REPLY TO DISCUSSION: A field guide to portions of the Jurassic Fernie-Kootenay Trans-Canada Highway section, Banff, Alberta: new sedimentological and structural observations and interpretations

Abstract

We thank Hamblin and Walker (2000) for their interest in our recent observations and interpretations of the Jurassic Fernie-Kootenay section near Banff town site (Cant and Stockmal, 1999). As we stated in our paper, our intention was “to provoke discussion” and “to reassess some uncertainties and ambiguities regarding the sedimentological interpretation”. We have clearly succeeded in these objectives. However, Hamblin and Walker (2000) have misread our intentions, and have cast our contribution not as presenting a viable alternative interpretation, but rather as a denunciation of their conclusions. Although we offered compelling evidence that some of their conclusions are likely in serious error due to extensive deformation in the lower part of the section, they are mistaken that we have completely dismissed their sedimentological interpretations in favour of our own. Throughout our paper we emphasized that our new sedimentological interpretations are viable alternatives, never once stating or implying that the interpretations of Hamblin (1978,1979,1983) and Hamblin and Walker (1979) must be incorrect, or that we must “reject” them. For example, on page 12 of Cant and Stockmal (1999), with reference to the lower section, we state “It is therefore possible that these beds could be true turbidites..., but could also be interpreted as storm return-flow deposits, or turbid underflows discharged directly from fluvial or deltaic distributaries”, and on page 15 we state “Rather, these units could equally as well be interpreted as tempestites...”. We emphasize our use throughout our paper of “could”. Nowhere do we emphatically state that these particular rocks are tempestites, and not turbidites. Similarly, with reference to the upper section, nowhere in the text do we state that it is absolutely non-marine — in fact, a lagoonal setting was specifically suggested. Rather, we offer alternative views, which Hamblin and Walker (2000) have chosen …