Evidence for high glacial-lake levels in the northeastern Lake Michigan basin and their relation to the Glenwood and Calumet phases of glacial Lake Chicago

Abstract

Strandlines and related features representing former high glacial-lake levels possibly related to the Glenwood and Calumet phases of glacial Lake Chicago were identified from Oceana County north to Benzie County in the northwestern lower peninsula of Michigan. Lacustrine features occur as far as 25 km inland from the Lake Michigan shore at altitudes above the rebounded water planes of glacial Lake Algonquin and the Nipissing Great Lakes identified by earlier investigators.In order to determine if the water planes identified in this study and those of previous investigators represent the Glenwood and/or Calumet phases, water-plane altitudes are compared with a height/distance curve for the highest level of the Lake Algonquin water plane constructed by J. W. Goldthwait. The Goldthwait curve north of his zero isobase indicates the nature of glacial isostasy for the northern Lake Michigan basin following the development of the Glenwood and Calumet phases. The rebounded water planes of both the Glenwood and Calumet phases should follow exponential curves similar to that of Lake Algonquin but at higher altitudes.The water-plane data were projected onto a vertical plane oriented perpendicular to Goldthwait's Lake Algonquin isobases in the northern part of the Lake Michigan basin and parallel to the axis of Lake Michigan in the southern part of the basin. From Ludington north to Frankfort, Michigan, the array of water-plane altitudes is diffuse but has an upper boundary that corresponds to a theoretical Glenwood II water plane. Only two sites occur at elevations high enough to be attributed to a Glenwood I water plane. Lacustrine features that occur at lower altitudes within the array, but above the Algonquin level, are within range of a theoretical Calumet water plane.Correlation of water-plane data with either the Glenwood or Calumet phase will probably remain unclear until ages are determined for many of the features.

Large‐scale glaciotectonic deformation in the Great Lakes basin, USA‐Canada

“…has often been considered a prerequisite for development of large-scale glaciotectonic deformation and results in sudden loading of saturated sediment to facilitate failure near the ice margin (Aber 1988;Banham 1988;Croot 1988). The fact that all or part of the grounding-line fan complex must have been submerged below the projected surface of glacial Lake Chicago (Evenson 1973;Taylor 1990;Clark et al 1994) as the Lake Michigan lobe advanced over it must have contributed to high initial pore-water pressures in the sediment and thus further reduced the sediment strength.…”

Constraining Holocene lake levels and coastal dune activity in the Lake Michigan basin

“…Shorelines from Lake Chicago have been mapped in Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan (e.g., Evenson 1973;Taylor 1990), and are above the elevation of lakes in this study. Overall ice recession was interrupted by the Port Huron and Two Rivers readvance, but once the ice retreated far enough north, glacial Lake Algonquin from the Lake Huron basin merged with the water body in the Lake Michigan basin, forming the Algonquin shoreline in the Lake Michigan basin by about 12500 cal (10.6 ka) BP (Capps et al 2007).…”

Glacial Isostatic Adjustment of the Laurentian Great Lakes Basin: Using the Empirical Record of Strandline Deformation for Reconstruction of Early Holocene Paleo-Lakes and Discovery of a Hydrologically Closed Phase*

“…The paleogeography of individual basins and of the entire Great Lakes watershed may likewise be reconstructed for any desired age. Applications of the isostatic response surface and the exponential model of uplift are illustrated for: (1) digital reconstruction of Great Lakes Clayton, 1983;Teller and Thorleifson, 1983;Teller, 1985;Thorleifson, 1996 Vincent andHardy, 1979;Veillette, 1994;Dyke, 1996Calkin, 1970Barnett, 1979;Calkin andFeenstra, 1985 Goldthwait, 1910;Stanley, 1936Stanley, , 1937Stanley, , 1938aDeane, 1950;Chapman, 1975;Karrow et al, 1975;Karrow 1980;Chapman and Putnam, 1984;Eschman and Karrow, 1985;Kaszycki, 1985;Karrow, 1986Karrow, , 1987Lewis and Anderson, 1989;Lewis et al 1994Goldthwait, 1907Leverett and Taylor, 1915;Stanley, 1938b;Evenson, 1973;Futyma, 1981;Hansel et al, 1985;Taylor, 1990;Kehew, 1993;Colman et al 1994aColeman, 1937Muller and Prest, 1985;Pair et al, 1988;Rodrigues, 1993 Harrison, 1972;Chapman, 1975;Vincent and Hardy, 1979;Barnett, 1988;…”