Help with an ID

[Semore Farrigamo]

Found on a buddies ranch in south western Utah. I’ve been slowly chipping away the sandstone matrix around it revealing smells of sulfur and low tide lol first I thought shells, however, the more i prep the more I’m revealing the scale sections are of one piece… 50 lbs or so. 18” long 12” wide and 7-10” thick. Any insight Is appreciated. I’m new here and have some others i need help with also. Thanks again!

[Brevicollis]

Could be a volcanoic rock ? I think the pattern is on my screenshot is a sream of hardent lava. Thats the only things I can say about it 🤨 Very interesting specimen !

 

[Ludwigia]

If you could be more precise about the location, then it would be possible for someone familiar with Utah's geology to be able to determine the approximate lithology and stratigraphic range of your find. Size? This appears to me to be a conglomerate of rocks in mudstone, but I can't make out anything fossiliferous in it.

[Rockwood]

The sulfur smell could easily be from sulfide minerals formed in oxygen poor mud. The decay of organic matter is often involved, but I don't recognize any fossils here. 

[Yoda]

Agree with @Ludwigia and @Rockwood

Not seeing any fish fossil there. 

[Semore Farrigamo]

@Ludwigia About 30 miles or so north east of kanab approximately. And as stated in the post it’s approximately 18in long 12in wide and 7-10in thick. I’ll get some better picks up for you guys to look at. Oddly enough, there have been no rocks or even small  pebbles that have been removed or found in the matrix. Not to say there aren’t, I’ve just yet to find any. Gastropods, shells and other small marine life along with the mud/sand stone has been all that’s been removed.
 

The picture directly below, if zoomed in, will show the scales I refer too. Sorry for the crappy quality. Basically, all of the dark spots/material on the piece, are scales of some sort, for certain. I’ve flaked a bit of the top layer of them off for examining….and when doing so it reveals more of the same scale/skin

 

 

close up of a chunk of matrix I removed early in process showing shell and marine life

 

early-ish in the matrix removel with framing square for scale

 

 

 

this is a photo with my hand for rough scale, early photo with much more of the original matrix still onboard.

 

 

 

 

this piece below is a chunk of matrix with shell and scale debris 

 

 

 

[Ludwigia]

Sorry, but I'm still not seeing any shell or scales, although there are a few forms which might lead to this conclusion.

[Fossildude19]

Looks to me like a fractured layer of minerals.

Not seeing scales.

 

[Semore Farrigamo]

@Ludwigia  Sincerely!? That’s interesting lol to me, the very first pic in my reply, is 80% all scales. Weird. I guess I can try to get closer and if you still can’t see them you’re just gonna have to take my word for it! Lol 

 

Could you clarify your response, please? Which “forms”  would lead to “this conclusion”? Im sincere in my questions. Just trying to learn as much as I can 

[Fossildude19]

How does it react to vinegar?

 

Could be some sort of calcite, or some sort of quartz/chert or something else entirely.

I am not seeing any repeating pattern that would indicate any kind of scales.

 

[SPrice]

Here's two closeups of the areas which one could mistake for a scaly appearance if one was not very familiar with fossil fish scales

 

. 

 

 

Looks to me like some hot flowing mineral mass which cracked when it cooled...or... weather cracked from freeze/thaw cycles. 

I would knock off one of the nodules and saw it in half to see what's in it.  Or even saw the whole thing lengthwise for bookends. Or it could be kept as is with a paraloid or other sealing product to give that shiny wet look. Just my .02 cents.

 

 

PS- looking at them again reminds me of the Dugway Geode Bed nodule masses in my rock garden but not the same colors.

 

 

Edited January 24 by SPrice

[Ludwigia]

3 hours ago, Semore Farrigamo said:

@Ludwigia  Sincerely!? That’s interesting lol to me, the very first pic in my reply, is 80% all scales. Weird. I guess I can try to get closer and if you still can’t see them you’re just gonna have to take my word for it! Lol 

 

Could you clarify your response, please? Which “forms”  would lead to “this conclusion”? Im sincere in my questions. Just trying to learn as much as I can 

See the posts above from Fossildude19 and SPrice. I agree with their assessments. Please keep an open mind if you want to learn something.

[Semore Farrigamo]

@SPrice Just to clarify, I tagged it as fish because it smells like the sea lol. Im not making any claim that this is or isn’t a fish. I am however confident in the notion that these are scales of some proportion. @Fossildude19The vinegar doesn’t react to any of the said “scaling”. However, it is breaking down the matrix to help with its removal. When the first layers of scaling have been removed it reveals identical patterning beneath it which struck me as layering, but as you alluded, i may not have the experience requisite to know what layering is either 😜. As for the inside of the nodules, there is a whiteish/pinkish/yellowish type of material that has a crystalline structure to it, under some of the “scaling” material that I’ve removed. And it smells like low-tide 😷. I’ll post some more for you to look at. I hope not everyone takes my insistent annoying questioning as anything other than yearning for learning! Appreciatcha’!
 

@Ludwigia thank you, I honestly didn’t know they were speaking to clarify your remarks! Being close minded, i have the tendency to take that which is in front of me, for what it is in front of me. I’m a work in progress, friend!
 

In the spirit of exchanging advice; If you take on the responsibility to educate others, you also, whether you like it or not, accept the burden of being questioned. Which, I argue, is the first sign of an open mind and should be embraced. If you’re actually trying to educate people you wouldn’t respond in a clearly patronizing manner to questions of any kind, let alone a question about one’s own remarks.  But, i assume, that if you really wanted to educate others, you wouldn’t reference me to others opinions as if I can’t read them. You would simply clarify your own remarks, all things considered. Nevertheless, I agree and appreciate the premise you mentioned about keeping an open mind. Thank you.

[Tidgy's Dad]

If the matrix is fizzing with the application of vinegar, maybe it's a conglomerate of redeposited carbonate clasts and associated minerals.

[Semore Farrigamo]

@Tidgy's Dad There hasn’t been any physical “fizzing” reaction, though giving it the periodical vinegar bath has noticeably helped with the breakdown and removal of the lighter colored sandy matrix. I had been working on it for 4 or so months before It was suggested for me to use. Originally I was trying to steer clear of any chemical help, in fear of destroying it like one of the sad amount of specimens ive idiotically damaged with the help of muriatic acid etc in the past 🤦🏻‍♂️ it’s a shame…. I was led directly to the water but nobody ever did teach me how to drink the stuff. 
 

I’ll hit it with another vinegar bath tmr. I’ve gotten a lot more revealed since its last time so maybe I’ll get some bubbles this time

[Andúril Flame of the West]

Looks like you've got something interesting on your hands. Although some parts of the specimen may be reminiscent of scales, there is not much indicating that there is a fish body fossil here (which may exhibit the layered scaling pattern that you mentioned). It is far above my pay grade to attempt any sort of ID for this, but I am also in the geologic camp. Many members who are well-versed in geology have given their opinions and are likely providing the most accurate identifications you would be able to receive from photographs alone. Since there are various opinions as to what it might be, I would certainly suggest taking this specimen in to your nearest natural history museum or rockhounding club for an identification. In this case and in-hand examination may be the only one to get a definitive ID. 

 

The members who have already commented in this thread are only attempting to answer your question as to what this is. Of course,  as we know all too well, tone can easily be misconstrued when reading messages sent over the internet, but condescension certainly is not the intent. 

[Ludwigia]

You stated above that

15 hours ago, Semore Farrigamo said:

Basically, all of the dark spots/material on the piece, are scales of some sort, for certain.

 

Others here are of a different opinion. This is why I suggested you keep an open mind. I was just being direct and not patronizing. Sorry if you felt offended. That was not my intention.

[JohnBrian]

The OP said it comes off in sheets. Maybe its mica? Or a similar material?

[Ludwigia]

Yes, I would also think that mica, more than likely biotite, a mineral within the mica group, would be a good call.

[patelinho7]

Agree with mica. Looks like schist? Can't exactly remember the difference between mica vs. mica schist, if there is any at all.

 

Side note- are those the insulated winter Milwaukee work gloves? Those are amazing! I love my pair so much. I got it for Christmas and it was fantastic for my first few hunts in the cold of 2024. I highly recommend them to others!

[Coco]

Mica is a mineral of aluminum and potassium, of general chemical formula AC_2-3T₄O₁₀X₂. Micaschist is a rock containing mica.

 

Coco

[Mahnmut]

I agree with the mineral ID.

even assuming the very rare possibility of petrified scales, in an animals hide you do not get many layers of scales on top of each other. There may be 2 or  perhaps three during molting. But if its layer after layer, its not scales, but a mineral like mica.

Best regards,

J

[Semore Farrigamo]

@Andúril Flame of the West I agree, most people are just trying to help! In regards to those that are, there is a zero percent chance of me taking problem to them. I welcome corrections, I welcome criticism, I welcome disagreemen, argument, I welcome any and all education from anyone anywhere anytime. If a person is trying to help, whether or not i agree, the fact they’ve taken time is what’s important to me. 
 

However,

 

I do not, will not, and frankly, cannot stand idly by when approached by people with patronizing attitudes. I respond respectfully, but accordingly. I also agree that tone can be misinterpreted. Thats just not the case here. They’ve proved that with every response. Helen Keller would conclude the same. No skin off my teeth tho! I do apologize for the disturbance I may have caused, but I call a spade a spade only when I know it’s, in fact, a spade. Principles. No malice or hard feelers being kept on my end! 
 

Moving on, I appreciate the advice on taking it to my local natty museum. I have actually been corresponding with them since November, they expressed extreme interest through email, asking questions etc so the ball was already rolling enough for me to heed your advice immediately!! lol I drove 2.5 hrs to its location at UofO, and they all but told me to leave! Lol the director I was emailing wasn’t there, but the guy that was refused to even look at it and told me, directly, to take it to Utah. He said they are only experts on fossils and geology from Oregon and couldn’t help me…. It was one of the most awkward/baffling experiences of my life lol 

 

I’ve inquired at the museum of natural history in Utah, hopefully Monday I’ll hear back from them and/or the museum official that I had been corresponding with here in Oregon. 

I’ll let all know what I know when I know.

 

@JohnBrian  If I said it was coming off in sheets, I apologize for the inaccurate characterization! It is not coming off in “sheets”. I have been as careful as a scrub can be in prepping this, but I have chipped or flaked off “scales”, for lack of a better term or understanding, revealing more of the same beneath it. A couple places where I’ve might of penetrated through those layers reveals a whitish, pinkish, yellowish crystalline like material structure underneath. Almost like a sugar agate kind of texture?? 🤷🏻‍♂️

@Mahnmutif what you mean by “layer after layer, is one on top of the other, than this is layered. There seem to be a couple spots I may have penetrated through in the process, not purposefully, but underneath those layers of “scales” is a sugary crystalline-esk material. It appears mostly a white-ish yellow-ish pink-ish color with places where one color is more present than others or even pale yellow with a white line all of that same sugary material. Idk what in the heck….

 

thank you everyone for the continued feedback! I’ll spend the rest of my life trying to get closure on this if I must!!! Lol I’ll be damned if we don’t reap the fruit of our labor!  Talk to ya soon….

 

[Ludwigia]

Whether "every response" in this thread is patronizing or not is a matter of subjective interpretation in my opinion. You have asked for opinions on your discovery and a lot of the responses here have led to the judgement (albeit based solely on a few photos, which is of course not necessarily conclusive) that your "scales", for lack of a better term as you have noted, might very well be sheets of  the mineral mica. You have however as yet not responded to these numerous comments, which in my opinion are not at all patronizing, but quite objective.

[Semore Farrigamo]

@Ludwigia considering I didn’t mention that those answers were patronizing, I’m glad we can agree. You’ll find that deflecting, projecting, twisting the narrative and/or putting words in another’s mouth isn’t very effective on a documented forum. Coincidentally,  I haven’t @ you in any recent comments, my response was addressing another users suggestions and consideration, but you continue to feel the need to interject. Least you could do is interject with accuracy. Ive been addressing every comment that I feel needs addressed. I did just that, on two separate occasions, in the very comment you’re responding too, friend. A comment in response to somebody else, mind you…. Just let it go. Im moving forward and I’d like you to join me.