SECOND ANNUAL REPORT—STRATIGRAPHIC GEOLOGY. 67 
the Vicksburg group, and is tentatively referred to the Ocala lime¬ 
stone, to which it probably belongs. 
APALACHICOLA GROUP. 
Prior to 1887 the rocks belonging to the group here designated 
Apalachicola group -from the exposures along Apalachicola River, in 
western Florida, were included with the Eocene and were regarded as 
part of the “Vicksburg” (“Orbitoides”) limestone. In that year 
Eangdon 1 observed a group of beds occurring on the Apalachicola 
River which he referred tentatively to the lower Miocene, designating 
them the Chattahoochee group. With the Miocene beds Dali, 2 in 1892, 
included not only the Chattahoochee group of Langdon, but the Haw¬ 
thorne formation, the so-called “Waldo formation,” the “Tampa lime¬ 
stone,” the “Tampa silex bed,” the Chipola marl, the Alum Bluff for¬ 
mation and certain sands, gravels and clays, which he did not spe¬ 
cifically name 
The use of the name Miocene to designate the group here called 
Apalachicola continued for a number of years, the Oligocene beds 
being often called “Old Miocene” or “Sub-tropical Miocene,” to dis¬ 
tinguish them from the “new” or “cold-water” Miocene. In 1896 Dali 3 4 
discussed the faunal reasons for regarding the “Old Miocene” as 
Oligocene, and in his publications since that date he has restricted the 
term Miocene to later beds (here called Jacksonville limestone and 
Choctawhatchee marl). However, the Chattahoochee formation is 
still included in the Miocene by both Smiths and McCallie. 5 
The Apalachicola group was formerly designated the Chipolan 
stage 6 and the Chipola group , 7 but these names are abandoned because 
the name Chipola has been used to designate a marl belonging to the 
group. 
The Apalachicola group includes a number of beds differing widely 
in lithological character, though they are recognized by their fossils 
1 Langdon, Danl. W., Jr., Some Florida Miocene; Amer. Jour. Sci., 3rd 
ser., vol. xxxviii, 1889, pp. 322-324. 
2 Dali, Wm. H., Neocene of North America, U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull. 84, 
1892, pp. 105-123. 
3 Dali, Wm. H., Descriptions of Tertiary Fossils From the Antillean Region, 
U. S. Nat. Mus. Proc., vol. xix, No. 1110, 1896, pp. 303-305. 
4 Smith, E. A., The Underground Water Resources of Alabama; Geol. 
Survey of Alabama, 1907, p. 81. 
5 McCallie, S. W., The Preliminary Report on the Underground Waters 
of Georgia, Geol. Surv., of Georgia, 1908, pp. 31 and 32. 
8 Dali, Wm. H., North American Tertiary Plorizon, U. S. Geol. Surv., 18th 
Ann. Report, 1896-1897, p. 334. 
7 Foerste, A. F., Studies on the Chipola Miocene of Bainbridge, Ga.; and 
of Alum Bluff, Fla., Am. Jour. Sci., 3rd ser., vol. xlvi, 1893, p. 244. 
