Culpeper Basin Possible Track

[patelinho7]

Location: Loudoun County, VA (near Ashburn)

Formation: Newark Supergroup —> Culpeper Basin

 

Background: 

 

 

Okay! Here we go. Another track. I will preface this by saying that I don’t know if it’s Grallator, or very well may not be (or not a track at all).

 

Here is how I found it in the field:

I picked it up after seeing the middle toe. I didn’t really think much of it, except that it had a rough knuckle-y shape like my other print. Then, I noticed the roughly-three-toed shape. But I was only sold on it when I noticed the rightmost toe, and how pronounced it is. It really sharply but smoothly tapers off into a “claw”.

 

Next, a shot in the sun with the ruler on my multi tool, and a closeup of the claw:

 

 

The photos don’t do this toe justice to how prominently it is formed in the rock.

 

Here are some low-angle lighting shots:

 

 

 

And lastly, a brightened photo and the same photo with an outline of what I am looking at:

 

 

Thanks for taking a look! At the end of the day, photo-ID of tracks are difficult so I will end up taking this along to Dr. Weems when I go to pick up my old track. But I will appreciate everyone’s insight regardless.

[patelinho7]

Some comments in passing:

 

 

 

this is the style of print I was comparing to. I also saw the similarities with this recent post:

 

[Fossildude19]

I see the similarities, but I don't think this is a track the way you have it outlined.
The "middle toe" may be part of a track, but I am not sure with the photos.

 

Definitely take it to be looked at, though.

[digit]

37 minutes ago, patelinho7 said:

Thanks for taking a look! At the end of the day, photo-ID of tracks are difficult so I will end up taking this along to Dr. Weems when I go to pick up my old track.

Faint track impressions are possibly the most difficult to comment on based solely on images. They can even make the enigmatic Mazon Creek concretions seem obvious in comparison.

 

Those who have a deeper experience with tracks may chime in with their opinions but what counts most is someone who knows tracks well and can see the piece in hand. We look forward to hearing what Dr. Weems has to say when you next meet-up. Please update this topic when you find out more as it will prove beneficial to those learning from these examples.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Andúril Flame of the West]

It's always very exciting to see a new post of yours show up! I have to agree with the others that I can't see anything that screams track when I look at it. However, I know next to nothing about track fossils and, as @digit pointed out, it can be hard to see a faint specimen from pictures. Out of curiosity, have you encountered any examples of tracks (online or in literature) that have been preserved in these red rocks? I could be quite off, but I believe that these particular rocks have been described as the Poolesville Member of the Manassas Sandstone. To me it seems that most tracks found in the area have been preserved in finer-grained mudstones and shales but I could easily have missed something - or my interpretation could be incorrect.

 

At any rate, I look forward to hearing what Dr. Weems has to say with regard to this specimen and if he has anything else to add concerning the Potomac Group footprint that you found .

Edited June 11, 2023 by Andúril Flame of the West

[patelinho7]

I expected as much! Yes, this one was a bit of a stretch. I didn’t even really believe it before seeing that “right toe” but that barely even shows up on camera. I will take it to Dr. Weems and report back. Thanks for the responses, everyone. 
 

On another note, my family is beginning to think I am crazy with the “maybe” tracks I pick up. They see nothing but rock . I do hope I am getting more knowledgeable about my tracks, although I can’t help but wonder if I’m just going crazy with pareidolia at this point…

[digit]

There is a fine line between developing the search image needed to be able to spot these types of fossils where others may miss them and pareidolia getting the best of you where you start seeing trackways everywhere. Being able to consult an expert (not too frequently ) with prospective items is a great resource in being able to know what are fossils and what are illusions. It will help refine your search image going forward.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[patelinho7]

To wrap this topic up, Dr. Weems said that it *could* be a track, but it could also be nothing. He was pretty much 50/50 undecided. He did remark that the "right toe" that stuck out to me seemed interesting, but is a bit inconclusive. The main thing that kept him against declaring it as a track was that the rock type was strange. It's definitely Culpeper Basin, and specifically a red bed layer of the Bull Run formation, but it's almost like it was a "half-baked" mudstone. It's basically hardened soil and quite crumbly, as if it got messed up before it fully had a chance to harden and stay preserved as the surface of the muddy ground. His logic was that if the ground was disturbed, there's a high chance whatever print was there was destroyed. This makes perfect sense. Considering that there's probably many more proper prints out there and that this one is quite literally falling apart as I speak, I'll probably let this one go into the creek behind my house and get back in the field to find a clear-cut track.

 

The one bit of good news is that we talked a lot about the stratigraphy of the area and the different layers of the formations nearby, and I'm on the right track. I may not have found something yet, but if I keep poking around these spoil piles, I should find something eventually!

[digit]

Thanks for keeping us in the loop.

 

The time spent with Dr. Weems sounds like it was more valuable than the questionable track. Glad you were able to level-up with some great information about the local stratigraphy. We look forward to a more conclusive track in the future.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[patelinho7]

Oh yes! It's always a good day when you can spend a whole hour one-on-one with an expert and they are happy to help you learn more about what they know best!

[Andúril Flame of the West]

9 hours ago, patelinho7 said:

To wrap this topic up, Dr. Weems said that it *could* be a track, but it could also be nothing. He was pretty much 50/50 undecided. He did remark that the "right toe" that stuck out to me seemed interesting, but is a bit inconclusive. The main thing that kept him against declaring it as a track was that the rock type was strange. It's definitely Culpeper Basin, and specifically a red bed layer of the Bull Run formation, but it's almost like it was a "half-baked" mudstone. It's basically hardened soil and quite crumbly, as if it got messed up before it fully had a chance to harden and stay preserved as the surface of the muddy ground. His logic was that if the ground was disturbed, there's a high chance whatever print was there was destroyed. This makes perfect sense. Considering that there's probably many more proper prints out there and that this one is quite literally falling apart as I speak, I'll probably let this one go into the creek behind my house and get back in the field to find a clear-cut track.

 

The one bit of good news is that we talked a lot about the stratigraphy of the area and the different layers of the formations nearby, and I'm on the right track. I may not have found something yet, but if I keep poking around these spoil piles, I should find something eventually!

 

It sounds like you were able to learn a lot from Dr. Weems! Even though this one might not be a footprint, I'm sure that it will not be too long before you find a bona fide track. I didn't notice this until you mentioned that the stone was falling apart, but this reminds me of many of the stones that I find quite literally in my backyard. I have come across countless of these very flaky mudstones, many of which could easily be broken apart by hand. I'd be interested to see if these kinds of rocks could contain trace fossils or if, as Dr. Weems said, they may have faced too much disturbance to preserve identifiable traces.

 

As one last note, have you been looking at construction spoil piles? I've driven past many spoil piles chock full of these red rocks in the past, but I was never certain whether hunting would be allowed in those spoil piles. I suppose I was always concerned about liabilities and who was legally allowed to grant permission for rummaging through the piles. 

[cck]

Some classics from culpeper…..

[Andúril Flame of the West]

1 hour ago, cck said:

Some classics from culpeper…..

 

Very cool tracks. I recognize that last photograph from your post on when the Culpeper Crushed Stone Quarry opened for a public viewing. Would these tracks be from the Groveton member of the Balls Bluff Siltstone?

[patelinho7]

3 minutes ago, Andúril Flame of the West said:

Very cool tracks. I recognize that last photograph from your post on when the Culpeper Crushed Stone Quarry opened for a public viewing. Would these tracks be from the Groveton member of the Balls Bluff Siltstone?

 
From what I already know as well as what I discussed with Dr. Weems, these should be Groveton.

[patelinho7]

9 hours ago, Andúril Flame of the West said:

As one last note, have you been looking at construction spoil piles? I've driven past many spoil piles chock full of these red rocks in the past, but I was never certain whether hunting would be allowed in those spoil piles. I suppose I was always concerned about liabilities and who was legally allowed to grant permission for rummaging through the piles. 

 

If you want to do it the fully safe way, you could contact the developer, or, as Dr. Weems mentioned, you go under their head and talk it up with the workers/manager on duty there and try to make friends with them so they let you look. He said yesterday that he not only made friends and asked permission, he got one of them to lay out a bunch of these rocks so they got rain-washed and then call him when they got cleaned up. Now he was with the USGS after all, but a lot of these workers are very friendly.