how I can find out more about them. Thank you for your consideration. --Jamie

My wife and I just returned from a trip out west (western USA for our international friends) which featured a trip to the famous Miocene site near Bakersfield; Ernst Quarry or Sharktooth Hill, whichever name you prefer. As most of you know this site it well known for the rich fauna of sharks teeth, marine mammal bones and other related items and has been written up numerous times on TFF going back over the years. We had originally planned this trip a year ago, but a family emergency caused us to reschedule. So we decided to try again this year and picked late April to try and avoid the "rainy" season and beat the start of the summer heat. One out of two isn't bad - haha. We had beautiful blue skies but unfortunately had an unseasonably early heat wave that had the temps climbing into the upper 90's! My main goal of this trip was to find some of the beautifully preserved, richly colored, good sized sharks teeth (Mako's being the most common) that I have seen millions of pictures of and read dozens of trip/ID reports about here on the Forum. It seemed with a diligent amount of work digging and sifting, I was sure to come away with a bagful of beauties! This is where my caution part comes in. We had a good trip, but the results were no where near our expectations. I have been fossil collecting for over 40 years and have had plenty of down days/visits/trips, but when we walked away with maybe a dozen teeth and the largest complete one at just over an inch long from a site that represents supposedly one of the richest around after a whole day of steady digging, suffice it to say, we were a bit let down. We worked steadily throughout the day, tried several different spots and outlasted everyone. As the day heated up most of the folks were gone by very early afternoon, we had the place to ourselves for the last couple of hours before we bailed out just after 4 pm (the car thermometer read 99 when we left). We had to be out by 5. From what I saw of about half the other collectors that I talked to, were similar results, a modest number of teeth, nothing very large. Someone may have found a ton of great stuff, but I did not hear or see it. So, my caution is not that this place is not good, don't go: no, not at all. It is to keep your expectations realistic. There is no doubt I oversold this to myself. I found some nice teeth as you will see below, just not the size or quantity that I thought was the norm out of here. It could be I had a down day, it could be I didn't know the best spots to dig, it could be the quarry just does not produce like it used to, it could be that I just didn't move enough dirt to support my expectations, it could be a lot of things. But when I raised my expectations to high levels on a trip half way across the country that this was the focus of, I guess I kind of set myself up. Keep it real!!! I mostly bring this up as I often see on here that people would love to go here, it is on their bucket list, etc, etc. Again, I'd encourage you to visit, just keep your expectations in line, dig as much as you possibly can, and you will probably find the mother lode! Ok, enough of my blathering. The trip was fun, we did find some nice teeth, the preservation of them is excellent for the most part and I am working my way through some matrix I brought back which contains some very cool little teeth in there. Here is what we found: The whole kit and caboodle with my tentative ID's scribbled on the paper towel. I will follow with close ups of most of them. This was actually the first tooth we found, just an edge sticking out of the chunk of matrix (on left). On the right is after a bit of prepping so you can see the whole tooth. I think I'm going to do a bit more shaving down but leave this in the matrix. The round object by the root is just a pebble that was in there. I also found another small sharks tooth as I was removing matrix that is no longer in the picture. These Cosmopolitodus hastalis are the most common tooth found in the Round Mountain Silt from what I read (and my 1 day experience). These Cosmopolitodus planus (Hooked or Curved Mako) were neat and more the size I though we would encounter. Unfortunately, neither of these are complete. These tiny ones we managed to see as we were sifting. Since my napkin writing I have learned they are indeed a Carcharhinus, but the species seems to be an ongoing topic of discussion (not uncommon for this genus from what I have found). In the matrix I am picking there are lots more of these but that will be a topic for a future Micro post. These three are some of my favorites, very neat little teeth. Since the napkin writing, I have found the the upper sharks tooth may not be Hemipristis but rather a Hexanchus upper anterior. If anyone can corraborate from this picture that would be great, otherwise I'll probably make an ID post for a couple of these items to sort them out. These small ones are also nice. I see I did not take a picture of the most diagnostic side of the Squalus, but it does have the finger like extension to below the root on the other side. I also have found several more of these in the fine matrix. And lastly for this group a neat little bone that I believe is a cetacean periotic. I saw another post in which @Boesse identified a similar looking one as Aulophyster morricei, but there were some differences between this one and that post which I don't know if its due to simple variation within the bone or it is a different animal. Again, if I can't get a confirmation or different ID based on this one picture, I'll be happy to create an ID thread. We also found a lot of bone, I brought home a bag full of some of the bigger chunks I found in one area. I only recognize some rib fragments (second pic) and a possible beat up vert (third pic in middle). I'm not sure what the rest of the fragments represent. And finally, just a quick bit on the matrix I brought back. I did a quick sieve separation in the field just to have a mix of different sizes. This turned out to be a waste of time as the matrix was too damp to properly sieve. When I got back home and had water available, I was able to quickly run it through a small series of sieves and get down to some pickable matrix. I used a window screen (about 12-14 mesh) and a 40 and 60 mesh sieve. 95% of the matrix was fine silt (hence the name of the Formation) and went through the 60 mesh and therefore contains nothing that I'm going to spend time on (60 mesh is 0.25 mm, too small for me to try and pick with the equipment and dexterity that I have). The material caught on the 13 mesh contained almost all the sharks teeth but only represented a small baggie of the couple gallon bags of matrix I was able to fit in my luggage. You can see in the picture below the small bag of matrix to the right and the little beaker contains about 26 cm3 of fossil material picked (about 17% of the bag volume). This is mostly small fragments of broken bone but there are lots of shark and ray teeth in there as well as a few other items (future post in Micro section). I have only looked at the 40 and 60 mesh material a little bit. The 40 has a few very small ray teeth, and some fish teeth (and more broken bone fragments). I have not seen much in the way of identifiable fossils in the 60 mesh material yet. That is all for now, thanks for following along. I appreciate any thoughts or comments on my ID's or anything else. Mike

Does anyone happen to know if the item in the attached photos is a fossil? Or any idea what it is for that matter? I don't know it's origins unfortunately. I apologize for not being able to be more help. It is something I have had for many years and wondered about. Finally getting around to seeking answers. Thanks for any assistance.