Talk:Valles Caldera

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Titles[edit]

A better title would be Valles Caldera National Preserve, especially since the world is so filled with "Valle Grandes". --Wetman 19:06, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • I was born in ABQ in 1963, my father had a cabin north of Jemez Springs in the 1960's, we never called it the "Grand Valley" or "Valle Grande", we always called it either the "Jemez Valley" or "Jemez Caldera", or maybe, after the government boys from where ever came from: "Valles Caldera". WikiDon
    • I would like to make Valle Grande a dab page. There is a city and a department in Argentina with that name. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 01:18, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sounds good to me. Valle Grande (New Mexico) would be a reasonable descendant node. In my opinion this article should not be the same as Valles Caldera National Preserve; one describes a geological feature, the other a political construct (that happens to contain most of the feature). There's room for both, with content unique to each. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 13:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is rather confusing. Valles Caldera National Preserve points to this article which is supposedly about Valle Grande but is really about the Preserve. What's more, the first sentence equates the valley (valle) to the entire caldera though Valle Grande is only part of the caldera. Peter (Cactus Pete) 22:55, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Valles Caldera National Preserve now redirects to Valles Caldera. --Una Smith (talk) 04:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Valle Grande is now a proper disambig page, which sets up future separation of these two subjects. No need to hurry though, as they seem to coexist fine at the moment. ∴ here…♠ 02:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Una Smith (talk) 04:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Parts of the Valles Caldera[edit]

Mateka wrote: "It is all that remains of a very large volcano."

But don't geoligist say that parts of the Rio Grande Rift and Sangre de Cristo Mountains to the east were modified from the effects of the blast? Or have those effects been eroded away over time?

  • Changed. An expert in geology might want to contradict me if this is wrong: But if you look on the USGS topographical map (e.g. using the TerraServer link in the article), it clearly is not the whole volcano. – Ylai 04:47, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Minor Change: Was President Bill Clinton enacted the... Chnaged to as it now is. Presidents don't enact. Congress enacts. Presidents sign. Johnwhunt 23:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, presidential authority does suffice for creation of certain protected areas, without congressional action. It's been done by several administrations, mainly for national monuments carved out of Bureau of Land Management territory. However, VCNP isn't one of them, so your change is OK. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 13:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read today a statement from a person studying the Valles Caldera NP that it has more lightning strikes than any other "area" other then Orlando. I'm not sure exactly what this means but I believe it. I've never see so much lighting in one area in my entire life. I guess it depends on the definition of area.

Is the Valles Caldera dormant or extinct at the moment? Does anyone know if there are any tiltmetres there, or seismic recording devices? Darkmind1970 11:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dormant. There are fumaroles over there, so there is a slight chance that it may erupt. Global Volcanism Programme Guanlongwucaii (talk) 11:13, 25 May 2009 (UTC)Guanlongwucaii[reply]
"Extinct" certainly isn't correct, as User:Guanlongwucaii points out. Use of the term "dormant" is notoriously inexact and probably should be discouraged. There is an excellent new book on the caldera by geologist Fraser Goff that talks about the eruptive status (among many other things) at some length; I'll try to adapt some verbiage from it to the article when I get home from work. Rhyolite volcanism typically has a "slow tempo" (another nice phrase from a good reference, Wood and Kienle, Volcanoes of North America) and the caldera and Jemez Mountains should certainly be considered potentially active, even though nothing more exciting than fumaroles is currently happening. Let me see if I can find some primary sources regarding instrumentation; the range is monitored for seismicity, although there are no tiltmeters that I know of. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Take the 700k hiatus between Yellowstone Caldera eruptions.--Guanlong wucaii 09:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge "Valle Grande, New Mexico" here?[edit]

It seems like "Valles Caldera" (this article) is already mostly functioning as the article for Valle Grande. There exists a separate article for it however. Seems like an obvious merge but I thought I'd wait for comments since I'm not familiar with the area. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I support a merge. I'd never heard that part of the caldera was a dried lake bed until I read the NASA page (interesting!). Most references I've seen refer to the caldera as a whole. - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 03:01, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fully support a merger based on how little new information is on the Valle Grande article compared with the Caldera article. Coinmanj (talk) 02:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Supervolcano[edit]

This is not a supervolcano. The term "supervolcano" implies a volcanic center that has had an eruption of magnitude 8 on the Volcano Explosivity Index (VEI), meaning the measured deposits for that eruption is greater than 1,000 cubic kilometers (240 cubic miles). https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/volcanoes/yellowstone/yellowstone_sub_page_49.html

The VC erupted only 300 cubic kilometers - which means the VC does not qualify.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwearvelcroshoes (talk • contribs)

@Iwearvelcroshoes: Alas, the base-10 logarithm of 1000/300 is about 0.522 and in practice, large VEI-7 volcanoes are also considered supervolcanoes, such as the Long Valley Caldera.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:28, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasper Deng:Thank you for the response. Please provide academic (peer-reviewed) support for the VEI-7 statement and I will happily forfeit my edits. I have searched extensively and have been unable to find a peer-reviewed journal that supports your statement.
@Iwearvelcroshoes: A straightforward search of JSTOR reveals things like [1]. Valles may be debateable (no sources specifically on Valles) but Long Valley Caldera is universally considered a supervolcano, even though its largest eruption only had twice as much ejecta as Valles. Campi Flegrei, with a slightly smaller maximum eruption (the Campanian Ignimbrite eruption), is considered to be a supervolcano ([2]).--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Iwearvelcroshoes: And in any case, if you really want to restore the stricter VEI 8 criterion, you need to talk this out at Talk:Supervolcano, where editors have long tossed out the VEI 8 designation.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:53, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasper Deng: Long Valley is indeed a supervolcano, I would be extremely interested in any more recent peer-reviewed sources citing the Valles Caldera as one though. Please do share. The [3] piece is from 2006.Iwearvelcroshoes (talk) 19:59, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Climate[edit]

When viewed in Google Earth, this file Global_1986-2010_KG_5m.kmz (available here http://koeppen-geiger.vu-wien.ac.at/present.htm ) indicates the Köppen climate classification for the Valles Caldera is Dfb. The current article states it has a Dfc climate, but I am unable to find a rigorous source for that classification. Can someone here provide it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leveretth (talk • contribs) 17:16, 28 June 2021 UTC (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Valles_Caldera&oldid=1205214107"