Annotated bibliography from Kyle Nichols

Brown, Andrew, 1963. A geologist-General in the Civil War. Geotimes, 7,

n.7, 8-11.

This short paper is an insightful look at one of the first military

commanders that placed an emphasis on maps. Most maps before the Civil

War, if there were maps, were at a scale of one inch = six miles, or more!

General Rosecrans, of the Union Army, wanted better maps and for areas

that did not have coverage he would talk to local people and send his

Calvary out ahead of the infantry to get the layout of the land. In Union

occupied territory, he had a group of surveyors that made accurate

topographic maps. Rosecrans, men were responsible for getting map

coverage to General Sherman's troops before the march to the sea. This

probably the first extensive use and making of maps during battle.

Rosecrans was not the only one to do this but he is the leader in that he

made maps fast and mass-produced them (30 per 6 hours) so each division

leader could have one.

This article is mostly history of maps in the Civil War. There is very

little geology in this article. It is interesting, though, to see that as

late as the Civil War men were going to battle and the command really

could have no idea what they were getting themselves into.

Ciciarelli, John A., 1994. The Geology of the Battle of Monte Cassino,

Italy, 1944. Journal of Geological Education, 42, 32-42.

Ciciarelli does a good job of explaining the topographic and geologic

layout of the terrain surrounding Monte Cassino. It is clear from the

text that allied forces had no other topographic choice but to go through

Cassino. The Germans used the geology to their advantage to bog down the

heavy equipment and turn the Americans into foot soldiers. Even past land

management issues are discussed as they pertain to bare bedrock. When

enemy fire hit the bare rock, it would fracture and cause an increase of

50% more eye and head injuries than normal battles.

This article is historically interesting and shows the significance that

geology can play in battle. Geology alone can be an obstacle but when

enemy forces use it effectively to their advantage, there can be no

defense against it (except perseverance and lots of men).

Dutch, Steven I., 1995. War and the environment: A conceptual framework.

Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs and Annual Meeting,

27, n6, 144.

Although only an abstract it describes the relationship between the

military and geology. In brief these are: side-effects due to activity,

using the environment as a weapon, direct modification of land, and

Eco-terrorism. This gives a brief foundation to understand military

geology. Today it seems as though most military geology addresses the

side effects of military activity.

Griffin, John E. Jr. and Brent A. Cox, 1993. Geologic factors which

influenced the Battle of Shiloh. Geological Society of America Abstracts

with Programs and Annual Meeting, 25, n4, 19

Another abstract, but an interesting synopsis of the geological influence

on the battle. The surprise attack by the Confederate soldiers forced the

Union soldier to high ground. The Confederates were in swampy low lands,

which once the Union army regrouped, was a disadvantage when fighting the

higher Union troops. Sorry rebs.

Just a geologic piece of Civil War history.

Hunt, C. B., 1950. Military Geology. Environmental Geology. Betz, F. Jr.

ed. Dowen Hutchington & Ross Inc. Strodsburg, Pennsylvania, 390 p.

This paper uses a "hypothetical" case study of an area to show the

significance of a geological investigation on the planning of military

activity. It shows that simple analyses of topographic maps and geologic

maps can lead to a wealth of information that would greatly increase the

knowledge with which to plan where to move troops, build roads and get

fresh water from.

This reads like an advertisement for geology. It effectively shows the

usefulness of applied geology. This is one of the landmark papers in

military geology.

King, W. B. R., 1951. The influence of geology on military operations in

North-West Europe. Environmental Geology. Betz, F. Jr. ed. Dowen

Hutchington & Ross Inc. Strodsburg, Pennsylvania, 390 p.

This paper mostly describes the geology of northwestern Europe and its

influence on WWII. Numerous examples are described of how decisions were

influenced by the geology. One of the most interesting examples explains

how the lower sea level of the last glaciation affected where the invasion

was going to begin. The present day beaches of Normandy are underlain by

peat. Heavy vehicles would be bogged down in the peat and be rendered

useless. Areas where rivers incised the land at the last glaciation in

route to the lower sea level lacked the peat. It was in these areas that

the landing of the heavy vehicles took place.

The author states two interesting points. He states that even if one side

has the advantage of geological features, good generalship and strong men

can overcome the deficit (i.e. in the previous paper on the Battle of

Monte Cassino). Also, due to geology battles are likely to occur in the

same areas. Thus, history repeats itself, not due human ignorance, but

due to geology.

Kiersch, G. A., 1998. Engineering geosciences and military operations.

Engineering Geology, 49, 123-176.

This is a great paper that pretty much sums up the history of military use

of geology. In its infancy military geology was mostly a terrain tool.

WWII gave birth to applied geology. Geology was being used for many

different aspects of recon. logistics, strategy and also terrain

understanding. The next major re-haul of military geology was during the

unpopular Vietnam War. The geology branch was dismantled and spread to

Special Forces, and various engineering branches. The use of consulting

geologists also became common. Military use through the years has even

made use of broader fields of oceanography, geophysics, underground field

geology, and nuclear geology.

This paper is full of information, from the first account of military

geological applications in 1813 by the Prussian army right up to the

1990's. It is surprising that nothing on the Gulf War is included. This

is a well-referenced paper that explains the basics and history of

military geology in 50 pages and lots of figures.

Kerr, Richard A, 1994, The Defense Department Declassifies the

Earth-Slowly. Science, 263, 625-626.

This article is about the efforts of civilian scientists to get the

military to declassify much of the data that can be used for scientific

research. Much of this data was collected during the Cold War and many

contend that it no longer needs to be classified. The military, being the

military, likes to keep things secret, but are slowly declassifying some

documents in a random and not so easy way to get the information. Much

data exists that will add to the climate change issue. Will this data

solve anythingno, but at least science should be able to look at it.

This article makes you think of how much information the military knows

that top-notch scientists don't know. Maybe we should all join the

military so we can get good data cheap.

Levitin, Carl, 1996, Russian documents set out 'tectonic weapon' research.

Nature, 383, 471.

The Soviet Union and later Russia and Azerbaijan, have tried

unsuccessfully to develop nuclear weapons that would trigger earthquakes.

The idea behind the science was to detonate one bomb (via satellite) to

build up stress on a fault, and then detonate a second bomb to release the

stress and cause an earthquake.

This is an interesting idea, but I think nearly impossible to implement.

How can one direct the correct amount of energy to build up tectonic

stress and then release it? Seems like there are too many geological

factors to account for. In an engineering world, maybe but not in a

natural world. I have heard of causing earthquakes by reducing stress,

but not by increasing stress.

McPhee, John, 1996. The Gravel Page. The New Yorker; 71, 44-69

This is yet another interesting piece by McPhee. This focus of this

article is forensic geology. In one section of the article McPhee

narrates the forensic geology of WWII. In 1944 Japan launched bombing

balloons into the Jet Steam. The idea was that in about 3 days the

balloons would be over the United States (more than 5000 miles away) and

the balloons would drop bombs and then self-destruct. These balloons were

masterfully designed, of 9000 balloons launched only 2 blew back over

Japan. Over 10% are estimated to have reached their destination. US

fighter planes only shot 2 balloons down over US soil, due to the high

altitude of the balloons. Despite the tactical success, the final outcome

was not what Japan was hoping for. The balloons killed only 5 Americans,

and that was due to the curiosity of one bomb. There was one design flaw

however. The Japanese used native beach sand as ballasts. The Army

geologists quickly concluded that the sand was not from North America and

not from pacific islands. Japan was the prime suspect. The geologists

identified the sand so well that they pinpointed one of the launch

beaches.

McPhee also narrates how forensic geology helped solve two murders. These

short pieces are interesting and fun to read. If enjoy McPhee's other

works I suggest you read this.

Kyle Nichols

003 Perkins Hall

Department of Geology

University of Vermont

Burlington, VT 05405