Devonian Ammonoids, Cephalopods, and More from Foreknobs Formation of New Castle, Virginia

[fossil_lover_2277]

Hiked up to some Devonian Foreknobs Formation exposures yesterday on a mountain in the Jefferson National Forest in Craig County, Virginia. Found some awesome and beautiful ammonoids, cephalopods, and more!!!

Now I’ve just gotta find some trilobites and crinoids...lol

 

 

Some of the better ammonoids I found in some mudstone:

 

 
 

 

Some of the different types of cephalopods along with some brachiopods:

 

 

 

And 2 unknowns, not a clue in the world what these are:

 

 

 

[Manticocerasman]

you got some nice cephalopods there, congrats

 

[fossil_lover_2277]

Thanks!!! I was really surprised, but for a soft mudstone they preserved fairly nicely...if you can get them out first lol :p

 

Btw if anyone is interested in fossil hunting the New Castle area, here’s an old Master’s dissertation that I found helpful...there’s plenty of National Forest land and fossils out there to go around (just remember, no vertebrate collection on federal lands):

 

LINK

[Manticocerasman]

isn't there any preservation of the ammonoids ( goniatites ) in 3D in pyrite? the little orthocone on the 2nd picture looks to be preserved like this.

 

[fossil_lover_2277]

40 minutes ago, Manticocerasman said:

isn't there any preservation of the ammonoids ( goniatites ) in 3D in pyrite? the little orthocone on the 2nd picture looks to be preserved like this.

 

So all of these fossils (cephalopods, brachiopods, goniatites, etc.) are preserved in relatively soft mudstone (damp, hardened after drying when I got them home). I had to split the mudstone with a rock pic to expose the fossils. Generally (when the stone split neatly) this would yield one plate with something close to an impression fossil and the other plate would have the “3D” fossil. But none of it was preserved substantially in pyrite or any other “hard” mineral. Generally the “3D” portions of the fossils were as soft as the mudstone, possibly some carbonized films with them (although can’t say for certain on the carbonized films, that was more on some other brachiopods I found lower down on the mountain). They’re quite delicate, easily damaged, especially until they dry fully.

Edited October 4, 2021 by Lando_Calrissian_4tw

[NickG]

Are you sure this is from the Foreknobs? This preservation reminds me of the Needmore.

[bockryan]

Who says there aren't any ammonites in the Eastern U.S.!? These are really nice finds, will have to look through the link as well

Edited January 11 by bockryan

[Fossildude19]

1 hour ago, bockryan said:

Who says there aren't any ammonites in the Eastern U.S.!? These are really nice finds, will have to look through the link as well

Goniatites, not ammonites.

[Manticocerasman]

1 hour ago, Fossildude19 said:

Goniatites, not ammonites.

well, Goniatites are Ammonoids 😛 but indeed not true ammonites.

[bockryan]

Ammonoids, ammonites - they're all spiral-y enough for me  

[EMP]

On 1/10/2024 at 9:41 PM, NickG said:

Are you sure this is from the Foreknobs? This preservation reminds me of the Needmore.

I agree. I’ve personally encountered some well weathered sections of shale from the Foreknobs that have a similar appearance, but I still wouldn’t classify them as “mudstones”, just deeply weathered shales (they still have the layering whereas mudstone is massive). His description and the pictures are more inline with the Needmore from my experience, whose fossiliferous horizons are typically mudstones.
 

The brachiopods remind me of the Needmore as well. I’m also not seeing species like Cyrtospirifer disjunctus which is very common in the Foreknobs, unless this is so far south it’s a totally different horizon/lithology. My experience is based off the northern WV/MD/southern PA area. 
 

These look pretty similar to Agoniatites sp. from the Needmore and Hamilton Group in general.

Still very cool finds though! I’ve only personally found a couple of ammonoids in the area over my years collecting, and none as well preserved as these. 
 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agoniatites

[sixgill pete]

On 1/10/2024 at 10:45 PM, bockryan said:

Who says there aren't any ammonites in the Eastern U.S.!? These are really nice finds, will have to look through the link as well

There are several species of Cretaceous ammonites found in North Carolina. 

[Fossildude19]

And in New Jersey...

[bockryan]

7 hours ago, sixgill pete said:

There are several species of Cretaceous ammonites found in North Carolina. 

 

4 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

And in New Jersey...

 

I know. Would you feel better trying to find one in Texas or NJ?  Seems some of those Texas riverbeds are just made of the things, whereas there are no sites that I'm aware of around here that as reliably produce nice ones. Luckily we get all the fun Miocene and Devonian stuff so it evens out in the end

[Fossildude19]

6 hours ago, bockryan said:

 

 

I know. Would you feel better trying to find one in Texas or NJ?  Seems some of those Texas riverbeds are just made of the things, whereas there are no sites that I'm aware of around here that as reliably produce nice ones. Luckily we get all the fun Miocene and Devonian stuff so it evens out in the end

 

 

Definitely EASIER to find ammonites in Texas.  No doubt about it.

But there were some very good exposures that produced ammonites in New Jersey and Maryland, if I recall correctly. See the MAPS collection for confirmation.

Unfortunately, most of the sites are gone,  no longer accessible, or only produce broken ones more frequently than complete ones. 

 

 

[Andúril Flame of the West]

Very nice finds @fossil_lover_2277! These ammonids are quite the treat being from Virginia and I’d certainly visit the area if it weren’t so far south. 
 

I must also agree that ammonites are rather hard to come by on the east coast. I cannot speak for New Jersey or North Carolina, but ammonites are rather scarce in Maryland, though they can be found (certainly a bucket list item for me this season ). They may have been easier to find in the past, though many came from construction sites that the general fossil collector may not have had access to.

[Isotelus2883]

The first unknown appears to be a partial phyllocarid carapace.

[NickG]

3 hours ago, Isotelus2883 said:

The first unknown appears to be a partial phyllocarid carapace.

Yea. It would be nice to see it laid on a flatbed scanner with a ruler to try to get some more detail out of it.