WICHITA FORMATION OF NORTHERN TEXAS 123 



Gould 1 correlated the Clear Fork with the Enid, Blaine, and 

 Woodward formations of Oklahoma. In making this correlation, 

 he evidently followed Cummins' earlier writings, in which the beds 

 of Baylor County were considered to be Clear Fork. Williston 

 states 2 that the Enid formation of Gould is identical with the beds 

 of Baylor County. 



NOMENCLATURE 



In the paper cited, Adams has contended that the terms Wichita, 

 Clear Fork, and Double Mountain should be discarded as having 

 no stratigraphical significance. In his latest papers, Cummins 

 recommends the abandonment of the term Albany and the use of 

 the term Wichita for the formation. In view of the conflicting 

 statements that have been made as to the relations of the beds 

 called Wichita we were at first inclined to agree with the first- 

 named writer in recommending the abandonment of the term 

 Wichita. Further consideration, however, leads us to conclude 

 that with a revised definition it will be best to retain the name 

 Wichita for the formation overlying the Cisco, which it is now gen- 

 erally agreed should be regarded as of lower Permian age, and to 

 abandon the name "Albany." 



The series of red clays and sandstones with their included 

 gypsum deposits which in Texas overlie the Wichita formation 

 and to which the names Clear Fork and Double Mountain have 

 been given have not as yet received much study. With the limited 

 amount of knowledge available the attempt to subdivide these 

 beds seems to the author unwarranted, and they are, therefore, here 

 mapped as "undifferentiated Clear Fork and Double Mountain." 



CLASSIFICATIONS 



The Permian age of the beds to which the name of Wichita was 

 originally applied has been accepted quite generally, though there 

 are not wanting those who regard the evidence as unsatisfactory. 

 It was based chiefly upon the vertebrate and plant remains. In the 

 southward, or "Albany," area the beds are wholly marine and 



1 C. N. Gould, Water-Supply Paper No. 154, U.S. Geological Survey (1906), 17. 



2 Letter to the author dated August 6, 1909. 



