<%BANNER%>

FGS



The limestone, dolomite, and coquina resources of Florida ( FGS: Report of investigation 88 )
CITATION SEARCH THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00001275/00001
 Material Information
Title: The limestone, dolomite, and coquina resources of Florida ( FGS: Report of investigation 88 )
Series Title: ( FGS: Report of investigation 88 )
Physical Description: vi, 54 p. (p. 54 blank) : ill., 5 fold. maps (in pocket) ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida -- Bureau of Geology
Schmidt, Walter, 1950-
Publisher: The Bureau
Place of Publication: Tallahassee
Publication Date: 1979
 Subjects
Subjects / Keywords: Limestone -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Dolomite -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: by Walter Schmidt ... et al. ; prepared by the Bureau of Geology, Division of Resource Management, Florida Department of Natural Resources.
Bibliography: Bibliography: p. 52-53.
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management:
The author dedicated the work to the public domain by waiving all of his or her rights to the work worldwide under copyright law and all related or neighboring legal rights he or she had in the work, to the extent allowable by law.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 000349968
oclc - 07249612
notis - ABY7754
lccn - 80621937
System ID: UF00001275:00001

Full Text






FLRD GEOLOSk ( IC SUfRiW


COPYRIGHT NOTICE
[year of publication as printed] Florida Geological Survey [source text]


The Florida Geological Survey holds all rights to the source text of
this electronic resource on behalf of the State of Florida. The
Florida Geological Survey shall be considered the copyright holder
for the text of this publication.

Under the Statutes of the State of Florida (FS 257.05; 257.105, and
377.075), the Florida Geologic Survey (Tallahassee, FL), publisher of
the Florida Geologic Survey, as a division of state government,
makes its documents public (i.e., published) and extends to the
state's official agencies and libraries, including the University of
Florida's Smathers Libraries, rights of reproduction.

The Florida Geological Survey has made its publications available to
the University of Florida, on behalf of the State University System of
Florida, for the purpose of digitization and Internet distribution.

The Florida Geological Survey reserves all rights to its publications.
All uses, excluding those made under "fair use" provisions of U.S.
copyright legislation (U.S. Code, Title 17, Section 107), are
restricted. Contact the Florida Geological Survey for additional
information and permissions.












P K YONGE
LIBRARY
OF
FLORIDA
HISTORY








STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Elton J. Gissendanner, Executive Director







DIVISION OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
BUREAU OF GEOLOGY
Charles W. Hendry, Jr., Chief







REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88

THE LIMESTONE, DOLOMITE
AND COQUINA RESOURCES OF FLORIDA





by
Walter Schmidt
Ronald W. Hoenstine, Michael S. Knapp,
Ed. Lane, George M. Ogden, Jr., Thomas M. Scott





Prepared by the
BUREAU OF GEOLOGY
DIVISION OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES



TALLAHASSEE
1979






A3









DEPARTMENT

OF

NATURAL RESOURCES


BOB GRAHAM
Governor


GEORGE FIRESTONE
Secretary of State


BILL GUNTER
Treasurer


RALPH D. TURLINGTON
Commissioner of Education


JIM SMITH
Attorney General


GERALD A. LEWIS
Comptroller


DOYLE CONNER
Commissioner of Agriculture


ELTON J. GISSENDANNER
Executive Director









LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL


Bureau of Geology
Tallahassee

November 19, 1979


Governor Bob Graham, Chairman
Florida Department of Natural Resources
Tallahassee, Florida 32304

Dear Governor Graham:

The Bureau of Geology, Division of Resource Management, Department
of Natural Resources is publishing as its Report of Investigations No. 88,
"The Limestone, Dolomite and Coquina Resources of Florida."

This report discusses the geological occurrence, uses, market trends and
mining methods of the limestones, dolomite, and coquina deposits found
throughout Florida. This information, I believe, will materially assist in the
future development of these resources in Florida.

Respectfully yours,

Charles W. Hendry, Jr., Chief
Bureau of Geology

















































Printed for the
Florida Department of Natural Resources
Division of Resource Management
Bureau of Geology


Tallahassee
1979






iv









CONTENTS

Page
Introduction Walter Schmidt................... ... ........ ............... 1
Purpose and Scope of Investigation .................................... 1
Acknowledgements.................................................... 1
General Statement...... .............................. ............. 1
Limestone, Dolomite, and Coquina: A Background ..........................
General Uses ............................ .............. ... .............. 2
Geology of Florida's Limestone, Dolomite, and Coquina
Deposits Thomas M. Scott................ .. ......................... 3
Northwest Florida ................................... ............. 4
Western Half of North and Central Peninsular Florida ......................... 6
Atlantic Coast ................. ................................ 9
Southwest Florida ..................................... .............. 10
The Uses of Limestone Michael S. Knapp, Ronald W. Hoenstine .................... 11
Transportation .......................... .. .. .................. 14
Quarry Sites ................................. ...................... .14
Market Trends Ronald W. Hoenstine ............................................ 15
Roadbase and Concrete Aggregate ................... ................ 17
Agricultural Limestone .................................................... 17
Lime ......... ........................... ..... .. .............. 17
General Future Trends ....................... ....... ..... .............. 20
Economic Factors ................... .. .......................... 21
Mining Methods and Beneficiation Ed Lane .............. ................ ...... 22
Mining Methods ............... ................... ............... 22
Processing and Beneficiation ....................... ... .................... 23
Cement Manufacturing .................... .. ........................... 27
Mineral Producers George M. Ogden, Jr ......................................... 34
References ................ ................................................. 52









ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page
1. Number of active quarries producing limestone, dolomite,
and coquina in Florida for the period 1965-1977 ................................. 15

2. Production and value for crushed limestone from all sources (limestone,
dolomite, and coquina) in Florida for the period 1966-1977 ...................... 16

3. Percentages of total Florida limestones that are used for agriculture and for cement,
road, and construction aggregate for the period 1966-1975 ..................... 18

4. Florida lime production for the period 1968-1977 ..................... .......... i9
5. Portable rock crusher ................................... .................... 24

6. Simplified processing diagram for limestone, dolomite, and coquina .............. 25

7. Large crusher/screener plant ................................................. 26
8. Schematic diagram of the flow-process of materials through a modern
"dry-process" cement plant ........... ............................. 28

9. Dry-pit limestone quarrying operation ................................ ..... 29

10. Conveyor belt from quarry to plant....................................... 30

11. Proportional blender unit .............................................. 31
12. Overall view of cement plant .................... ...... ............ ........ 32

13. Main control room of cement plant.......................................... 33


MAPS (in pocket)

1. Geologic Map of Surface and Near Surface Deposits of Limestones, Dolomites,
and Coquinas in Florida

2. Physiographic Map of Florida

3. Limestone Resource Potential Map of Florida

4. Dolomite Resource Potential Map of Florida

5. Coquina Resource Potential Map of Florida











INTRODUCTION
Purpose and Scope of Investigation
This report summarizes the known data relating to the occurrence of the
limestone, dolomite, and coquina resources of the State of Florida and the
uses of these commodities. The information presented is not intended to be
an exhaustive study leading to immediate commercial development,
however, the conclusions and statements made herein are based on exten-
sive research by the Florida Bureau of Geology. Preparation for this report
included geological field reconnaissance, examination of well cuttings and
core samples, analysis of data from private industry, and comprehensive
literature search. This study may be considered an up-to-date "state-of-the-
art" report including uses and the locations of economic deposits of
limestone, dolomite, and coquina in Florida.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the valuable assistance provided by
the many other authors whose publications were used in compiling this
report. Special thanks goes to Mr. E. W. Bishop, Mr. Charles W. Hendry,
Jr., Mr. Steve R. Windham, and Mr. J. William Yon, Jr., for reviewing the
manuscript. Their assistance added materially to the accuracy and clarity of
presentation.
The authors are most grateful to Mr. John W. Sweeney of the U. S.
Bureau of Mines for reviewing the manuscript, and Mr. William D. Reves,
Consulting Geologist, for reviewing the resource potential maps.

GENERAL STATEMENT
The State of Florida is underlain by more than 4,000 feet of sedimentary
ocks that overlie a basement of older sedimentary, metamorphic, and ig-
neous rocks. Most of the state is covered by a surface mantle of soils, sands,
nd clayey sands that may reach several hundred feet in thickness. This
mantle obscures the underlying carbonates (limestone, dolomite, and co-
uina), except where they are exposed in stream valleys, sink holes, coastal
'wlands, and other areas where the cover is thin or absent as a result of ero-
on.

LIMESTONE, DOLOMITE AND COQUINA: A BACKGROUND
The term limestone has its origin in the mineral industry. In the literal
:nse it means a stone from which lime can be produced. Geologists,
however, refer to a large group of rocks as limestone, regardless of their
ilue for the production of lime. The geologist would include as limestones
lose sedimentary rocks made up of 50 percent or more of the minerals








BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


calcite (calcium carbonate) and dolomite, (calcium magnesium carbonate),
with calcite being the predominant mineral. Most commercial limestones
are 90 percent or more calcium carbonate.
Dolomite is far less common than calcite. It can be defined as a sedimen-
tary rock containing more than 50 percent of the minerals calcite and
dolomite, with dolomite being the most abundant. Dolomite most often
forms by subsequent alteration (recrystallization) of a limestone after its
deposition. In many cases the major features of the limestone, such as bed-
ding or chert nodules, may carry over into the dolomite.
Coquina consists primarily of cemented mollusk shells in varying
degrees of preservation. Generally, the shells are loosely held together by a
calcareous cement. In Florida the rock varies from a sandy limestone, to a
calcareous sandstone, to unconsolidated sand and shells.
Coquina was the first of Florida's mineral resources to be utilized by
early European settlers. The name has its origin from a Spanish word mean-
ing cockle or shellfish. Early Spanish settlers applied the name to the
deposits of shell near St. Augustine. The harder layers were used in building
forts and missions.

GENERAL USES

Limestone and dolomite both possess a property which has been known
for quite some time: When they are heated they lose carbon dioxide and
yield lime.
CaCO, + heat CaO + CO2 I
CaMg(CO3)2 + heat CaO + MgO + 2C02t
In addition, limestone and dolomite have in common the following uses:
(1) as crushed stone for concrete aggregate, road metal, railroad ballast,
and sewage filter beds; and when ground finer, for poultry grit, stucco, a
stabilizer for coal mine dust, filler, and whiting; (2) as a fluxing agent, in the
smelting and refining of iron and other metals; (3) as dimension stone; (4) as
a chemical raw material, as in glassmaking and acid neutralization; (5) as i
soil conditioner, often referred to as "agricultural lime" or "aglime",
which is used to correct soil acidity and promote plant growth.
Limestone is a basic raw material for Portland cement manufacture, an, 1
dolomite is the source of certain high-grade refractory materials.
Coquina was used extensively in the past for building stone. An impo -
tant characteristic of the rock is that, though somewhat soft when first cul,
it tends to "case harden" on the outside after exposure to the elements. Th:
famous Fort Castillo de San Marcos at St. Augustine is made from cut cc -
quina. More recently several public buildings along the East Coast cf
Florida have been built with facings of coquina blocks. The dominant use Z t
present, however, is for roadbase.








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION No. 88


THE GEOLOGY OF FLORIDA'S LIMESTONE, DOLOMITE, AND
COQUINA DEPOSITS
Limestone and dolomites presently mined in the State of Florida range
in age from late Middle Eocene (42 million years ago, MYA) to Pleistocene
(.5 MYA). The mining in the Florida panhandle and the western half of the
northern and central peninsula utilizes carbonates that range in age from
late Middle Eocene to Upper Oligocene and Middle Miocene. Southwestern
Florida mining operations produce limestone from rocks ranging from Mid-
dle or Upper Miocene to Pliocene Age. Pleistocene Age limestones and
lithified coquina are mined along the Atlantic coast from the Florida Keys
in Monroe County north to Flagler and St. Johns counties.
Several geologic factors control the mining potential of limestones and
dolomites. Lithology, structure, and geomorphology all are important fac-
tors that dictate where mine activities will be economically feasible. The
lithologic character of the rocks is the most variable of the three factors.
The lithology of any carbonate section may change quickly due to many
factors including facies transition, alteration of the rock due to ground
water action, varying degrees of dolomitization, and the dolomitization of
differing facies creating a varying dolomite lithology. Other lithologic
variables such as sand and clay content also affect the quality of the rock,
and may render it useless for certain products.
Structure and geomorphology are much more generalized in their effects
on potential mining. Structural control is related to the attitude of the car-
bonate units and to faulting. The dip of the units, which in Florida is
generally less than 30 feet per mile, can cause the limestone or dolomite unit
to become more deeply buried beneath undesirable or non-economic units
down-dip. Conversely, in an up-dip direction, the unit being mined may
have been removed by erosion, thus exposing underlying units which may or
mnay not be economically important. Faulting may also cause rapid changes
n lithology within a relatively short distance. This results from the up-
hrown side of the fault exposing older rocks to erosion while the
lownthrown side protects the older rocks from erosion by burying them
!ith younger sediments. An example of this is discussed by Pride, et al
i966) in a report on the Green Swamp.
The limestone and dolomite units are often buried by younger geomor-
hic features. These landforms are marine, deltaic, fluvial, and solution
elated in origin. The effect of these geomorphic features can create condi-
ons under which limestone or dolomite production is no longer
economical. The relation of these landforms to the carbonate units will be
discussed in each section.
The geology of Florida's limestone and dolomite resources will be
discussed in four sections based on location within the state. Each section








BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


has its own unique geologic setting. The areas to be discussed will be north-
west Florida, the western half of the northern and central peninsula, the
Atlantic Coast, and southwestern Florida.

NORTHWEST FLORIDA

Active and potential limestone and dolomite mining areas of the Florida
panhandle lie within a four-county area which includes Walton, Holmes,
Washington, and Jackson counties. The carbonate resources of this area
have been discussed by many previous authors. Vernon (1942), Moore
(1955), and Schmidt and Coe (1978) have discussed the stratigraphy and
structure of the area. Moore (1955) also presents a detailed discussion of
previous authors' works. Reves (1961), Shirley and Sweeney (1965), and
Yon and Hendry (1969) all investigated the area's limestone resources.
Stratigraphically, the oldest limestones available for mining in north-
west Florida belong to the Upper Eocene Ocala Group. As shown on Map 1
(in pocket), the limestones of the Ocala Group crop out in a broad band
along the Florida-Alabama border in Jackson and Holmes counties. They
also extend southward into extreme northwestern Washington County.
The limestones of the Ocala Group are white to cream colored, usually
poorly indurated, permeable, granular, fossiliferous to highly fossiliferous,
and very high in calcium carbonate content. Texturally, the sediments grade
from very chalky through microquina to a coarse allochemical limestone
composed almost completely of fossil material. The high purity (percent
CaCO3) varies slightly with the exception of a lower faces described by Ver-
non (1942), which occurs in northern Holmes County and contains con-
siderably more quartz sand and glauconite. Induration varies from the com-
mon poor induration to moderate induration with areas of well indurated,
recrystallized, dense limestone. The well indurated, recrystallized rocks
generally cover only small areas (Reves, 1961).
The thickness of the Ocala Group in this area ranges from 200 to 300
feet (Vernon, 1942; Moore, 1955; Reves, 1961). The direction of the dip of
the beds varies from southeast in eastern Jackson County to south and
southwest in central and western Jackson County and in Holmes and
Washington counties (Vernon, 1942; Reves, 1961). The dip averages be-
tween 12 to 20 feet per mile (Reves, 1961).
The existence of faulting in Jackson County was discussed by Moor:
(1955). He identified what he believed to be a large fault in the central poi -
tion of the county, and named it the Cypress Fault. Schmidt and Coe (197F)
could not substantiate the existence of this fault in their lithostratigraphi:
study.
The Marianna Limestone, of Oligocene Age, overlies the Ocala Grou
and crops out in a narrow band immediately south and southwest of th:








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


ocala Group. It occurs in a narrow band across central Jackson, northern
Washington, and southwestern Holmes counties, and into northeastern
Walton County.
The Marianna Limestone is white, cream to light gray in color. It is
slightly glauconitic (Moore, 1955) and sandy (Vernon, 1942) in thin beds.
The limestone generally appears massive and impermeable with an abun-
dant foraminiferal fauna. It is soft in fresh exposures but case hardens upon
exposure to the atmosphere. There are local occurrences of hard
recrystallized limestone.
The thickness of the Marianna Limestone is fairly uniform throughout
this area. It ranges from approximately 25 feet in some areas of Jackson
County to as much as 45 feet in Washington and Holmes counties. It thins
to zero due to erosion toward the Eocene outcrop. The beds dip generally
southward at a rate of 11 to 18 feet per mile (Reves, 1961). However, Moore
(1955) reports a dip of 64 feet per mile in part of Jackson County. This, he
believes, is associated with the Cypress Fault.
The Marianna Limestone is overlain by the Suwannee Limestone, of
Oligocene Age. It crops out in a narrow band immediately south of the
Marianna outcrop belt, and follows the same trend across the four-county
area as the Marianna Limestone.
The Suwannee Limestone is a cream to buff colored, poorly to well in-
durated, extremely fossiliferous, porous, massive limestone. It may occa-
sionally contain beds of chalky, soft limestone. Small areas of highly
recrystallized limestone frequently occur but apparently with no regular ar-
rangement. In portions of Jackson County the Suwannee varies from a
dolomitic limestone to a dolomite, which is mined in the Chipola River
Valley. Silicified zones also occur scattered about the limestone surface.
The thickness of the Suwannee is quite variable due to erosion of its sur-
Sice prior to the deposition of the Tampa Stage limestones (Chattahoochee
Sad St. Marks Formations). The Suwannee thickens from a feather edge at
te Marianna outcrop, to over 200 feet thick in the sub-surface down-dip in
.ckson County. The dip varies from 10 to 20 feet per mile. Moore (1955)
ggests a dip of 64 feet per mile in the vicinity of the Cypress Fault in
ckson County.
Overlying the Suwannee is the Chattahoochee Formation of Upper
:igocene and Miocene Age (Poag, 1972). It crops out immediately south of
t Suwannee outcrop belt and follows the same trend. The Chattahoochee
Buried by younger sediments to the south.
The lithology of the Chattahoochee Formation is quite variable within
four-county area. In Holmes and Washington counties it is
edominately a sandy, silty limestone with greenish, argillaceous silts
Scurrying at its base. In Jackson County, it is characterized as an







BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


argillaceous limestone that is white to cream in color, very silty to sandy,
and chalky to crystalline (Hendry and Yon, 1958).
The Chattahoochee appears to be thickest in Jackson County, near th.
Jim Woodruff Dam where it is 227 feet thick (Hendry and Yon, 1958). It
thins to 100 feet or less in the southwestern part of the county. In Holmes
and Washington counties it averages 50 feet in thickness.
The dip of the Chattahoochee varies from 12 feet per mile in
Washington County to approximately 20 feet per mile in Holmes county.
The dip is approximately 13 feet per mile in Jackson County.
The geologic map (Map 1, in pocket) shows relatively large areas of
limestone within northwestern Florida. However, due to the physiography
of the region these limestones are often buried to an unmineable depth. By
comparing the geologic map (Map 1), the physiographic map (Map 2, in
pocket), and the limestone and dolomite potential maps (Maps 3 & 4, in
pocket), it becomes clear the effect that the physiography has on the poten-
tial for mining the limestone and dolomite resources of northwest Florida.

THE WESTERN HALF OF NORTH AND
CENTRAL PENINSULAR FLORIDA
This area includes the counties of the "Big Bend" south to Manatee
County. Included are the counties of Wakulla, Jefferson, Taylor,
Lafayette, Suwannee, Dixie, Gilchrist, Alachua, Levy, Marion, Citrus,
Sumter, Hernando, Pasco, Hillsborough, Polk, and Manatee. This
17-county area has been discussed by many authors. These include Yon
(1966), Geology of Jefferson County; Puri, Yon and Oglesby (1967),
Geology of Dixie and Gilchrist Counties; Clark, Musgrove, Menke, and
Cagle (1964), Water Resources ofA lachua County; Vernon (1951), Geology
of Citrus and Levy Counties; Puri (1957), Stratigraphy and Zonation of the
Ocala Group; Yon and Hendry (1972), Suwannee Limestone in Hernando
and Pasco Countes; Peek (1958), on Manatee County; Stewart (1966), en
Polk County; Pride, Meyer, and Cherry (1965), on the Green Swamp;
White (1970), Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula; and many other;.
Each of these previous authors discuss other authors who have complete d
investigations in this area. These reports may be consulted for more infor-
mation and further additional references.
Stratigraphically, the oldest formation cropping out in the state, the la:e
Middle Eocene Avon Park Limestone, is found in this area. In Levy Coun y
where the Avon Park is being mined at the present time, it is a tan to brow i,
thin bedded, laminated, finely crystalline dolomite. The Avon Park vari :s
from very porous and soft to dense and well indurated. Layers of fine, si t-
sized dolomite occur throughout the Avon Park section. Layers of ligni:e
commonly occur, as do layers of carbonaceous plant fossils. Fossil mol is
are very common in the more porous zones. The Avon Park also occurs as a








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


Scream to brownish, highly fossiliferous, soft, porous limestone, but is not
economically significant. Vernon (1951) estimates the thickness of the Avon
Park to be 200 to 300 feet in Levy County. It thickens in the subsurface east
and southeast of the crest of the Ocala High (Citrus and Levy counties) and
may reach as much as 600 feet thick in eastern peninsular Florida. West of
the crest, the Avon Park dips southwest at approximately 15 feet per mile.
East of the crest, it dips to the northeast and east at the same gentle rate.
The Ocala High plunges gently to the southeast and the dip of the Avon
Park follows that trend south of the outcrop area. The geologic map (Map
1) shows where the Avon Park occurs in outcrop or in the shallow subsur-
face.
The Upper Eocene Ocala Group limestones overlie the Avon Park
Limestone and crop out in a roughly oval pattern around the Avon Park
outcrop (Map 1). The Ocala Group is divided into three formations based
on lithology and paleontology. The three formations are in ascending order:
the Inglis Formation, The Williston Formation, and the Crystal River For-
mation, as named by Vernon (1951) and Puri (1957). The lowest formation,
the Inglis, is a cream to tan, granular, porous, massive, semihard,
fossiliferous limestone. It is occasionally a coquina of foraminifers,
mollusks, and echinoids (Vernon, 1951). The base of the unit may be
dolomitized to varying degrees. When the dolomite occurs it is usually tan
to brown, porous, soft to hard and massive. Vernon (1951) reports the base
of the unit is generally marked by a rubble zone whose source is the Avon
Park Limestone. The Inglis may be cross-bedded as can be seen along the
Gulf portion of the Florida Barge Canal and in pits in the surrounding area.
The Inglis is approximately 50 feet in thickness.
The Williston Formation overlies the Inglis. It has two lithologic types
tnat interfinger. One is a cream colored limestone that is a soft, friable co-
caina of foraminifers. The other is a cream to tan, highly fossiliferous
c :trital limestone (Vernon, 1951). Masses of silicified limestone occur and
a e generally found near the Williston-Inglis contact (Vernon, 1951). Ver-
r m (1951) describes the top of the Williston as "a transition zone, having
f unal similarities with the Ocala Limestone (now called Crystal River For-
r Nation) but generally differing in lithology, being harder, more granular,
a d containing fewer specimens of large foraminifers". The Williston in the
a :a of potential mining averages 30 feet in thickness.
The Crystal River Formation lies above the Williston and is typically
v ,ite to cream, soft, very massive, friable coquina of large foraminifers in a
F ;ty calcite matrix (Vernon, 1951). Occasional thin beds of a more
inular miliolid-rich limestone occur, and they also appear at the base as a
I !nsitional zone between the Crystal River and the Williston formations.
1 le thickness of the Crystal River Formation is highly variable since the top
( the formation has been exposed to erosion several times after deposition.







BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


This highly irregular surface is often penetrated by solution features (sinks
and solution pipes), as is much of the lower Ocala Group. The total
thickness of the Crystal River varies from zero to a maximum of nearly 300
feet in the subsurface of the peninsula. The thickest exposure of the Crystal
River is located in the Crystal River Quarry in Citrus County where 108 feet
of the limestone is exposed.
Structurally, the Ocala Group crops out in a roughly oval pattern near
the crest of and on the flanks of the Ocala High. It dips off the elongate
high in all directions. For further information consult the various references
for the Ocala Group, particular Vernon (1951) and Puri (1957).
Unconformably overlying the Ocala is the Suwannee Limestone of the
Oligocene Epoch. It is a pale orange, finely crystalline, thin bedded, soft to
hard, dense, porous, very fossiliferous limestone. The lithification varies
from soft and friable to well indurated, highly recrystallized. In Jefferson
and Taylor counties the Suwannee exhibits varying degrees of dolomitiza-
tion. The dolomitic limestone is tan to brown, porous to dense,
fossiliferous, and moldic. It occurs in a band of varying width that parallels
the coastline. Boulders of silicified limestone are very common in the out-
crop areas.
The Suwannee Limestone crops out on the northwestern and
southeastern ends of the Eocene outcrop area (Map 1). It does not occur on
the eastern flank of the Ocala High, either because of nondeposition or ero-
sion. The thickness of the Suwannee is highly variable due to erosion and
varies widely throughout the outcrop belt, reaching more than 200 feet in
thickness in the subsurface of Pasco and Hernando counties.
Overlying the Suwannee is the St. Marks Formation of the Tampa
Stage, considered Lower Miocene. Yon (1966) described the St. Marks For-
mation in north Florida as a white to very pale orange, finely crystalline,
sandy, silty, clayey limestone (calcilutite) with poor to moderate porosity.
Menke and others (1961) described the "Tampa" limestone (St. Marks) of
Hillsborough County as a white to cream and gray, hard to soft, sanc.y
limestone containing many fossil molds.
The St. Marks Formation crops out or is near the surface in two wide y
separated areas. One is in northern Florida in Wakulla and Jefferson cou: -
ties and the other is in central Florida in Pasco and Hillsborough counties .
In Jefferson County it is a maximum of 120 feet thick and dips to the sout ".
In Pasco and Hillsborough counties the St. Marks is of quite variab.e
thickness and dips generally to the south and southwest.
The Middle Miocene Hawthorn Formation overlies the St. Marks Fc-
mation. The Hawthorn consists of two dominant lithologies, an upp r
plastic unit and a lower carbonate unit. The carbonate unit varies in cor i-
position and thickness throughout the state and is of economic important e
only where it is near the surface. The carbonate Hawthorn is mined, or








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


would d be mined, in parts of Polk, Hillsborough, and Manatee counties. As
described by Peek (1958) in Manatee county, the Hawthorn consists of
gray, bluish-gray, and greenish-gray, sandy, calcareous clay interbedded
with white, gray and tan sandy limestone and thin beds of sand and shells.
The limestones contain varying amounts of chert and dolomite. Dolomite is
very abundant in the Hawthorn of western Manatee County where it is
mined. In many instances, the dolomites are very crystalline and hard.
The Hawthorn thickens down-dip to the south and varies from 150 feet
to over 300 feet thick in the subsurface.
Limestone and dolomite in western peninsular Florida are mined
predominantly from the Gulf Coastal Lowlands. Several highland features
influence the economics of the resource and these are shown on Map 2. A
comparison of the physiographic map (Map 2), the geologic map (Map 1),
and the potential map (Map 3) relate the influences of geomorphology,
stratigraphy, and lithologies.

ATLANTIC COAST OF FLORIDA

The limestones and lithified coquina actively mined along Florida's
Atlantic Coast occur from St. Johns County on the north to Monroe Coun-
ty in the Keys. The lithified coquina occurs in the Pleistocene Anastasia
Formation and forms the backbone of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge south to
approximately the Palm Beach-Broward County line. South of that county
line to the Keys the Pleistocene Miami Oolite forms the ridge and is actively
mined for limestone. The limestones of the Florida Keys belong to two for-
mations, the Key Largo Limestone and the Miami Oolite. The Upper Keys,
from Soldier Key to Big Pine Key, are composed of the Pleistocene Key
Largo Limestone while the Lower Keys are Miami Oolite. As seen on Map 1
:e Upper Keys are designated as the Coral Keys while the Lower Keys are
Sle Oolite Keys.
Lithologically, the Anastasia Formation consists primarily of a sandy
Squina of mollusk shells held loosely together by a calcareous cement (Puri
I:d Vernon, 1964). Cooke (1945) states "the most conspicuous part of the
nastasia is coquina, a deposit of whole or broken shells that have been
ore or less firmly cemented by calcium carbonate, iron oxide, or other
nding material. All gradations can be found between coarse rock, com-
,sed almost entirely of unbroken shells, and sandstones in which all the
ells have been reduced to rounded grains of coral sand."
The Anastasia Formation represents an ancient beach facies and occurs
Sily in a band of limited extent. It occurs rarely more than 5 miles inland
:m the Intracoastal Waterway where it interfingers with and is equivalent
unnamed contemporaneous deposits and, in south Florida, the marine
embers of the Ft. Thompson Formation (Parker, et al 1955). Southward







BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


the Anastasia interfingers with and grades into the Miami Oolite which
replaces it as the core of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge. Parker, et al (1955)
states that the Anastasia may exceed 100 feet thick in some areas.
The Miami Oolite is typically a soft, white to yellow, stratified to
massive, cross-bedded, sandy to pure limestone analyzing as high as 95 per-
cent CaCO, and consists of small, spherical ovules with marked concentric
structure (Puri and Vernon, 1964). It reaches a maximum thickness of near-
ly 40 feet under the ridge and thins away from it. The Miami Oolite is often
pitted with numerous sand-filled solution cavities. It is found underlying
nearly all of Dade County, much of Broward County, a very small area of
Collier County, Florida Bay, and the Lower Keys of Monroe County. The
Miami Oolite interfingers with the upper part of the Key Largo Limestone
and overlies the lower, older part of the Key Largo to the south. It overlies
the Ft. Thompson in some areas of the Everglades to the west of the coastal
ridge.
The Key Largo Limestone represents an ancient coral reef tract and its
associated environments. It forms the Upper Keys of the Florida Keys in
Monroe County. Lithologically, it is a white to cream colored, coralline
limestone, with 40 percent composed of skeletal remains of reef-building
corals, and the rest being a skeletal limestone containing remains of coral,
mollusks, foraminifers, coralline algae, and echinoids (Puri and Vernon,
1964). Cooke (1945) states that it is highly variable in appearance and struc-
ture ranging from a fine, white, compact, homogeneous limestone to the
coralline limestone described above.
The Key Largo Limestone interfingers with both the Miami Oolite on
the mainland and in the Lower Keys and the Ft. Thompson on the
mainland. Parts of the Upper Key Largo Limestone are the same age as the
Miami Oolite, while the lower portion is older and is equivalent in age to the
Ft. Thompson Formation.

SOUTHWEST FLORIDA

Active limestone mining operations occur in Lee, Hendry, and Collie:
counties of Southwest Florida. The limestone is predominantly mined fror
the Plio-Miocene (7-10 MYA) Tamiami Formation. Some secondary minin;
activity removes limestone from the Pleistocene Ft. Thompson (?) Form -
tion near Lake Okeechobee. The limestone surface is generally buried by i
thin layer of quartz sand usually referred to the Pleistocene Epoch, (1.
MYA), which is easily removed prior to mining.
Lithologically, the limestones of the upper Tamiami Formation are ta i
to white, soft to very hard, sandy, and contain an abundant and varie I
fauna of mollusks, barnacles, echinoids, and corals. Preservation of fossil;
varies from excellent to mostly moldic in a highly recrystallized matri,








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


(Meeder, 1979). Several facies of the upper Tamiami have been named,
while others remain unnamed and their relationships are still questioned
(Meeder, personal communication, 1979; Hunter, personal communica-
tion, 1979).
Dubar (1958) states that the Tamiami Formation ranges from 40 to 100
feet in thickness in the area of the Caloosahatchee River in Lee and Hendry
counties. Parker (1955) gives a maximum Tamiami thickness of 150 feet in
south Florida.
Limited mining of Ft. Thompson limestones and possibly lithified por-
tions of the Caloosahatchee Formation occurs locally, but is of little
economic significance.

THE USES OF LIMESTONE

The uses of limestone and dolomite are so variable and abundant that a
list of specifications is beyond the scope of this report. Certain uses of
limestone and dolomite are dependent upon the chemical composition,
whereas other uses are largely controlled by the physical characteristics
(Bowles, 1956). The following is a listing of the major uses of limestone
modified after Wood (1958).
RAW MATERIAL Cement, agriculture limingg), stock feeds, syn-
thetic whiting, rubber, calcium cyanamid, calcium
carbide, insecticides, abrasives, glass
BONDING AGENT road-soil stabilization, sand-lime brick, asphalt
paving, mortars, plasters, insulation materials,
silica brick, stuccos
NEUTRALIZATION water treatment, sewage treatment, fine
chemicals, citric acid, gasoline, wood distillation,
calcium phosphates, dyestuffs, metal pickling
wastes, explosives wastes, chrome chemicals, acid
mine drainage
LOCCULATION water purification, industrial waste treatment,
paint pigments, sugar, ore flotation, salt process-
ing.
OLVENT gelatin, animal glue, leather (dehairing), casein
paints, strawboard
BSORPTION bleaches, gas purification, sulfite pulp
YDROLIZATION soap, pulp cloth, lubricating grease, organic
chemicals, ammonia
LUX alumina, open hearth steel, electric furnace steel,
non-ferrous metals
UBRICANT oil-well muds, wire drawing


AUSTICIZATION


caustic soda, soda and sulfate pulp







BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


DEHYDRATION air drying, petroleum, other organic solvents,
alcohols
Nationally the limestone industry is divided into two groups: The pro-
ducers of crushed and broken stone, and the producers of cut or dimen-
sional stone. Dimensional stone is not currently produced in Florida,
although in the past, Florida limestones and coquinas were extensively used
for building block.
The largest percentage of limestone produced in Florida is used for
roadbase. The limestone can be used as a surface treatment aggregate to im-
prove unstabilized roads, as bituminous aggregate for road pavement, or
more commonly as a limerock base and stabilized base material.
The limestone used for limerock base and stabilized base material must
meet both chemical purity and certain physical requirements as specified in
the Florida Department of Transportation Standard Specifications For
Road and Bridge Construction (section 911 1-6, page 541). The minimum
percentage of carbonates of calcium and magnesium in the limerock
material shall be 70 percent. The liquid limit' for both limerock and
limerock stabilized base material shall not exceed 35. The limerock base
material shall be non-plastic and the limerock stabilized base material's
plastic index2 shall not exceed 10. The limerock also shall not contain any
harmful materials such as chert, extremely hard pieces or lumps, balls, or
pockets of sand or clay size material in sufficient quantity to be detrimental
to the proper bonding, finishing or strength of the limerock base. The
gradation and size requirement for limerock base is that at least 97 percent
(by weight) of the material shall pass a 3 V2 inch sieve and that the material
shall be graded uniformly to dust. The size requirement for limerock
stabilized base differs from the limerock base in that 97 percent of the
material shall pass the 1 V inch sieve. The limerock material used in con-
struction of limerock base shall have an average limerock bearing ratio of
not less than 100.
Florida limestones are also used in great quantities for cement ag-
gregate. In this form they are used primarily in highway construction and il
the building trades. In general, the stone used for aggregate should consis-
of clean, hard, strong, durable, uncoated fragments free from injuriou;
amounts of soft, friable, thin, elongated, or laminated pieces. Alkalies,
organic matter, and soluble sulfides are also undesirable. The fitness of th,
limestone for concrete aggregate can be ascertained by a variety of tests.
These tests are outlined in the American Society for Testing Material;

'The liquid limit of a material is the water content expressed as a percentage of the weight ( f
the oven-dried material, at the boundary between the liquid and plastic states. (ASTM 1978 .
The plastic limit of a material is the water content, expressed as a percentage of the weight ( f
the oven-dried material, at the boundary between plastic and semisolid states (ASTM 1978 .








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


(ASTM) 1978 manual and include the Los Angeles abrasion .test, Deval
abrasion test, the Dory hardness test, the Page impact test, and ordinary
crushing strength tests. In Florida the Los Angeles abrasion test is normally
the only test conducted on potential aggregate material.
The next most common use for the limestones and dolomites of Florida
is for agricultural stone. The limestones and dolomites are used as fertilizer,
soil conditioners, and correcters for soil acidity. The major prerequisite for
the limestone or the dolomite used as agricultural stone is that it have a high
percentage of calcium or magnesium available for improving the soil.
Limestone dust is used as a filler in road asphalt surface mixtures. The
Florida Department of Transportation requires that 65 percent of the
material shall pass a no. 200 sieve, 95 percent of the material shall pass a no.
80 sieve, and 100 percent of the material shall pass a no. 30 sieve. Their
specifications also stipulate that no phosphate shall be present in the
mineral filler.
Another use for limestone and dolomite is as rip rap. Rip rap consists of
heavy, irregular blocks used primarily for harbor and river erosion control
structures such as jetties, spillways at dams, docks, and sea walls. The
Florida Department of Transportation requires that rip rap materials be
sound and durable, with specific gravities of at least 1.90. The rip rap shall
be free of cracks, soft seams and other structural defects. The pieces shall be
roughly angular and shall be reasonably free from thin, flat or elongated
pieces.
Limestone screenings are used in place of silica sand in many areas of
the state for roofing gravel, playground surface, concrete block manufac-
ture, and poultry grit. When used as roofing gravel the limestone chips are
mixed with tar for coating flat roofs. Limestone screenings without a binder
make good surfaces for playgrounds, schoolyards, and walkways. Concrete
blocks almost always have some limestone aggregate incorporated within
hem. Crushed limestone is satisfactory for sewage filter beds.
Impurities in limestone such as marcasite, pyrite, and clay should be
voided. Siliceous impurities are not objectional as long as they are fine-
:ained and evenly distributed. The limestone fragments should be compact
'd strong with rough surfaces. Fines and dirt should also be screened out
Sthe limestone.
Finely ground limestone or dolomite is often used as a whiting substitute
ceramic raw materials and as fillers in numerous products, which include
bber, paint, paper, oilcloth, window shades, and linoleum.
Limestone is the major raw material used in making Portland cement
d lime. The manufacturing processes for cement are discussed in detail in
e section on Mining Methods. Briefly, cement manufacture requires the
Semical conversion of limestone (calcium carbonate) to lime (calcium ox-
Se). This conversion is accomplished by a calcination process, which is the







BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


burning of limestone at high temperature in special kilns to drive off the
CO2 (Reves, 1961). It is not necessary to have pure limestone as a raw
material. However, limestones that have high percentages of calcium car-
bonate are most desirable, since processing is simplified. The limestone
should be free of iron-rich concretions, and it should be low in silica,
alumina, magnesium, and sulfur.
In addition to cement, lime is an important and essential raw material
for numerous other industries. It is one of the most widely used chemical
reagents in the chemical and other manufacturing industries. Lime's
physical properties make it a valuable commodity to the building industry.
In agriculture lime is widely used as a soil corrective.
The manufacture of lime generally requires an exceptionally pure
limestone for the kiln, with total carbonates more than 97 percent. A high
carbonate content is desirable because virtually all of the impurities in the
limestone remain in the lime after calcination.
Both high-calcium and high-magnesium limestones can be used in these
operations. The physical properties of the limestone are also important, but
requirements vary with the method of manufacture. A sound and compact
stone is desirable for a vertical shaft kiln operation because it does not pro-
duce an excess of fines, which retard the draft in the kiln. For a horizontal
rotary kiln operation finer materials may be used.

TRANSPORTATION
Crushed limestone in Florida is transported by truck, rail, and water.
Conveyance by truck represents the principle means of transportation and
averages between 75 and 85 percent of the total tonnage hauled (U. S.
Bureau of Mines, 1945-1974). Rail is an important minor means of
transportation of crushed stone and averages from 10 to 15 percent. Due to
energy demands and projected future expansion of mass transportation,
shipments by rail should increase significantly in the future. Shipment by
water is a very minor means of transportation averaging from 0.5 to 2 per-
cent.
QUARRY SITES
Limestone and dolomite in Florida is produced from several formation;
including the Key Largo Limestone, the Miami Oolite, the Hawthorn Fo -
mation, the Tampa Limestone, the Suwannee Limestone, the Marianni
Limestone, the Ocala Group, and the Avon Park Limestone (Cooke, 1945 .
All limestone and dolomite produced in Florida is by open pit mining wit I
the highest concentrations of quarries located in Broward, Dade, an I
Marion counties.
The production of aggregate (hard-rock) limestone in Florida is primary -
ly concentrated in Broward, Collier, Dade, Hernando, Lee, Monroe,








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


Okeechobee, Palm Beach, and Suwannee counties (U. S. Geological Survey
Investigations, 1973). Dade, Hernando, and Broward counties are, in the
order noted, the leading limestone producing counties in the state, supply-
ing 70 percent of the total tonnage and value.
Soft-rock limestone commonly used for road base is more evenly
distributed over Florida and averages about 63 percent of the total output
of all limestone produced. Figure 1 is a graph showing the number of active
quarries (total of hard plus soft-rock) in Florida over the period 1965-1977
(U. S. Bureau of Mines, Mineral Yearbooks 1965-1977). The graph il-
lustrates the wide variation from year to year in the numbers of active quar-
ries. These variations are primarily a result of changing market conditions
and quarry suitability.

MARKET TRENDS
The total U. S. production of crushed and broken limestone (excluding
that used in making lime) has shown a marked increase over the years. In


S77

- 73


74


-M 65

m- 75


NUMBER OF
m ACTIVE QUARRIES


85


90





89


119

119


377 127
lure 1.-Number of active quarries producing limestone, dolomite, and coquina in Florida
for the period 1965-1977. Numbers represent totals of hard-rock plus soft-rock
quarries.


1965

1966


1969


1971

1972

:973

974

975

976


--e~Src Re ~c~1l


--b~sB~'-~P~PL6d~ ~P ~ dgc~

~pb~l I ~~eLB~( -~pL- --JI-----








16 BUREAU OF GEOLOGY

1922 production was 52,684,000 tons; in 1942, 142,025,000 tons; in 1952,
216,468,000 tons; in 1962, 460,953,000 tons, and in 1975 about 666,320,000
tons. This rapid growth over the last 50 years can be attributed to a marked
increase in highway construction (especially the development of the inter-
state system), the building construction industry, and a significant expan-

6 33.542
66r 35.767


32.617
1967 36.669


1968


1969


1970


1971


197


19


- 35.548
-----iii- =- 44.612


QUANTITY
(MILLION SHORT TONS)

VALUE
(MILLION DOLLARS)


40.730
.i 7i....... 53.626

40.210
.::. ..: .. ....: I 55.176

40.458
.......... ............. 59.319


S .53.093
2 ... ....... *1 81.621


61.734
73 1 .............................................................. .. 103.536


1975 38.556
1975 ::::::::: :: ................................
..........73.372


197


38.500


::::::::::: 74.300


48.600


::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::: 10 1.4 0 0

Figure 2.-Production and value for crushed limestone from all sources (limestone, dolomi e,
and coquina) in Florida for the period 1966-1977.


I


1974 1 ...37
.1 100.378


p


.. I I


R4_ R60


e


11. 9








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


sion in the metallurgical, chemical, and processing industries for which
limestone is an important ingredient. In addition, limestone can be
substituted for lime in areas such as agriculture, fluxing, and sulfur
removal. This substitution of limestone for lime is further facilitated by the
much lower cost of limestone as compared to the more expensive calcined,
energy dependent lime.
Figure 2 is a graph showing the record of total crushed limestone pro-
duction in Florida for the years 1966 to 1977. Production of crushed
limestone, which totaled about 33.5 million tons in 1966, rose gradually to a
peak of 61.7 million tons in 1973 (U. S. Bureau of Mines, 1966-1976). This
steady growth closely paralleled the upward trend in the construction in-
dustry during this period of time. The sharp downturn in production
recorded in 1974 was directly attributable to a recession and consequent
slowdown in the construction and road-building industries. Further reduc-
tion in limestone production in 1975 reflected this continued downward
trend in the number of homebuilding and highway projects.

ROADBASE AND CONCRETE AGGREGATE
The two principal uses of limestone in Florida are for concrete aggregate
and roadbase. Figure 3 shows the trend of this segment of the industry for
the period 1966-1975. About 29.5 million tons, 88 percent of the total of
Florida's 1966 limestone production, was mined (in 1966) for use as road-
base and concrete aggregate. This can be compared with approximately 33.6
million tons, which is 87.2 percent of the total crushed stone produced in
1975. A comparison of these values shows a relatively small growth for this
sector of the industry over this ten-year interval, reflecting in part the rece-
sion of 1973-1974 in homebuilding and road construction.

AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE
Agricultural limestone, which includes both pure limestone and
iolomitic limestone, represents a small but significant part of the Florida
rushed limestone industry. Figure 3 graphically depicts the fluctuations of
lis commodity over the period 1966-1975. Use of agricultural limestone
ere is for fertilizers, soil conditioners and correctives for soil acidity.
bout 880,000 tons, 2.6 percent of the total limestone production in 1966,
as utilized for agricultural limestone. This can be compared with 1975 pro-
action figures of 942,000 tons, representing 2.4 percent of the total
'ushed limestone produced that year.

LIME
Florida lime production in 1965 was 425,000 tons as compared to a total
f 199,362 tons in 1975. Figure 4 shows Florida lime production from 1968








18 BUREAU OF GEOLOGY

to 1977. Total lime production for 1977 in the U. S. and Puerto Rico was 20
million tons, which showed a 1 percent decrease from 1976 and 8 percent
below the production level of 1974. Florida lime production represents a
figure far below lime consumption in the state.


I pi b 1~2.6


I 00


- 2.4


.............................................................................. o0 .U
--~~-~~~~~~~~"~'~""::--""


2.6
.............. 79.0


2,0
..81.5


0.9
76.4

1.2
...................................................... 88.4


1966



1967



1968



1969



1970



1971


1972



1973



1974



1975


2.3


2.7
--......... .I 88.9


2.4
..... ... .. ............................. 87.2


PERCENT USED FOR AGRICULTURE
PERCENT USED FOR CEMENT MANUFACTURING,
ROAD AND CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE
Figure 3.-Percentages of total Florida limestone that are used for agriculture and for cement t,
road, and construction aggregate for the period 1966-1975.


.1.9
...............I 79 .7


S. . . . . . . .00.. .. .. .. .. .. -..


00 r








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


In June of 1978, the national demand for fluxing lime declined some 15
percent due in a large part to the problems of the U. S. steel industry and
foreign steel competition (Boynton, 1978). The curtailment of steel produc-
tion has had an adverse effect on the lime industry in the east. However,
Florida and the rest of the southeast, where sales of fluxing lime are
minimal, have experienced an increase in production as a result of increased
demand for road stabilization uses, environmental uses, and other
chemical-lime markets.


1968


1969


1970


1972


1974


977


m 125


167


159


180


187


185


199


95


177

FLORIDA LIME PRODUCTION
(THOUSAND TONS)


gure 4.-Florida lime production for the period 1968-1977.


~p~%~ ~e '~L~~


~L -~ ~ = ~e~


Bk-~k--p~-~b~p


a~~a~---L~pl ~s


I





BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


GENERAL FUTURE TRENDS
Virtually all of the crushed stone in Florida is limestone. Nationally th:
prominence of crushed limestone as an aggregate is reflected in statistics
which show limestone accounting for almost 75 percent of the total crushed
stone production.
Cement and crushed stone are integral parts of the construction in-
dustry, and demands for them closely parallel changes in this part of the
economy. Homebuilding, which peaked in October 1977 at an annual rate
of 2.2 million new starts, has continued at an annual rate of 2.0 million
through 1978 (Carter, 1979). The National Crushed Stone Association sees
continued gradual growth for the homebuilding and commercial construc-
tion industries through the foreseeable future, and the demand for limestone
aggregate and cement should parallel this growth.
Roadbase and concrete aggregate usage in public highway construction
should show a moderate increase due to the national goal of completing the
interstate system in Florida, as well as other areas of the country. In addi-
tion, reconstruction, rehabilitation, and resurfacing projects should con-
tinue to increase due to the high level of road usage which results in the con-
tinued deterioration of the nation's existing road system.
Due to the world's expanding population and consequent need for
higher yield crops, the use of limestone for agricultural limestone is pro-
jected to be an area of substantial growth. Nationally, the use of
agricultural limestone has shown an average annual increase of nearly 18
percent from 1973 to 1976. This recent growth has been attributed to several
factors, including the higher cost of other chemical fertilizers, and the
general acceptance by farmers of the importance of liming. The future
outlook is for continued growth, but at a more modest rate (Koch, 1979).
In recent years, limestone has experienced an expanding role in the en-
vironmental field. One new environmental application is in the area of flue-
gas desulfurization. As power plants install scrubber systems, crushed
limestone will be needed to charge them. As new and stricter environmental
standards are required this market should experience substantial growth in
the years ahead (Gutschick, 1979). For example, it is estimated that 600,0)0
tons of limestone per year will be needed for SO2 removal in the Lakeland
area (Personal communication, J. L. Eades). Other environmental uses
with growth potential include the application of limestone for erosion con-
trol and waste water treatment.
Some current minor uses of crushed limestone should show modern te
growth in the future. For example, the need for railroad ballast should in-
crease substantially in the future due to an increasing national dependent :e
on mass transportation. In addition, it is probable that new industrial a id
chemical applications of limestone will be found which will contribute :o
the further growth of this segment of the industry.





REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


ECONOMIC FACTORS
The success of a crushed limestone operation is dependent on a number
of factors including market distance, quarry and plant locations, availabili-
ty of transportation, accessibility, power, reclamation costs, and land
values. More recently, factors such as inflation and environmental re-
quirements have had a significant impact on this industry.
Cost factors are especially critical in the crushed limestone industry due
to the small profit margin associated with this relatively low priced, high
volume commodity. For example, with today's rising fuel costs a long truck
or rail haul may be prohibitive, thus requiring quarries to be relatively near
to the consumer. Direct costs now average about $1.35 to $1.75 per ton, and
truck haulage adds $.15 to $.25 per ton for the first mile and $.05 to $.10 for
each additional mile.
An additional factor is the aggravation to the urban population centers
from dust, noise, and blasting. As the urban areas expand, active quarries
and potential quarry sites are encroached upon. Consequently, the conflict-
ing interests of continued urban growth and the development of limestone
quarries are major considerations to the industry.
The upward spiral in land prices will continue to be an important
economic consideration in the production of crushed limestone. Adequate
property must be purchased or leased economically for future expansion of
the quarry, as well as space for processing plant, storage, and waste disposal
facilities. It is estimated that Florida's limestone reserves total some 85
billion tons, of which 32 billion tons are readily available for mining (U. S.
Geological Survey Investigations, 1973). Much of the remainder is
unavailable for reasons of urban encroachment or excessive overburden
thickness.
Another major factor affecting the production of limestone in the future
Sthe price of energy. The ever-rising costs of energy, labor, and materials
ill continue, thereby increasing the price of limestone. In addition, the re-
*ent increase in the minimum wage and a new tougher Mine Health and
safety Act should also contribute to higher prices (Carter, 1979).
Other measures either pending in Congress or under serious considera-
in affecting this vital industry include: sharp increases in social security
xes on employee and employers, additional taxes to industrial users of
iergy in the form of wellhead taxes, peak hour utility rates, requiring the
inversion of oil and gas operation to coal, a reduction or elimination of
:rcentage depletion allowances, and the application of strict coal mine re-
lirements to the stone industry. A large potential factor affecting the pro-
i action of limestone is more restrictive EPA standards which would
inificantly reduce the mineral particle content in ambient air at produc-
*n sites, thus restricting the uses of unbound crushed stone. These EPA
andards would require that a minimum of 99.85 percent of the dust








BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


generated at a lime plant would be collected, or a maximum emission of 0.;i
lb/ton and an opacity of no more than 10 percent (Carter, 1979). A con-
tinuous monitoring program would ensure compliance. The effect of such
restrictions could seriously limit plant expansion, according to the National
Lime Association.
In summary, the future outlook for the limestone industry in Florida is
bright, especially in areas of environmental application, construction, and
agriculture. The National Crushed Stone Association estimates a slow but
solid expansion of production through 1979 in Florida and a 2 to 3 percent
national annual rate increase.

MINING METHODS AND BENEFICIATION

MINING METHODS
There is considerable variation among the sizes of mining operations in
the state. At one end of the scale are "backyard operations", with one man
and a tractor digging a small pit and selling the material locally. At the other
end of the scale are the huge operations that encompass several square miles
of holdings and produce several commodities simultaneously from the same
pit. They have plant facilities to completely process the commodities, and
their products are sold internationally.
Market conditions will determine the scope of a company's operations;
that is, how much raw material must be mined in order to get as much
finished product as can be sold? The projected scope of operations, then,
will determine the type and size of mining and processing equipment need-
ed. Other important determinants of required equipment are the kinds of
materials to be mined, and the geological conditions where the quarry is to
be located.
All limestone, dolomite, and coquina mining in Florida is by the open
pit method. Almost without exception, it is necessary to remove overburden
before mining can proceed. Usually, the overburden consists of quartz sand
with widely varying amounts and combinations of other constituents, such
as clay, silt, organic materials, shells, phosphorite, and heavy minerals. TIe
maximum thickness of overburden tolerated is 20-25 feet; most mines a e
located where there is less than that. The overburden is stripped off ty
dragline or bulldozer and stacked near the excavation. However, if the ove -
burden is an important commodity that can be sold, it may be process d
and transported away from the quarry. Good examples of saleable br-
products are sand, clay, or peat.
Mining operations can be classified generally as wet versus dry pits, ar d
hard versus soft rock. The easiest mining conditions occur in soft-rock, dr '-
pit operations. The most difficult conditions occur where hard rock must I e









REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


Shined from underwater. Soft, dry rock can be mined with bulldozers or
iront-end loaders that simply "rip" the working face. In dry pits, the rock
,iay be loaded onto trucks or conveyors and taken directly to the processing
plant; or it may be crushed and then hauled to the plant. Where pits are
flooded, mining is done by dragline. The broken rock is removed and either
stacked to dry for later hauling to the plant, or it may be crushed and then
moved to the plant. For harder rocks it first may be necessary to blast them
into manageable sizes, before transport or crushing. This entails a separate
operation, in which shot-holes are drilled into the rock and explosives are
placed and detonated.

PROCESSING AND BENEFICIATION
Processing involves operations which physically or chemically change
materials on their way to becoming finished products.
The most common uses of limestone, dolomite, and coquina are as
crushed stone or aggregate products. The crushed stone is the basic raw
material that can be processed further, if necessary, for roadbase, cement
manufacture, fertilizer and soil conditioners, rip rap and other uses. Market
conditions or customer specification, of course, will determine the
necessary degree of processing.
Processing of limestone and dolomite mostly involves size reduction and
invariably includes crushing and screening (size grading). These processes
produce the different sizes of stone that are the raw materials required in
subsequent uses. Some small mining operations may be able to utilize the
simplest of machines, such as a portable, one-step crusher/screener, il-
lustrated in Figure 5. Larger mines require more elaborate, multi-stage
systems, with each successive stage producing finer-sized material. Figure 6
is a simplified block diagram of a multi-stage processing plant for crushed
sione. Examples of these processing methods and equipment are shown in
F gure 7.
Screening processes allow for the removal of properly sized fractions
f )m the system, and for coarse fractions to be recycled for further
c fishing. As indicated down the left side of Figure 6, the crushing and
st evening techniques allow for the removal of different size fractions of
s. ne at intermediate stages. After sufficient crushing and screening the
sl ne may be transferred to storage, or loaded directly onto trucks, rail
c s, or barges for delivery to customers.
For some uses it may be necessary to do more to the stone than reduce its
si Such processes can involve beneficiation techniques. Beneficiation is
a, process with removes unwanted components from the raw material, or
\ ich adds relatively pure desirable components to the raw material.
F fishing, screening, drying, and blending are the most common beneficia-







































Figure 5.-One type of portable rock crusher used in quarries. Man at crusher controls gives
scale.









REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88 25

ion process used for limestone, dolomite, and coquina. A special benefica-
tion of limestone, in the form of pyroprocessing (commonly called
burning), is required to manufacture Portland cement. Because cement
manufacturing is such a specialized, high consumptive user of limestone, it
will be discussed separately.


MINING OPERATIONS
(drilling, blasting, or ripping and
transport of broken rock)


F sre 6.-Simplified processing diagram for limestone, dolomite, and coquina. Some mining
operations may have either more-or fewer steps.




































Figure 7.-A multi-stage crusher/screener plant that can produce and separate several sizes of
stone. The large hoppers store the various fractions of stone, which also can be
shunted to stockpiles by several outrigger conveyors. Trucks can be loaded beneath
the hoppers and at the stockpiles.








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


CEMENT MANUFACTURING
The manufacture of Portland cement (hereafter called cement) is the
processing of selected raw materials to produce a synthetic "clinker",
wv.hich can be processed further to give a "raw cement" mix to meet the
specifications of the customers. In the discussion that follows, reference is
made to Figure 8, which is a schematic diagram of the flow-process of
materials through a modern "dry process" cement plant. Corresponding
photographs of major equipment found in such a plant are shown as
Figures 9-13.
The technology of cement manufacturing has undergone significant
changes over the last 20 to 30 years. Older plants were more energy inten-
sive, while modern plants are designed to be energy conservative. An exam-
ple of this is shown on Figure 8, where hot gases from the exit of the kiln are
recycled to several prior stages. Process control and its corollary, quality
control, have improved due to automation and computer monitoring of
processes. Because of these technological advances, some large modern
cement plants are designed to operate with less than 10 men. Most older
cement plants use a "wet" process, whereby all grinding, blending, and
conveying are done with wet slurries. Recent upward spirals of fuel costs
have led to the design of energy saving "dry" process plants, where em-
phasis is on keeping moisture content low. But, because of other economic
considerations, converting from wet to dry plants may not be justified.
Therefore, depending on any given company's requirements and plant
design, specific equipment may vary from that shown here. In all cases,
however, the basic cement manufacturing process is as described.
Cement manufacturing combines mechanical and chemical processes.
All steps prior to the "rotary kiln" are mechanical, and their functions are
t:V prepare the raw materials into a form that is suitable for "feed" to the
k-ln. The kiln is a high-temperature pyroprocess that chemically combines
t e raw materials to form a "clinker".
Cement compounds differ in chemical makeup according to end-
r oduct specifications, but generally they range from Ca3SiOs through
( ,4Al2Fe20,2 (Lefond, 1975). The primary ingredient of cement is lime
( aO). Cement manufacturing requires large quantities of lime, which is
c trained from calcium carbonate minerals (CaCO3). In Florida, manufac-
t ers' sources of calcium carbonate are limestones. In the past, deposits of
s i shells were mined, but that source of calcium carbonate is no longer
L :d in the state. Limestone that is relatively soft and of high purity is the
r )st desirable, since these two attributes decrease the amount of processing
E ::essary, as well as reducing the cost of manufacturing.
Secondary raw materials needed in cement manufacturing are silica,
a mina, and in some cases, iron. Sources of these raw materials may be
n tural or artificial. In Florida, natural sources of these materials are sand,









CLAY


Figure 8.-Schematic diagram of the flow-process of materials through a modern "dry
process" cement plant.


00









MILL
I / I)RY RI



C
C

0
O
0







E

CLINKER TO PULVERIZING
AND BLENI)NG FOR
FINAL CEMENT PRODUCTS
FINAL CEMENT I'ROI)UCTS

















F l o r i d a I. &... .. ..a l C p B
VIEW FOR .. r '7",









~ O













00

Figure 9.-View of a dry-pit limestone quarrying operation. The rock is ripped and stacked by
a bulldozer. The front-end loader feeds the portable crusher, and the crushed rock
is then carried to the plant on the conveyor belt. (Picture used with permission of
Florida Mining & Materials Corp., Brooskville.)
i N

14W-








OJ

















0
O










Figure 10.-Conveyor belt from quarry to plant (Picture used with permission of Florida
Mining & Materials Corp., Brooksville.)







REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


.aurolite or clay; artificial sources are slag or fly ash. If natural deposits of
iese additives do not occur on the plant property, it is necessary to pur-
ihase them from outside sources. Fly ash is an example. This material,
whichh is a waste by-product of coal burning electrical utilities' generating
plantss is an excellent source of additives.
As with limestone and coquina processing, cement manufacturing in
Florida begins with quarrying operations. These operations are discussed
above, and they are applicable here up to the point where the crushed
limestone enters the cement plant.


PLANT WATER
STORAGE TANK


ure 11.-Proportional blender unit. Surge storage bins for limestone, clay, and fly ash.
(Picture used with permission of Florida Mining & Materials Corp., Brooksville.)











PREHEATER
BLENDING CLINKER
.. CLINKER

RAWJ
MILL C'



t



.40O

KILN ..

Figure 12.-Panoramic view of cement plant showing, from left to right: rotating raw mill
(grinder/dryer), kiln-feed preheater and blending/storage silos, rotary kiln, and
clinker storage silos. (Picture used with permission of Florida Mining & Materials
Corp., Brooksville.)







REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


After one or more stages of crushing, the limestone is stockpiled, where
i. is available as raw feed according to the demands of the plant. If clay is
ised as an additive, the plant may have a clay crusher/dryer, whose output
is conveyed to storage. Other raw materials, such as fly ash, are stored
separately.
All of the raw materials are brought together at the proportional blender
unit. This unit consists of weigh-scales and belt conveyors. The central con-
trol room controls the proportions (by weight) of each raw material that is
released from storage and blended. This blend is conveyed to a rotating raw
mill, which performs the dual functions of grinder and dryer. Some of the
hot gases from the kiln are recycled to the raw mill to dry the mix. Grinding
is accomplished by steel balls in the rotating mill.
This raw mix is sent to the kiln preheater/blender, which is the final
mechanical step in preparing the "feed" for the kiln. Using recycled hot
gases from the kiln (about 1800 F), the raw mix is preheated before being
fed into the kiln. This step increases the efficiency of the kiln by having the
initial large heat exchange take place outside the kiln. This increased effi-
ciency allows the use of a considerably shorter kiln. This last item, the size


-- ----------


are 13.-Main control room of cement plant showing, from top to bottom: illuminated
process flow diagram, automatic process control instruments with alarms, sloped
panel with operator's controls. The TV screen in the center monitors the clinker
as it leaves the kiln. (Picture used with permission of Florida Mining & Manu-
facturing Corp., Brooksville.)







BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


of the kiln, is substantial in terms of both investment and physical dimen-
sions. Until recent years, the trend in the cement industry was to bigger kilns
- the largest in the United States being over 600 feet long and 25 feet in
diameter. Today, with the emphasis on energy conservation, the trend is to
smaller and more efficient kilns, with overall dimensions reduced by 30 to
60 percent from that mentioned above.
The kiln is the center of the cement plant. All processes up to this point
have been to get the raw materials into proper size and proportions,so that
the kiln can burn them to form the artificial cement "clinker"'. The-kiln is
very slightly inclined so that it slowly moves the feed down its length as it
rotates. Temperature increases toward the exit end, where it can be as high
as 27000 F. The high temperature produces several physical and chemical
changes in the raw feed. Physically, the material is melted and fused. The
most important chemical changes are calcination, which drives off carbon
dioxide gas (CO2) from the limestone to form lime (CaO), and subsequent
reactions of the hot lime with the additives of silica, alumina, and iron to
produce a synthetic silicate "clinker". The clinker products are cooled and
stored for further processing, which usually includes pulverizing and blend-
ing with other additives to meet customer specifications.

MINERAL PRODUCERS
The following list of active and inactive limestone, dolomite, and co-
quina producers was compiled from many sources, the main ones being the
U. S. Bureau of Mines, the Mine Safety and Health Administration, and the
Florida Department of Transportation. A telephone survey was conducted
for those producers whose mine location was uncertain. Because of the
nature of the mining industry, the location and sometimes the operational
status of the producer changes, and therefore the list is only accurate as of
the time the survey was made. Any updates to this list are requested and
should be sent to the Bureau of Geology, 903 West Tennessee Street,
Tallahasssee, Florida 32304. The compiler of this list is indebted to the
members of the Florida stone industry and the above agencies for inform a-
tion supplied on the industry in Florida.
The list is divided into active and inactive producers. Within these
categories the list is further divided into commodity, county, and produce r.
The counties and then the producers in each county are listed alphabetic; 1-
ly. All of the active producers' locations are plotted on the resource pote a-
tial maps located in the pocket at the back of this publication.
The inactive producers list is not to be considered exhaustive, as it is v r-
tually impossible to locate all the inactive operations in the state. Some inm c-
tive producers locations are known only by county with no information -n
their exact locations. The addresses given for the producers that have ceas d
operations are given for historical purposes only.








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


ACTIVE MINERAL PRODUCERS LISTED BY COMMODITY AND COUNTY


Company Name/Address


Mine Name


MINE LOCATION
Township Range Section


Houdaille Duval Wright Corp.
P. O. Box 1588
Jacksonville, FL 32201
Limerock Industries, Inc.
P. O. Drawer 790
Bronson, FL 32621
Limestone Products, Inc.
P. O. Box 177
Newberry, FL 32669


S. M. Wall Co.
1650 N. E. 23rd Blvd.
Gainesville, FL 32601


LIMESTONE

ALACHUA
Haile Quarry
Chastain Pit

Newberry Pit



Haile Quarry
North Pit
North Pit
Cleary Pit
High Springs Mine


9S 17E 13,14,23,24
9S 18E 18

9S 17E 25


17E
S17E
18E
17E


24
13,24
18-20
26


7S 18E 30


BROWARD


Bergeron Sand and Rock Min-
ing Co.
2121 North 184th Ave.
P. O. Box 6280
Hollywood, FL 33021
BNJ Equipment Corp.
401 Hanchey Drive
Nokomis, FL 33555
towardd Paving, Inc.
1111 North State Road 7
:ollywood, FL 33021
J. Capeletti, Inc.
0 O. Box 9444
ialeah, FL 33021
Surcie Brothers, Inc.
S50 Park Road
allendale, FL 33009
Smar Industries
llywood Quarries
00 SW 64th Ave.
Lauderdale, FL 33314
orida Fill Inc.
O. Box 560992
Siami, FL 33156


Hollywood Pit


Broward Rock & Fill
Pit


Rhodes Pit


Broward Pit No. 1



Glades Rock Pit


(No Name)


Gator Rock


51S 39E 12


48S 42E 16



50S 42E 31



51S 41E 29


51S 40E


50S 41E 23


50S 39E








36 BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


Griffin Brothers Co., Inc.
6143 SW 45th Street
Davie, FL 33314

Hardrives Paving, Inc.
846 NW 8th Ave.
6143 SW 45th Street
Davie, FL 33314

Hardrives Paving, Inc.
846 NW 8th Ave.
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33311



Meekins, Inc.
3500 Pembroke Road
Hollywood, FL 33021

Miramar Rock, Inc.
Box 6418
Hollywood, FL 33021

L. W. Rozzo, Inc.
4435 SW 26th Street
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33314

Vulcan Materials
S/E Division
P. O. Box 80730
Atlanta, Ga. 30366



Carroll Contracting & Ready
Mix, Inc.
P. O. Drawer 1398
Inverness, FL 32650

Colitz Mining Co.
(Crystal River Quarries, Inc.)
P. O. Box 216
Crystal River, FL 32629

E. R. Jahna Industries, Inc.
Lecanto Rock Division
P. O. Box 317
Lecanto, FL 32661

Lecanto Materials Co.
(Crystal Construction Co.)
Drawer 291
Lecanto, FL 32661


Griffin Brothers Pit



State Road Quarry
State Road Quarry



State Road Quarry
State Road Quarry
Snake Creek Mine
Pit No. 4
Miramar Lakes Pit

Derfield Quarry



Miramar Mine


Rozzo Mine



Broward Mine


50S 40E 1;


50S 42E
50S 16


50S
50S
51S
48S
S1S


19
40E


42E
41E
39E
42E
39E


48S 42E 4



51S 39E 36



51S 40E 31,32



51S 39E 24


CITRUS


Carroll's Lecanto Pit



Lecanto Rock Pit


Lecanto Mine


Lecanto Rock Mine


18S 18E 33



19S 18E 15, 6


18S 18E 5


18S 18E 5








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88

COLLIER


ishland-Warren, Inc.
.'. O. Box 7368
r4aples, FL 33941
A. J. Capeletti, Inc.
P. O. Box 9444
Hialeah, FL 33021
Century Industries
P. O. Box 4667
Jacksonville, FL
Florida Rock Corp.
Box 2037
Naples, FL 33940
Highway Pavers, Inc.
P. O. Box 7098
Naples, FL 33941
Meekins, Inc.
3500 Pembroke Road
Hollywood, FL 33021


Limerock Industries, Inc.
P. O. Box 473
Chiefland, FL 32626


The Brewer Co. of Fla., Inc.
9800 N.W. 106th Street
Miami, FI 33166
A. J. Capeletti, Inc.
P. O. Box 9444
Hialeah, FL 33021


C -al Aggregates Corp.
L ision of Meekins
3 0 Pembroke Road
P ilywood, FL 33021
L veil Dunn Co.
P ). Box 2577
v imi, FL 33012
SF rida Rock and Sand Co.
P )Box 3004
Fi rida City, FL 33030


Golden Gate Quarry


Collier No. 1 Quarry


Sunniland Quarry


Golden Gate Quarry



Virgil Marcum Pit


Mule Pen Rock Quarry



COLUMBIA
Columbia City Mine



DADE
Naranja Road Rock Pit


49S 27E 16


53S 33E 14


48S 30E 28


49S 26E 21


50S 26E


48S 26E 13,14
23,24


5S 16E 16,17
20,21


55S 39E 34


52S
52S
53S
53S
53S
55S
52S


Dade Pit No. 1
Dade Pit No. 7
Dade Pit No. 9
Dade Pit No. 10
Dade Pit No. 11
Dade Pit No. 12
Dade Pit No. 13

Miami Mine




Dunn Airport Pit
Indian Lakes Pit

Card Sound Pit


40E
40E
39E
39E
39E
39E
39E


13
20
26
23
21
13,14
13


53S 39E 36




52S 39E 2
54S 40E 16

58S 39E 17








BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


General Portland Inc.
Florida Division
Box 440336
Miami, FL 33144
A. J. House and Sons, Inc.
P. O. Box 457
Miami, FL 33144
Lone Star Florida, Inc.
6451 N. Federal Highway
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33308
Miami Crushed Rock, Inc.
P. O. Box 440214
Miami, FL 33166
Redland Construction Co.
9800 N.W. 106th St.
Miami, FL 33166
Redland Rock Co.
23799 S. W. 167th Ave.
Homestead, FL 33030
Rinker Southeastern Materials,
Inc.

P. O. Box 2634
Miami, FL 33012
Ronlee, Inc.
P. O. Box 660655
Miami Springs, FL 33166
Sterling Crushed Stone Co.
Box 630877 Ojus Branch
Miami, FL 33163
Vulcan Materials Co.
S/E Division
P. O. Box 80730
Atlanta, Ga. 30366


West Dade Rock & Fill Co., Inc.
(Marks Brothers Co.)
1313 N. W. 97th Ave.
Miami, FL 33126


Dade County Quarry


Pit No. 1


Pennsuco Quarry
Pennsuco Quarry

Coral Gables Quarry


Brewer Pit


Eureka Pit


F. E. C. Quarry
(No Name)
Rinker Lake Quarry
Miami Quarry
Ronlee Inc. Pit


Richmond Quarry
Golden Prince Quarry


Medley Plant


West Dade Rock Pit


54S 38E 3(


53S 39E 13


52S 39E 26,35,36
53S 39E 2

53S 39E 25,36
Gov. Lotl

55S 39E 27,34


55S 39E 34


52S 39E 25
52S 40E 31
52S 40E 20
53S 39E 34
52S 39E 12


55S 39E 24
53S 39E 25

53S 40E 5,9




53S 39E 26


DIXIE
Anderson Contracting Co., Inc. Tennille Pit
P. O. Box 38
Old Town, FL 32680


8S 10E 17


LaBelle Limerock Co.
General Delivery
LaBelle, Fl 33935


HENDRY
LaBelle Limerock Mine


43S 28E








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


L. T. Ridgdill & Sons
P. O. Box 447
Clewiston, FL 33440



Brooksville Rock Co., Inc.
605 W. Broad St.
Brooksville, FL 33512
W. L. Cobb Construction Co.
P. O. Box 11826
5002 E. Hillsborough Ave.
Tampa, FL 33610
Florida Crushed Stone Co.
P. O. Box 668
Brooksville, FL 33512
Florida Rock Industries, Inc.
P. O. Box 457
Brooksville, FL 33512
E. R. Jahna Industries, Inc.
P. O. Drawer 317
Lecanto, FL 32661



Anderson Contracting Co.
P. O. Box 38
Old Town, FL 32680



Ballard Shell & Fill, Inc.
Rt. 2, Box 1104
North Ft. Myers, FL 33903
Coral Rock Industries, Inc.
P O. Box 1021
C pe Coral, FL 33904
F Irida Rock Industries, Inc.
F O. Box 158
F Myers, FL 33901
F gate Construction Co.
I 'Texas Ave.
F Myers, FL 33901
F rper Brothers, Inc.
R ute 13, Box 821
F Myers, FL 33901
J. L. Kelly Rock Co., Inc.
P O. Box 353
L 3elle, FL 33935


Clewiston Quarry




HERNANDO
Broco Quarry



Aripeka Quarry




Brooksville Gay Quarry
Brooksville Gay Quarry
Brooksville Gay Quarry
Diamond Hill Mine


Mills Mine


LAFAYETTE
Dowling Park Pit



LEE
Ballard Pit



Cape Coral Pit



Alico Road Pit



Alva Mine



Estero Quarry


Alva Pit


43S 34E 24





21S 18E 23



23S 17E 19


21S
22S
22S
21S


31,32
1,12
5-8,18
20


23S 21E


3S 11E


44S 23E 10



43S 24E 17,18
19,20
(mining canal spoil banks)
46S 25E 1,12



43S 27E 10


46S 25E


43S 27E 11,14







BUREAU OF GEOLOGY

LEVY


Connell & Schultz
Box 97
Inverness, FL 32650
Levy County Road Dept.
P. O. Box 336
Bronson, FL 32621
V. E. Whitehurst & Sons, Inc.
Route 1, Box 125
Williston, FL 32696


Lecanto Materials Co.
(Crystal Construction Co.)
Drawer 291
Lecanto, FL 32661
Marion County Highway
Dept.
3190 S. E. Maricamp Road
Ocala, FL 32670

Monroe Rock Co.
P. O. Box 417
Belle View, FL 33626
Ocala Limerock Corp.
Box 1060
1013 N. E. Osceola Street
Ocala, FL 32670
O'Neal Construction Co.
5685 S.W. 52nd Street
Ocala, FL 32670
Southern Materials Corp.
P. O. Box 218
Ocala, FL 32670
M. J. Stavola Industries, Inc.
P. O. Box 187
Anthony, FL 32617


Parks Banks Trucking
P. O. Box 327
Rockledge, FL 32955
A. J. Capeletti, Inc.
P. O. Box 9444
Hialeah, FL 33021
Alonzo Cothron, Inc.
P. O. Box 450
Big Pine Key, FL 33043


Williston Quarry


Arrington Pit
Williston Pit
Grissin Pit
Raleigh Quarry



MARION
Britt (Ocala) Pit


(No Name)
Canal Right of Way Pit
Bell Pit
Godwin Pit
Zuber Pit
Pedro Mine
Barco Pit
No. 7 Kendrick Quarry
Zuber Pit


O'Neal Pit


Lowell Quarry


Stavola Pit



MONROE
Big Pine Key Quarry


Monroe Pit No. 1


Tavernier Pit


12S 19E 31


15E
18E
14E
19E


31
12
4
19,20


16S 22E 20


14S
16S
12S
14S


22E
22E
21E
20E
21E
22E
20E
21E
21E


14S 21E 25,36


13S 21E 23


14S 22E 19


66S 29E 15


60S 40E 19


62S 39E








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


Charley Toppino & Sons, Inc.
Box 787
Key West, FL 33041



Belcher Mine, Inc.
P. O. Box 86
Aripeka, FL 33502
International Minerals and
Chemical Co.
Box 867
Bartow, FL 33830



Florida Rock Industries
P. O. Box 4667
Jacksonville, FL 32201



Dixie Lime & Stone Co.
Suite 700, Lincoln Center
Tampa, Fl
Florida Crushed Stone Co.
303 E. Silver Springs Blvd.
P. O. Box 608
Ocala, FL 32670
Ocala Limerock Corp.
Box 1060
1013 N. E. Osceola St.
Ocala, FL 32670
St. Catherine Rock Co.
Box 103
Nobleton, FL 33554


nderson Contracting Co.,
. O. Box 38
' Id Town, FL 32680
atch Enterprises, Inc.
3x 238
:anford, FL 32008


Snderson Contracting Co., Inc.
SO. Box 38
! d Town, FL 32680


Rockland Key Quarry


PASCO
Belcher Mine


Morrel Limerock Mine


ST. LUCIE
(No Name)


SUMTER
Sumterville Complex



Center Hill Quarry




Mabel Quarry




St. Catherine Quarry


SUWANNEE
Inc. Lanier Pit


Hatch Quarry


TAYLOR
Cabbage Grove Pit


67S 26E 21


24S 16E 1,2
11,12



25S 22E 24,25


37S 38E 15


20S 22E 1,12,13
23E 6,7

21S 23E 16




22S 23E 10,11




22S 21E 2


6S 15E 21



6S 14E 16


3S 4E 34








BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


Limerock Industries, Inc.
P. O. Drawer 790
Chiefland, FL 32626


Cabbage Grove No. 2


3S 4E 34


Colitz Mining Co.
(Crystal River Quarries, Inc.)
P. O. Box 216
Crystal River, FL 32629
Dolime Minerals, Inc.
(Florida Lime Works, Inc.)
P. O. Drawer ARI
Bartow, FL 33830



Dolomite, Inc.
P. 0. Box 1586
Marianna. FL 32446
Florida Lime & Dolomite
P. O. Box 681
Marianna, FL 32446


Florida Rock Industries
P. O. Box 227
Gulf Hammock, FL 32639


Dolime Minerals, Inc.
P. O. Drawer ARI
Barrow. FL 33830
Limerock Industries, Inc.
P. O. Drawer 790
Chiefland, FL 32626


DOLOMITE

CITRUS
Red Level Mine


Crystal River Quarry


JACKSON
Rocky Creek Mine


(No Name)


LEVY
Gulf Hammock Mine


TAYLOR
(No Name)


Cabbage Grove Quarry


17S 16E 36


17S 16E 11,12


3N 9W 18


3N 9W 19


14S 16E 21,28


4S 4E 13



4S 4E 2,3


COQUINA
BREVARD


Brevard Co. Public Works
Div.
Road and Bridge Department
1948 Pineapple Ave.
Melbourne, FL 32935


Kings Park Pit
Valkaria Pit
Rockledge Pit
Sarno Pit
Rifle Range Pit
Pluckeybaum Pit


24S
29S
25S
27S
21S
22S


36E
37E
36E
36E
34E
35E









REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


Bell Engineering
Route 3
7755 Jog Road
Lake Worth, FL 33460
Palm Beach Co. Highway
Dept.
2030 Congress Ave.
West Palm Beach, FL 33406
Rubin Construction Co.
P. O. Box 15065
West Palm Beach, FL 33406


PALM BEACH
Bell Farms Shell Pit


Lantan Pit
Okeechobee Pit


Pebb Pit


45S 42E 15


42E 31
42E 29


44S 42E 6,7


INACTIVE MINERAL PRODUCERS LISTED BY COMMODITY AND COUNTY


Company Name/Address


Mine Name


Mine Location
Township Range


Newberry Corporation
P. O. Box 1588
Jacksonville, FL
Williston Shell Rock Co.
Box 600
Ocala FL


Deerfield Rock Corp.
P. O. Box 781
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Florida Material Producers,
'nc.
'. O. Box 9902
;t. Lauderdale, FL 33310
lallandale Rock Corp.
lox 781
't. Lauderdale, FL
loudaille Industries, Inc.
loudaille-Duval-Wright Div.
. O. Box 8068
050 NE 5th Terrace
t. Lauderdale, FL 33310
ayne Dredging Co.
'. Box 5791
t. Lauderdale, FL 33310


LIMESTONE
ALACHUA
Haile Quarry


Buda Quarry
Haile Quarry


BROWARD
Deerfield Quarry


Deem Pit


Hallandale Quarry



Hollywood Quarry
Deerfield Quarry




Decker Quarry


9S 17E 13


8S 17E 32
(Location Unknown)




48S 42E 4,9


49S 42E 18


51S 42E 28



51S 40E 7,18
48S 42E 10




49S 42E 22


Section









BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


Maule Industries, Inc.
5220 Biscayne Blvd.
Miami, FL
Meekins, Inc.
3500 Pembroke Rd.
Hollywood, FL 33021
E. L. Montgomery, Inc.
815 NW 7th Terrace
Ft- Lauderdale, FL
Oakland Park Rock, Inc.
740 NE 45th Street
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33308
Perna Asphalt
P. O. Box 959
Deerfield Beach, FL 33441
Road Rock, Inc.
2700 W. State Road 84
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
L. W. Rozzo, Inc.
4435 SW 26th Street
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33314

Finley P. Smith
Rt. 1, Box 733
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Snyder Paving Co., Inc.
P. O. Box 1199
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Task Corporation
660 North SR 7
Plantation, FL 33317
R. H. Wright & Son, Inc.
Box 781
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Zinke-Smith, Inc.
Box 2004
Pompano Beach, FL



B & C Mining Co.
P. O. Box 316
Lecanto, FL 32661
Carroll Contracting & Ready
Mix, Inc.
P. O. Drawer 1398
Inverness, FL 32650


Prospect Quarry



Monarch Quarry
Meekins Quarry

Montgomery Quarry


Rhodes Pit



(No Name)


Road Rock Quarry


49S 42E 18



51S 40E 18
51S 42E 20

(Location Unknown)



49S 42E 18



(Location Unknown)



50S 42E 20


48S
50S
49S
50S


(No Name)
(No Name)
(No Name)
(No Name)
(No Name)


Dania Quarry
Ft. Lauderdale Quarry


(No Name)


Wright Quarry


(No Name)


CITRUS
Lecanto Pit



Floral City Pit
Floral City Pit


42E
42E
42E
43E


48S 42E


42E 4
42E 17


(Location Unknown)



(Location Unknown)


48S 42E


19S 18E 22



20S 20E 24
20S 21E IS









REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


Florida Lime Works, Inc.
P. O. Box 774
Bartow, FL 33830
General Portland Cement Co.
Box 1528
Tampa, FL
Gulf Coast Aggregates, Inc.
P. O. Box 1686
Crystal River, FL 32629
Ocala Limerock Corp.
1013 NE Osceola Ave.
Ocala, FL 32670


Leon McCormick & Son, Inc.
3601 Davis Blvd.
P. O. Box 326
Naples, FL 33940
Ochopee Rock Co., Inc.
P. O. Box 154
Naples, FL 33940
Sunniland Limerock Co.
Box 1547
Ft. Myers, FL
Ashland-Warren, Inc.
P. O. Box 7368
Naples, FL 33941


E. E. Collins Construction
Co.
2175 SW 32nd Ave.
Miami FL 33012
welll Dunn Co.
'. O. Box 2577
liami, FL 33012
Jeal Crushed Rock Co., Inc.
500 NW 37th Ave.
iialeah, FL
J. James Construction Co.,
1c.
700 NW 119th Street
iiami, Fl
eHigh Portland Cement Co.
autheastern Division
370 NW 36th Street
liami, FL 33148


(No Name)


Storey Quarry


Gulf Coast Quarry


Rooks-Homosassa



COLLIER
Avalon Quarry


Ochopee Quarry


Sunniland Quarry


North Pit
South Pit


17S 17E 31


20S 19E 35


17S 19E 10


(Location Unknown)


50S 25E 13


52S 30E 34



48S 30E 29



49S 25E 25
50S 26E 34,35


DADE


Collins Quarry



Medley Pit
Opalocka Pit
Indian Mound Pit
Dade County Pit




James Quarry



LeHigh Quarry


(Location Unknown)


53S
52S
52S


40E
39E
40E


56S 40E 4


(Location Unknown)



52S 40E 32,33








BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


Maule Industries, Inc.
5220 Biscayne Blvd.
Miami, FL

Murphy & Mills Corp.
2601 NW 75th Street
Miami, FL
Naranja Rock Co.
P. O. Box 98
Naranja, FL
Native Stone, Inc.
Box 252
Miami, FL
Oolite Rock Co.
P. O. Drawer 868
South Miami, FI
Peffer Construction Co.
Box 185
Shenandoah Station
Miami, FL
E. A. Pynchon
P. O. Box 1921
North Miami, FL
Seminole Rock Products Co.
P. O. Box 335
Tamiami Station
Miami, FL
Three Bays Improvement Co.
(Formerly Hialeah Crushed
Stone Co.)
2601 NW 75th St.
Miami, FL
Troup Quarries, Inc.
P. O. Box 168
Miami, FL



Brooksville Rock Co., Inc.
605 W. Broad Street
Brooksville, FL 33512
Camp Concrete Rock Co.
Box 608
Ocala, FL
Florida Crushed Stone Co.
303 E. Silver Springs Blvd.
P. O. Box 608
Ocala, FL 32670


Ojus Quarry
Red Road Quarry
Tropical Quarry
Pennsuco Quarry
(No Name)
(No Name)

Naranja Quarry


Ball Quarry


Oolite Rock Quarry



Hialeah Gardens Quarry




North Miami Quarry



Red Road Quarry
Medley Quarry



Dade County Mine


Kendall Quarry
Perrine Quarry


HERNANDO
Annutteliga Quarry


Gay Plant



Lansing Quarry


52S 5
53S
54S
52S
53S
51S


41E
40E
40E
40E
41E
42E


5
Lots 1,2
22
31,32


56S 39E 33,34


(Location Unknown)


54S 40E 23



(Location Unknown)




50S 42E 20



53S 41E 31
53S 40E 9,10



52S 41E 35


55S 40E
55S 40E


21S 18E 23,2(



22S 19E 6,



21S 19E 2:;









REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


W. P. McDonald Corp. of
Florida
Box 1256
Lakeland, FL


Conroc Quarry


22S 20E 19


Anderson Contracting Co.
P. O. Box 38
Old Town, FL 32680
Green Valley Lime Co.
P. O. Box 387
Marianna, FL 32446

Marjax Company
Marianna, FL
West Florida Lime Company
Box 208
Cottandale, FL 32431


JACKSON
Sam Smith Mine



Marianna Quarry



Marjax Quarry


Cottondale Quarry


Anderson Contracting Co.
P. O. Box 38
Old Town, Fl 32680
Williston Shell Rock Co.
Box 600
Ocala, FL


LAFAYETTE

Gardiner Pit



Dell Quarry


4S H1E 32



11S 4E 32


: centrall Florida Mining Co.
. O. Box 4525
north Ft. Myers, FL 33902

nes Contracting Co., Inc.
33 Gramac Drive
Srth Ft. Myers, FL 33903
1 e-Mar Corp.
1 .3, Box 489
I Myers, FL 33901

iple C Fill & Paving Co.
Sneral Delivery
I Belle, FL

Srren Bros. Co.
f O. Box 7368
I >ples, FL 33940


LEE

North Ft. Myers Pit


Matlacha Pit



Lee-Mar Pit



Triple C Pit


LeHigh Acres Pit


43S 25E 5



44S 23E 10



45S 24E 32



44S 25E 25



44S 27E 30


5N 11W



5N 10W



SN 10W


5N 11W









BUREAU OF GEOLOGY

LEVY


Levy County Lime Rock
Corp.
Box 194
Williston, FL
Limerock Industries, Inc.
P. O. Drawer 790
Chiefland, FL 32626
Charles E. Peacock
Williston, FL
United Limerock Co.
P. O. Box 4667
Jacksonville, FL
W & M Construction, Inc.
Williston, FL


City of Ocala
435 NW 2nd Street
Ocala, FL
W. L. Cobb Construction Co.
P. O. Box 11826
5002 E. Hillsborough Ave.
Tampa, FL 33610
Cummer Inc. of Ocala
P. O. Box 1539
Ocala, FL
Cummer Lime & Manufactur-
ing Co.
P. O. Box 4640
Jacksonville, FL
Dixie Lime & Stone Co.
Rt. 4, Box 363A
Ocala, FL 32670
Dixie Lime Products Co.
P. O. Box 598
F & G Enterprises
P. O. Box 615
Belleview, FL 32620
Marion County Road Dept.
3330 E. Maricamp Road
Ocala, FL 32670


Leo Haskins
726 Caroline St.
Key West, FL


Quarry #1
Quarry #2
Quarry #3
Vista Pit


Peacock Quarry

Williston Quarry


Raleigh Quarry


MARION
Ocala Quarry


York Quarry


Kendrick Quarry




Martin Quarry


Martin Quarry
Zuber Quarry
LeHigh Quarry
Plant No. 1 Reddick
Plant No. 3 Kendrick
Belleview Pit
Dallas Pit
Santos Pit
Proctor Pit
Castro Pit


MONROE
Haskins Rock Pit


12S 14E 19


(Location Unknown)

(Location Unknown)


12S 18E 24


15S 22E 19



15S 20E 26


14S 21E 24




14S 21E 10,11


14S 21E 11
14S 21E 13
(Location Unknown)
(Location Unknown)
(Location Unknown)
16S 22E 2
17S 23E :0
16S 22E :0
17S 23E :0
15S 21E 6


(Location Unknown)









REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


Keystone Art Co.
684 NW 7th St.
Miami, FL
Charlie Toppino & Sons, Inc.
Box 787
Key West, FL 33041



Dixie Lime & Stone Co.
Rt. 4, Box 363A
Ocala, FL 32670
Lakeland Rock Co.
P. O. Box 2563
Lakeland, FL 33803
Limerock Minerals
P. O. Box 3813
Lakeland, FL 33803
Ocala Limerock Corp.
P. O. Box 1060
Ocala, FL 32670



Charles Phillips
1307 2nd Ave. SW
Largo, FL



Claussen-Laurence Const. Co.
Augusta, GA
IPhillip McLeod
i. x 673
: Augustine, FL
1 B. Meade & Sons
Sx 677
, Augustine, FL



( :tral Quarries, Inc.
F O. Box 822
1 :sburg, FL
' rida Rock Industries, Inc.
I O. Box 4677
J ksonville, FL 32201
S enter Lime Products
F O. Box 6
S lnterville, FL


Windleys Key Quarry



Stock Island Quarry



POLK
Kathleen Mine



Hampton Quarry



Hampton Mine



Hampton Property
Limerock Mine


PINELLAS
Alverton Road Quarry



ST. JOHNS
Anastasia Quarry

McLeod Quarry



Anastasia Quarry



SUMTER
Sumterville Quarry



Center Hill Quarry



Sumter Quarry


(Location Unknown)



67S 26E 30





26S 23E 32



25S 23E 36



25S 23E 22


25S 23E


(Location Unknown)


(Location Unknown)

7S 30E 28



7S 30E 28





(Location Unknown)



21S 23E 28



20S 23E 18








REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88

SUWANNEE


Anderson Contracting Co.,
Inc.
P. O. Box 38
Old Town, FL 32680
Florida Rock Industries, Inc.
P. O. Box 4667
Jacksonville, FL 32201
Live Oak Stone Co.
P. O. Box 327
Live Oak, FL
L. J. McCray Const. Co.
429 East Street
Lake City, FL 32055
Suwannee Limerock Co.
Branford, FL
S. M. Wall Co.
1650 NE 23rd Blvd.
Gainesville, FL 32601



Limerock Industries, Inc.
P. O. Drawer 790
Chiefland, FL 32626




Golden Dolomite Co.
P. O. Box 1193
Orlando, FL



Dixie Lime Products Co.
P. O. Box 578
Ocala, FL



Bradenton Stone Co.
P. O. Box 256
Bradenton, FL
Florida Travertine Co.
Oneco, FL
Manatee Dolomite Co.
P. O. Box 37
Samoset, FL


Mulkey Pit
Hall Quarry

Suwannee Quarry



Live Oak Quarry



Mulkey Pit



Ralph Quarry

Branford Quarry



TAYLOR
Tennile Pit



DOLOMITE

CITRUS
Red Level Quarry



LEVY
Lebannon Quarry



MANATEE
Bradenton Quarry



Clark's Quarry

Minton Quarry


6S 15E 21
(Location Unknown)

2S 13E 1,2,3,
11,12,13,14

(Location Unknown)



6S 14E 23



5S 14E 32

(Location Unknown)





8S 10E 21







17S 16E 25





16S 16E 12





34S 18E 2



35S 18E 7

35S 18E 5









REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88


Southern Dolomite Co.
P. O. Box 23
Bradenton, FL



Florida Dolomite Co.
Pembroke, FL
Venice Dolomite Co.
303 E. Silver Springs Blvd.
P. O. Box 367
Ocala, FL 32670


Palmetto Quarry



SARASOTA
Sarasota Quarry

Venice Dolomite


34S 18E 19


36S 17E


(Location Unknown)


Belle Glade Rock Co.
P. O. Box 37
Northwest Branch
Miami, FL
Burnip & Sims Inc.
505 Park Street
West Palm Beach, FL
Driskell & Mayo
Jupiter, FL
Handley Construction Co.
Airport Road
Pahokee, FL
Palm Beach Co. Highway
Dept.
2030 Congress Ave.
West Palm Beach, FL 33406
Pubin Construction Co.
F. O. Box 15065
'est Palm Beach, FL 33406


COQUINA

PALM BEACH
South Bay Quarry




Peanut Island Mine



DuBois Quarry

Palm Beach Co. Quarry


Lantana Rock Pit
Okeechobee Pit
Rangeline Pit
Burke Trustee Pit
Dingwall Pit
Rosa Tusa


44S 36E 23




42S 43E 34



40S 42E 31

(Location Unknown)


5S 42E
3S 42E
5S 41E
(Location Unknown)
(Location Unknown)
(Location Unknown)








BUREAU OF GEOLOGY


REFERENCES
American Society for Testing Materials 1978 Book of Standards, part 14.
Bowles, Oliver 1956 Limestone and Dolomite: U. S. Bureau of Mines I. C. 7738, 28 pp.
Boynton, R. 1978 Lime Outlook for 1977-1978; Pit and Quarry, Vol. 70, No. 7; p. 76.
Carter, W. 1979 Review and Outlook for Crushed Stone; Pit and Quarry, Vol. 71, No. 7; p.
72-73.
Clark, W. E., Musgrove, R. H., Menke, L. G. and Cagle, J. W. Jr. 1964 Water Resources of
Alachua, Bradford, Clay and Union Counties, Florida; Florida Geological Survey,
Report of Investigations 35.
Cooke, C. W. 1945 Geology of Florida; Florida Geological Survey Bulletin 29.
DuBar, J. R. 1958 Stratigraphy and Paleontology of the Late Neogene Strata of the
Caloosahatchee River Area of Southern Florida; Florida Geological Survey Bulletin 40.
Florida Department of Transportation 1977 Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Con-
struction.
Gutschick, K. 1979 Lime Outlook; Pit and Quarry, Vol. 71, No 7; p. 75-76.
Hendry, C. W. Jr., and Yon, J. W. Jr. 1958 Geology of the Area In and Around The Jim
Woodruff Reservoir; Florida Geological Survey, Report of Investigations No. 16.
Koch. R. 1979 Limestone Industry Forecast; Pit and Quarry, Vol. 71, No. 7; p. 74-75.
Lefond, S. J. 1975 Industrial Minerals and Rocks, 4th ed.; Copyright by American Institute of
Mining Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc.
Meeder, J. F. 1979 A Field Guide with Road Log to the Pliocene Fossil Reef of Southwest
Florida: Miami Geological Society.
Menke, C. G., Meredith, E. W. and Wetterhall, W. S. 1961 Water Resources of Hillsborough
County, Florida; Florida Bureau of Geology, Report of Investigations 26.
Moore, W. E. 1955 Geology of Jackson County, Florida; Florida Bureau of Geology,
Bulletin 37.
Parker, G. G., Ferguson, G. E. Love, S. K. and others 1955 Water Resources of Southeastern
Florida; U. S. Geological Survey, Water Supply Paper 1255.
Peek, H. M. 1958 Ground Water Resources of Manatee County, Florida; Florida Geological
Survey, Report of Investigations 18.
Poag. C. W. 1972 Planktonic Foraminifers of the Chickasawhay Formation, United States
Gulf Coast; Micropaleontology, Vol. 18, No. 3.
Pride, R. W., Meyer, F. W. and Cherry, R. N. 1966 Hydrology of Green Swamp Area in Cen-
tral Florida; Florida Geological Survey, Report of Investigations 42.
Puri, H. S. 1957 Stratigraphy and Zonation of the Ocala Group; Florida Geological Survey
Bulletin 38.
Puri, H. S.. Yon, J. W. Jr., and Oglesby, W. R. 1967 Geology of Dixie and Gilchrist Countic v,
Florida; Florida Geological Survey Bulletin 49.
Puri, H. S. and Vernon, R. 0. 1964 Summary of the Geology of Florida and a Guidebook o
the Classic Exposures; Florida Geological Survey, Special Publication No.5 revised.
Reeves, W. D. 1961 The Limestone Resources of Washington, Holmes, and Jackson Counti' f,
Florida; Florida Geological Survey Bulletin 42.
Schmidt, W. and Coe, C. 1978 Regional Structure and Stratigraphy of the Limestone Outcr 'p
Belt in the Florida Panhandle; Florida Bureau of Geology, Report of Investigations 5.
Shirley, L. E. and Sweeney, J. W. 1965 Limestone Resources of Washington County, Floric ;
Published in Florida Bureau of Geology Bulletin 50.
Stewart, H. G. Jr. 1966 Ground Water Study of Polk County; Florida Geological Surve y,
Report of Investigations 44.
U. S. Bureau of Mines 1945-74 Mineral Yearbooks, Chapter on Stone; Vol. II.
U. S. Geological Survey Investigations 1-850 1973 Resource and Land Information for Soi th
Dade County, Florida; 65pp.









REPORT OF INVESTIGATION NO. 88 53

Vernon, R. 0. 1942 Geology of Holmes and Washington Counties, Florida; Florida Bureau of
Geology, Bulletin 21.
Vernon, R. 0. 1951 Geololgy of Citrus and Levy Counties, Florida; Florida Geological Survey
Bulletin 33.
Vernon, R. 0. and Puri, H. S. 1964 Geologic Map of Florida; Florida Bureau of Geology Map
Series 18.
White, W. A. 1970 Geomorphology of Florida; Florida Bureau of Geology Bulletin 51.
Wood, Robert S. 1958 Lime Industry in Virginia, in Virginia Minerals; Virgina Division of
Mineral Resources, Vol. 4, No. 2; P. 1-9.
Yon, J. W. Jr. 1966 Geology of Jefferson County Florida; Florida Geological Survey Bulletin
48.
Yon, J. W. Jr. and Hendry, C. W. Jr. 1969 Mineral Resource Study of Holmes, Walton, and
Washington Counties; Florida Bureau of Geology Bulletin 50.
Yon, J. W. Jr. and C. W. Hendry, Jr. 1972 Suwannee Limestone in Hernando and Pasco
Counties, Florida; Florida Bureau of Geology, Bulletin 54.





RE DUCT ION


RATIO


13X




1.-- ---~ -r


i 4'


Report of Investigation No. 88
Map 1. Geologic Map of Surface and Near Surface Deposits


I


O 10 20 30 40 SO MILES
I I ."- I i I


riik Bur&em of Geology


r---- OT Limestones, uolomites, ana uoquinas in
Florida.
SANTA ROSA
i KALOOSA ,/ I .. *
WALTON.

I E F A GADSODEN JEFFERSO N --
'^ -- |LEON A MADISON / DUVAL
'BAYWA ~ EE I BAKER
SWAKN: IR COLUMBIA
AY LY IU NIOBN IST JO H N S

L FRANKLIN LAFAYETT RADFORD


ACHUA PUTNAM

FLAG L













Years Ago) FSco -
Anastasia Fm. IP
PLEISTOCENE OMiami Oolite IS O -


OSCE0LA w-
POLK BREVAR
\L I

K. argk s Fm. and eae

Chattasahoochee Fm.\ ARAO \
PLIO-MIOCENE G S EN
STamiami Oolite Fm.HLLSBOR
G OSCEOLA
Key Laro Limestone
1.5

ITamiami Fm. l
------ -----ANATEE HARDEE OKEECHOBEE
ST.LUCIP
Hawthorn Fm. ----- HIGHLANDS --
MITIOCENE
St. Marks Fm. and Tampa Stage L.A DE SOTO
Chattahoochee Fm. ARASOTA MARTt-
-26 --- LAKE
OLIGOCENE Suwannee Ls.CHARLOTTE GLADES OKEECHOBEE










OF LIMESTONE DOLOMITE AND COQUINA
and Marianna Ls.

SOcala Group I HENDRY
EOCENE BEACH

SAvon Park Ls. I
-- - - 54


IIIIN
1


GEOLOGIC MAP MONROE

I

OF SURFACE AND NEAR SURFACE DEPOSITS


OF LIMESTONE DOLOMITE AND COQUINA

~s


~"~~ ---i~ II


r'y LIBRARY
OF FLA. mlcTnB


I


I ? '- "- -- --





SPKY LIBRARY
OF FLA. HISTORY


L. ';=` V: i-~
.. r i---_~s i
-- '- r
~ :1 ....
i
r- -1


PHYSIOGRAPHIC MAP















HIGHLANDS


l LOWLANDS


Ai


5.

p


p4
b -


coj
09 L


Rorida Burea of Geology


do
v


Report of Investigation No. 88

Map 2. Physiographic Map of Florida.




.LIRAR Y
I -.-.- .. ... "::: T- "- .- '' :'. .- .- ..i, : I U 8 J L l UK I


Report of Investigation No. 88
Map 3. Limestone Resource Potential Map of Florida.

SSATA* ROSA I
S0KALOOSA
SDWALTON j ~-9 T-----i.--N. NASSAU
1 .... I ^GADSDEN E / u ,- ] c A I
SI ALHOUN % J FERSO A HAMILTO
LEON MADISON H _-A





-ALEVY
AYAREAS OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
LIBERTYJ(--- E BAKER 1
WACOLUBIA

SOF UNION S. JOHNS
SC LLF C AY
L FRANKLIN LAFAYETTEADFOi

i G IS HEA PUTNAM

\DIXIEG-ILC I 1 (LALER



AREAS OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LEV
1 \VOLUSIA
OF
C_ Sl LAKE -4
LIMESTONE SEMINOLE










1NDIAN RIVER


MANATEE HARDEE ECHOBEE
H IG H PO T EN T IA L Present pro ductio n and/o r proven 1 --DI----- VER
reserves in past production areas.-L


[- INTERMEDIATE POTENTIAL Material has been pro- -ST.LUCIE
duced in the past and/or there are potential --- HGHLANDS
reserves.
L\ --L --00 '-y^"
SASOTA MARTIN
LOW POTENTIAL Material present but not proven I A LAKE
economic at this time. -'--
CHARLOTTE GLADES OKEECHOBEE
W NONE (No Potential) Material not present or present PALM
at depth which prohibits development. LEE HENDRY


S Location of active producers of Limestone.


C L IR




MONROE
DADE











0 10 20 30 40 SO MILES
Florida Bureau of Geology > I I1 i














SANTA ROSA

O"CLOOSA4
/1


-T~T ~' i5-

-


OF FLA. HISTORY



Report of Investigation No. 88


Map 4. Dolomite Resource Potential Map of Florida.


HOLMES


WALTON


AREAS OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT


V1


MARION


OF


DOLOMITE


ORANGE


POLK


OSCEOLA
BREVARD


W HIGH POTENTIAL Present production and/or proven
reserves in past production areas.


INTERMEDIATE POTENTIAL Material has been pro-
duced in the past and/or there are potential
reserves.


LOW POTENTIAL Material present but not proven
economic at this time.


NONE (No Potential) Material not present or present
at depth which prohibits development.


BEACH


* Location of active producers of Dolomite.


COLLIER
COLLIER


BROWARD


I-


DADE


0 10 20 30 40 SO MILES
1 1 a -1 1


Rorida Bureau of Geology


i :
-ji3i;-- i-r--~i~- :1-I-I: 2


PKY LIBRARY
^C l L fI flIrnt


i




-- -- --- Is~bC -I ~---.- ..IF e -.- -


I~.-~;-~-~.s~~-~*t~"~,~;;s-


Report of Investigation No. 88


Map 5. Coquina Resource Potential Map of Florida.


NASSAU


AREAS OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT


MARION


OF


COQUINA


ORANGE


POLK


[ HIGH POTENTIAL Present production and/or proven
reserves in past production areas.


~ INTERMEDIATE POTENTIAL Material has been pro-
duced in the past and/or there are potential
reserves.


J LOW POTENTIAL Material present but not proven
economic at this time.


NONE (No Potential) Material not present or present
at depth which prohibits development.


Location of active producers of Coquina.


Florida Bureau of Geology


-- --- ..


SANTA ROSA

S' OKALOOSA .
WALTON
x /- I


LEVY


HENDRY


BEACH


LIER






MONROE
DADE
!-


COLI


Irion


S-- OF: F r .rT-HISTORY
: OF F :! HISTORY


---


BROWARD


i o 20 31040 150 MILES