[meteorite-list] Dry Lake Strewnfields

From: Rob Matson <mojave_meteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:17:48 2004
Message-ID: <GOEDJOCBMMEHLEFDHGMMMEHECAAA.mojave_meteorites_at_cox.net>

Hi John,

You asked:

> Questions/observations in regards to desert strewnfields.

> 1. Obvious groupings of fallen masses would make the likelihood of
> the area being a meteorite strewnfield. Do multiple finds in desert
> locale usually get described as a strewnfield?

That depends on the nature of the surface on which the finds
are made, and the quantity of finds. If open desert, I would be generally
inclined to expect that proximate finds with similar
exteriors would be paired. Whether one ultimately referred to
the finds collectively as a "strewnfield" would hinge on how many
individuals were found, and whether their find locations were
non-random (e.g. elliptical shape, or at least an axis of symmetry
indicating the flight line). 4 finds: no. 40 finds: yes. The
dividing line is somewhere in between, and more a question of
semantics.

> 2. Does the fact that many rocks get moved around in these
> environments take the strewnfield idea down a notch with rocks
> being scattered?...or does their proximity within the bounds
> of normal surface movements qualify them to be still within
> the original strewnfield?

The mobility of meteorites under various circumstances (natural
or otherwise) will over time alter both the absolute and relative
positions of each find. Since the (generally elliptical) pattern
is a necessary part of the accepted definition, I feel that once
the pattern has been significantly altered it deserves a
different term. I use the term "recovery field" whenever dealing
with multiple paired finds on or around desert playas.

Cheers,
Rob
Received on Tue 16 Dec 2003 04:28:58 AM PST