The Study of Quaternary Strand-Lines in New Zealand
Canterbury University College, Christchurch.
[Read before the Geological Section of the Royal Society of New Zealand Seventh Science Congress, Christchurch, May 1951; received by the Editor, May 1, 1952.]
The evidence then known for post-Tertiary changes of sea-level was collected and reviewed in 1924 by Henderson, who concluded that with respect to these changes New Zealand had behaved as a rigid unit. This finding promoted special studies during the succeeding decade by King, Jobberns and others, leading to the opposite conclusion that evidence for late differential movements was widespread, and that New Zealand could contribute little to world-wide strand-line study. Subsequent work has tended to confirm this view. L. A. Cotton, in his 1946 review of Pacific strand-line shifts, has apparently taken a retrograde step by including New Zealand data on the explicit assumption that differential movements have been unimportant. Seismicity and geology suggest that North Auckland and East Otago have suffered the least Quaternary deformation, yet correlation of strand-line data is difficult even between these districts. Inexactness and ambiguity of much of the existing data force us to contemplate an entirely fresh start. Carbon-isotope absolute age determinations may in future assist by directly dating some raised beach deposits.
Some years ago the writer was attracted to the problem of correlating the inland Pleistocene geology of New Zealand with the coastal evidence for swinging sea-levels, hoping thereby to establish a link with world Quaternary chronology. Examination of the literature disclosed many references to raised beaches, raised abraded platforms, and evidence of submergence, several earlier reviews, and some strongly divergent conclusions. It is now apparent, however, that the possibilities of correlation within New Zealand are strictly limited, and that overseas correlation is extremely hazardous. In this paper, following a brief outline of the history of strand-line studies in New Zealand, reasons will be given for selecting North Auckland and East Otago as the most hopeful areas for this work, and the several factors impeding correlation of the existing data will be discussed.
Rigidity versus Late Deformation
Prior to 1924, there had been few special studies of old strand-lines, but much information of a qualitative character had been recorded incidentally by many authors. Indications of both higher and lower stands of sea-levels than at present had been observed at many separate localities, but little attempt had been made to correlate the data between one part of the coast and another.
Henderson (1924) listed 119 publications referring to marine terraces and other signs of sea-level fluctuation in New Zealand, and attempted to classify the information they contained. Although C. A. Cotton1 had already recognised the continuance of late Tertiary (Kaikoura) orogenic deformation through the Pleistocene into the Recent epoch, Henderson in his generalization was not de-
[Footnote] 1 Cotton, C. A., The Structure and Later Geological History of New Zealand. Geol. Mag., dec. 6, vol. 3, pp. 243-9, 314-20; 1916.
terred from classifying marine terraces on the basis of intervals from present sea-level (up to about 1,000ft.), and proposing correlations throughout New Zealand. He concluded that since mid-Pleistocene times, differential crustal deformation had been subsidiary to “widespread epeirogenic oscillations” (1924, p. 580), and that New Zealand “has moved in respect to sea-level… as a whole” (p. 591). The units of his altitude-classification of terraces, however (0–120ft.; 200–300ft.; 350–600; 600ft.+) were too coarse to afford a satisfactory test of his hypothesis, and he did not discriminate actual measurement from rough guess, or beach-line from abrasion-platform before making his generalizations.
There is little doubt that Henderson's conclusions were largely responsible for the enthusiasm and optimism with which a group of geographers and geologists, including G. Jobberns and L. C. King, began an intensive study of coastal terraces, which was to culminate in the presentation by King and Jobberns to the Fifth Pacific Science Congress of a review of New Zealand shoreline changes with conclusions very different from those of Henderson ten years earlier. These authors now recognised six “provinces,” some divided into “sub-provinces,” each of which had experienced a different sequence of post-Tertiary upward and downward vertical movements with or without warping and tilting. The chances for correlation of New Zealand terraces with those of other countries were heavily discounted, and it had become clear that strand-line evidence alone would not serve to synchronize the Quaternary geology of this country with the rest of the world. Perhaps because an important incentive had thus been removed, interest in this field waned appreciably after 1934.
Since then, continued discovery of tilted marine and river terraces, deformed and faulted young sediments, and recent fault-traces has tended to confirm the sceptical view of King and Jobberns. Many of the several hundred earthquakes recorded instrumentally here each year originate in or near New Zealand, and every few years a damaging shake is experienced in some district One cannot ignore these signs of continuing orogenic activity through a large part of the country, and there is thus good reason for hesitation in accepting marine terraces on any part of the coast as being of eustatic origin.
To many New Zealand geologists, therefore, it seemed that Dr. L. A. Cotton had taken a retrograde step in presenting to the Royal Society of New South Wales in 1946 a classification of New Zealand strand-line data on a height basis, and incorporating them in circum-Pacific correlations on the explicit assumption that recent differential earth-movements had been local and unimportant. Dr. Cotton was apparently unaware of the unfavourable findings of King and Jobberns (1934).
Detection of Truly Eustatic Features
Notwithstanding all that has been said, the writer is not convinced that raised beaches, etc., formed during pauses in eustatic uplift can nowhere be distinguished in New Zealand, although this may be true for some of the more strongly deformed regions. Some way is needed to separate the reliable data. Steep tilting or sharp folding are likely to be self-evident and therefore present no problem, but gentle regional warping or tilting may not easily be detected, especially if about an axis oblique to the shore. Errors are then probable when inferred raised strand-lines are interpolated between widely spaced points of observation. In the lack of internal evidence for recognizing eustatic features directly, we are
forced to select the regions less likely to have suffered late deformation and to exclude from consideration (for the present, at least) the shoreline features of the remaining districts. Criteria for this selection will be considered next. But there remains the problem of distinguishing eustatic benches marking small intervals of sea-level shift from benches currently developing at or near present H.W.M. (Bartrum 1923, 1935, etc.), and these will perhaps always be a source of confusion.
King and Jobberns established their “provinces” on regional differences of physiography and structure that reflected differences in later geologic history. No doubt because the general prospects for eustatism studies seemed so poor, they made no attempt to assess the relative merits of the provinces. It is now proposed that relative seismicity may be used to reinforce physiographic and geomorphic evidence for late deformation, and thus to eliminate areas in which altitude is insufficient on its own for correlating discontinuous fragments of coastal terrace.
No part of New Zealand is seismically quite “dead,” nor have the seismically inert districts necessarily escaped deformation for a long time past, but it is reasonable to assume that seismically “quiet” areas should have experienced less recent deformation than active ones, and seismically inert areas still less. Hayes.2 and Hendersony.3 independently and from different viewpoints examined the earthquake records of New Zealand and divided the country into areas of varying earthquake intensity, frequency and liability. The resulting patterns differ in many respects, but agree in showing the seismicity of North Auckland peninsula as strikingly lower than that of other districts. Next comes East Otago, which has experienced few earthquakes of local origin, and none of high intensity since European settlement.
Between the city of Auckland and the Kaipara district, the deformation of the Tertiary and younger rocks is very mild, and the strictly localized occurrences of intense folding are accepted as the results of pre-consolidation slumping. Farther north, understanding of the geology has been impeded by scarcity of outcrops, due in part to the pronounced slumping tendencies of the Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments, which is also a more likely cause of the apparent complexity than diastrophism. In East Otago, excluding the late Tertiary volcanic area around Dunedin, rocks as old as late Cretaceous are, on the whole, gently deformed. In this respect, North Auckland and East Otago contrast with most of the remainder of New Zealand, so that it is correct to say that the present weakly seismic areas coincide with areas of less intense post-Cretaceous orogenic deformation, and are the most suitable for the study of Quaternary shorelines. North Auckland has an additional advantage in being hundreds of miles distant from the nearest area likely to have borne thick, extensive glaciers or an ice-cap, and being therefore free from risk of post-glacial isostatic adjustments. Although East Otago is much nearer to glaciated areas, it was probably never occupied by thick ice. Traces of recently active faults are not, so far, reported from either district.
[Footnote] 2 Hayes, R. C., Seismicity of New Zealand, N.Z Journ Sc. Tech., 23, sec. B, (2), pp. 49–52; 1942. On Earthquake Distribution in New Zealand. idem, 24, sec. B, (6), pp. 236-8; 1943.
[Footnote] 3 Henderson, J, Earthquake Risk in New Zealand N. Z. Journ Sc. Tech 24, sec B, (5), pp. 195–219; 1943.
North Auckland herein denotes the northern half of the North Island “Northern Province” of King and Jobberns, and East Otago includes their “Waitaki-Clutha sub-province” together with the south-east corner of Otago and Stewart Island.
Quaternary Strand-Lines of North Auckland and East Otago
The accompanying table summarizes the published data on earlier stands of sea-level in these areas. A well-defined level at + 15ft. is indicated at 14 separate localities in North Auckland (to which might have been added a number from the coasts south of Auckland city) and two from the southern province. Other levels, however, are indicated from only one or two localities each. There is surprisingly poor agreement between the northern and southern provinces, except for the + 15ft. and perhaps the + 100ft. and + 200ft. levels, although the evidence for the latter is very scattered. The + 15ft. level alone is sufficiently well authenticated to warrant comparison with L. A. Cotton's circum-Pacific data, in which we find the 15ft. level one of the most widely recorded (1947, Table I, p. 68). Information about lower stands of the sea is still hardly more than qualitative.
Inexactness of Data
Although the slender correlation between the strand-lines of the most favourable areas probably implies gentle regional warping even of these parts of the country since the time of formation of old shoreline features above 15ft., it is also likely that correlation would have been more successful but for the inexactness, ambiguity and incompatibility of many of the published figures. The writer recalls no case wherein the limits of error were stated, yet it is strongly suspected that the accuracy varies from that of mere visual estimates to careful aneroid determinations. In many instances, there was no indication of the nature of the shoreline evidence to which the altitude referred, leaving the following sources of ambiguity.—
A single height in many cases could mean:
height of top or base of raised beach deposit;
height of inferred old H. W. M.;
height of top of cliff at seaward margin of coastal terrace;
height on terrace surface at some unspecified position in relation to old shoreline;
height of wave-planed surface beneath marine gravels;
A range of heights (e.g., “100-150ft.”) could mean:
a single bench or beach varying in height along its length;
a single bench varying in height transverse to the old shoreline;
flights of level platforms between the limits given.
Confusion between raised platforms at less than 10ft. and Bartrum's “abnormal” platforms.
Supposed stands of sea-level inferred from geomorphic studies inland, and therefore inexact.
Teichert,4 dealing with recent minor changes of sea-level, distinguishes carefully between features indicating H. W. M. and L. W. M. at each level, and discusses
[Footnote] 4 Teichert, C., Late Quaternary Changes of Sea-level at Rottnest Island, Western Australia. Proc. Roy. Soc. Vict. 49, (2), n.s., 63-79, 1950.
|Vertical Distance from Present S.L. (ft.)||Locality.||Evidence.||Reference.|
|(-)200||Daragaville-Rodney||Drowned valley||Ferra, 1934, p. 45|
|(-)150 +||Waitemata Harbour||Broe-log||Searle, 1944, p. 51|
|(+) 3—5||Pahi, Kaipara||Raised beach||Ferra, 1934, p.45|
|Waipu Ck. to Deep Ck.||"||" " "|
|(+) 6—15||Cavalli Is.-Whangarei Heads||"||" 1925, p.53|
|(+) 8||Russell, Bay of Islands||"||" " "|
|(+) 12||"||"||" " "|
|Onewhero||"||" " "|
|Putoa Pt., Kaipara||"||" 1934, p.45|
|Whangarei Heads||"||" 1925, p.53|
|Hatfield Beach||"||" 1934, p.45|
|Stanley Bay (Waiwera S.D.)||"||" " "|
|(+) 15||Hokianga||"||Smith, 1881, p. 402|
|Whangaroa||"||" " "|
|Manganui||"||" " "|
|Waiwera||"||" " "|
|Orewa||"||" " "|
|Whangaparaoa||Old channel||" " "|
|Motutapu I||Raised beach||" " "|
|Auckland Harbour||"||" " p. 403|
|(+) 40—60||Takapuna-Silverdale||Erosion surface||Turner & Bartum, 1929, p. 892|
|(+) 50||Mokohinau I.||"||Fleming, 1950, p.267|
|Doubtless Bay||"||Battey, 1950, p.56|
|(+) 100||"||"||" " "|
|(+) 100—200||Takapuna-Silverdale||Erosion surface||Turner & Bartrum, 1929, p. 892|
|(+) 100—150||Mokohinau I.||Wave-cut beach||Fleming, 1950, expln. to Pl. 27|
|(+) 200||Dargaville-Rodney||Erosion surface||Ferrar, 1934, p. 44|
|(+) 350||Takapuna-Silverdale||"||Turner & Bartrum, 1929, p. 892|
|(b) East Otago.|
|(-) 180||Stewart I.||Drowned valleys||Williams, 1934, p. 344|
|Tokomairiro R. mouth||Terrace||Ongley, 1939, p.65|
|(+) 10||Kaikorai Stream||"||Henderson, 1924, p.587|
|(+) 12||Oamaru||"||Park, 1918, p.112|
|(+) 15||Stewart I.||"||Williams, 1934, p. 352|
|(+) 15—20||N. of Pleasant R. (Goodwood)||"||Service, 1934, p.277-8|
|(+) 20||Tokomairiro R. to Brighton||"||Ongley, 1939, p. 65|
|Waipapa Pt.||"||Henderson, 1924, p.587|
|(+) 20—30||Shag R.||"||Paterson, 1941, p.56|
|(+) 30||Tokomairiro R. mouth||Terrace||Ongley, 1939, p.65|
|(+) 42||Oamaru||Raised beach||Park, 1918, P.112|
|(+) 40—60||Shag R.||"||Peterson, 1941, p.56|
|Tokomairiro R. to Brighton||"||Ongley, 1939, p.65|
|(+) 50||Kaikorai Stream||Bench||Ongley, 1939, p.66|
|(+) 60||North of Molyneux R.||Coastal bench||Ongley, 1939, p.65|
|(+) 80—100||Shag R.||Coastal bench||Paterson, 1941, p. 56|
|(+) 100||Kaikorai Valley||Terrace||Ongley, 1939, p.65|
|* Molyneux-Tokomairiro||"||Ongley, 1939, p.66|
|(+) 100—120||N. of Pleasant R. (Goodwood)||Cut platform||Service, 1934, p. 277-8|
|(+) 120||* N of Molyneux Mouth||Wave-cut bench||Henderson, 1924, p. 587|
|(+) 140—200||Islands in Foveaux Strait||Flat tops||Hutton, 1875, p.79|
|(+) 200||South of Wangaloa||Bench||Ongley, 1939, p.66|
|(+) 200—300||Goodwood district||Terraces||Service. 1934, p.277-8|
|Seacliff and Dunedin||Terraces||Henderson, 1924, p.588|
|(+) 250||Sandymount (Dunedin)||Bench||Marshall, 1906, p.386|
|(+) 260—300||Kaitangata||Raised beaches||Henderson, 1924, p.588|
|(+) 650||Stewart I.||Bench||Williams, 1934, p.3542|
|(+) 900 (max.)||Highcliffe (Dunedin)||Rock benches||Hutton, 1875, p.78|
[Footnote] * These records probably refer to the same feature.
[Footnote] * These records probably refer to the same feature.
the error due to variable tide range. No less refinement is required for the study of similar features on New Zealand coasts. It would be quite impossible to attempt to classify the existing New Zealand data into different orders of accuracy, or to recast them into common terms and thereby eliminate the ambiguity. Anyone wishing to pursue further the study of old strand-lines in New Zealand will have to consider the advisability of making an entirely fresh start, working only with new data collected with regard for the recommendations of King, Jobberns and Teichert.
Although many people have observed evidence of higher and lower stands of sea-level at many places around the New Zealand coasts, little of the data can be incorporated in the general fund of knowledge of worldwide Quaternary sea-level change. or is likely to assist in synchronizing the recent geological history of New Zealand with that of other regions. This is partly because so much of New Zealand has suffered deformation during the Quaternary but also partly because of the inexactness and ambiguity of many of the observations. An entirely fresh start would seem preferable to any further attempt at interpretation of the existing information. In dealing with sub-recent strand-lines, some assistance may be available in future in distinguishing recent storm-beach deposits from raised beaches by carbon-isotope absolute age determinations of carbonaceous or calcareous matter. New work should take the form of a special study, rather than an adjunct to regional or other geological investigations, and it would seem advisable to begin with the coasts of North Auckland and East Otago. Every effort should be made to express the altitudes of raised shore features in uniform terms, preferably in terms of mean sea-level at the time of their formation, making use of suggestions by King (1930), Jobberns & King (1933), and Teichert.
The following list is believed to contain all important references to Quaternary strand-lines in New Zealand during the period 1924-1950, and is intended to supplement Henderson's earlier list (Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, 55, pp. 597-9. A few publications earlier than 1924 are included for the documentation of Table I. The writer is indebted to Miss Mabel Rice for several items.
Allan, R. S., 1925. Preliminary Account of the Geology of the Chatham Islands. N.Z. Journ Sc. Tech., 7, (5), p. 290-4.
— 1929. Chatham Islands: The Physical Features and Structure. Trans. N.Z. Inst., 59, (4), p. 824-839.
Babtrum, J. A., 1923. The Shore-platform of the West Coast near Auckland: Its Storm-wave Origin. Proc. Austr. Ass. Adv. Sc. 16th Meeting (Wellington), p. 493-5.
— 1926. “Abnormal” Shore Platforms. Journ. Geol., 34 p. 793-806.
— 1927. The Western Coast of the Firth of Thames. Trans. N.Z. Inst., 57, p. 245-53.
— 1929. Geography and Geology (of Auckland). Municipal Record (Auckland), 3, (3), p. 2-5.
— 1935. Shore Platforms. Proc. Austr. N.Z. Ass. Adv. Sc. 22nd Meeting (Melbourne), p. 135-43.
— 1938. Shore Platforms. Journ. Geomorph. 1, (3), p. 266-8.
Battey, M. H., 1950. The Geology of Rangiawhia Peninsula, Doubtless Bay, North Auckland. Rec. Auck. Mus., 4, (1), p. 35-59.
Benson, W. N., Bartrum, J. A. and King, L. C., 1934. The Geology of the Region About Preservation and Chalky Inlets, Southern Fiordland, N. Z. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 64, (1), p. 51-85.
Brown, D. A., 1942. Geology of the West Coast of the Firth of Thames. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 72, (1), p. 60-84.
Cotton, C. A., 1946. The Geology of the Middle University District The University and the Community, Victoria Univ. College, Wellington, p. 212-236.
— 1947. The Alpine Fault from the An. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 76, (2), p. 359-72.
— 1949 Plunging Cliffs of Lyttelton Harbour. N.Z Geogr. 5, (2), p. 130-6.
— 1950. Axes of Active Warping in the New Zealand Seismic Region. Geol. May, 87, (5), p. 360-8.
Cotton, L. A. 1947. The Pulse of the Pacific. Proc. Roy. Soc. N. S. W., 80, (2), p. 41-76.
Daly, R. A., 1934. The Changing World of the Ice Age. New Haven, Conn., p. 178.
Ferrar, H. T., 1925 The Geology of the Whangarei-Bay of Islands Subdivision, North Auckland N.Z Geol. Surv. Bull. 27, p. 53-4.
— 1928. Geological Notes on Kapiti Island. N. Z. Journ Sc. Tech. 9, (5), p. 512-5.
— 1934. The Geology of the Dargaville-Rodney Subdivision, Hokianga and Kaipara Divisions, North Auckland. N.Z. Geol. Surv. Bull. 34, p. 44-5.
Firth, C. W., 1930 The Geology of the North-west Portion of Manakau County, Auckland. Trans. N.Z. Inst., 61, (1). p. 85-137.
Fleming, C. A., 1947 Standard Sections and Subdivisions of the Castlecliff and Nukumaruan Stages of the New Zealand Pliocene. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 76, (3), p. 300-26.
— 1950. The Geology of the Mokohinau Islands, North Auckland Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 78, (2-3), p. 255-68.
Fleming, C. A and Hutton, C. O., 1949 Notes on the Geology of Kapiti Island, Cook Strait, N.Z. Trans. Roy. Soc. N. Z., 77, (4), p. 456-68.
Gage, M., 1940. The Makara and Karori Valleys and their Bearing on the Physiographic History of Wellington. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 69, (4), p. 410-9.
— 1943 The Tertiary and Quaternary Geology of Ross, Westland. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 75, (2), p. 138-59.
Gill, E. D, 1950. Some Unusual Shore Platforms near Gisborne, North Island, New Zealand. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 78, (1), p. 64-8.
Grange, L. I, 1927 The Geology of the Tongaporutu-Ohura Subdivision, Taranaki Division, N. Z. Geol Surv Bull 31, p. 11, 40.
Hall, W. E., 1946 Notes on the Later Geological History of Wellington Peninsula. N.Z. Journ. Sc. Tech., Sec. B, 27, (6), p. 427-30.
Healy, J., 1938 The Geology of the Coastal Strip from Big Bay to Professor Creek, North-west Otago N.Z Journ. Sc. Tech., Sec. B, 20, (2), p. 80-94.
Henderson, J., 1924 The Post-Tertiary History of New Zealand. Trans. N. Z. Inst, 55, p. 580-99.
Henderson, J., and Grange, L, I, 1926. The Geology of the Huntly-Kawhia Subdivision, Pirongia and Hauraki Divisions. N.Z. Geol. Suri. Bull. 28, p. 19-21.
Hutton, F. W., 1875 Report on the Geology and Goldfields of Otago (with G. H. F. Ulrich). Dunedin. p. 78-9.
Jobberns, G., 1926. Raised Beaches in the Teviotdale District, North Canterbury. Trans. N. Z. Inst, 56, p. 225-6.
— 1928 The Raised Beaches of the North East Portion of the South Island of New Zealand. Trans. N.Z. Inst., 59, (3), 508-70.
— 1935. The Physiography of Northern Marlborough. N. Z. Journ. Sc. Tech. 16, (6), p. 349-59.
— 1937 A Stream-planed Pedment of the New Zealand Coast. Proc. Aush. N.Z. Ass. Adv Sc. 23rd Meeting, (Auckland), (abstr.), p. 400.
Jobberns, G., and King, L. C., 1933 The Nature and Mode of Origin of the Motunau Plam, North Canterbury. Trans. N.Z. Inst, 63, (3), p. 355-69.
King, L. C., 1930. Raised Beaches of the South-east Coast of the North Island of New Zealand. Trans. N.Z Inst., 61, (3-4), p. 498-523.
— 1932 Notes on the Geology and Geomorphology of the Coast between Naprer and Castlepoint. Trans. N. Z. Inst 63, (1), p. 72-9.
— 1934. The Geology of the Lower Awatere District, Marlborough, New Zealand. N.Z. Dept. Sc. Ind. Res. Geol. Mem. 2, p. 35-6, 47.
— 1939. The Relation Between the Major Islands of New Zealand. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 68, (4), p. 544-69.
— Late Pliocene and Pleistocene Tectonic Movements in the Central Region of New Zealand. Proc. 6th Pacif. Sc. Congr., 2, p. 815-22.
King, L. C., and Jobberns, G., 1934. Shoreline Changes on the New Zealand Coast. Proc. 5th. Pacif. Sc. Congr. 2, p. 1285-95.
Lyons, R. R., 1932. Notes on the Geology of the Mangatangi-Mangatawhiri District, Auckland, New Zealand. N.Z. Journ. Sc. Tech. 13, (5), p. 268-77.
Marshall, P., 1906. Geology of Dunedin. Quart, Journ. Geol. Soc., 62, p. 381-423.
— 1926. Crustal Movements and Geotectonics in the Pacific Region. Proc. 3rd. Pacif. Sc. Congr. 1, p. 441-2.
Marwick, J., 1930. Evidences of Past Land Connections of New Zealand. N.Z. Journ. Sc. Tech., 11 (3), p. 302-6.
— 1946. The Geology of the Te Kuiti Subdivision. N. Z. Geol. Surv. Bull. 41, p. 2.
Morgan, P. G., and Gibson, W., 1927. The Geology of the Egmont Subdivision, Taranaki. N.Z. Geol. Surv. Bull. 29, p. 29-30.
Oliver, R. L., 1948. The Otaki Sandstone and its Geologic History. N.Z. Dept. Sc. Ind. Res. Geol. Mem. 7, p. 33-44.
Ongley, M., 1927. Wairoa Subdivision. N.Z. Geol. Surv. 21st. Ann. Rep., p. 12.
— 1935. Eketahuna Subdivision. N.Z. Geol. Surv. 29th. Ann. Rep., p. 2.
— 1939. The Geology of the Kaitangata-Green Island Subdivision, Eastern and Central Otago Divisions. N.Z. Geol. Surv. Bull. 38, p. 65.
— 1940. Note on Coastal Benches formed by Spray Weathering. N.Z. Journ. Sc. Tech, Sec. B, 22, (1), p. 34-5.
Ongley, M., and Macpherson, E. O., 1928. The Geology of the Waiapu Subdivision, Raukumara Division. N.Z. Geol. Surv. Bull. 30, p. 3-4.
Park, J., 1918. The Geology of the Oamaru District, North Otago. (Eastern Otago Division.) N.Z. Geol. Surv. Bull. 20, p. 112.
Paterson, O. D., 1941. The Geology of the Lower Shag Valley. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 71, (1), 32-58.
Searle, E. J., 1944. Geology of the Southern Waitakere Hills Region, West of Auckland City. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z. 74, (1), p. 49-70.
Service, H., 1934. The Geology of the Goodwood District, North-East Otago. N.Z. Journ. Sc. Tech. 15, p. 270-1.
Smith, S. P., 1881. On Some Indications of Change of Level of the Coastline in the Northern Part of the North Island. Trans. N.Z. Inst., 13, p. 398-410.
Speight, R., 1943. The Geology of Banks Peninsula: A Revision (Pt. 1). Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 73, (1), p. 13-26.
— Idem. (Pt. 2). Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 74, (3), p. 232-54.
— An Eroded Coastline. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z. 78, (1), p. 313.
Thomson, J. A., 1926. Geological Notes on Mayor Island. N.Z. Journ. Sc. Tech., 8, (4), p. 210-4.
Turner, F. J., and Bartrum, J. A., 1929. The Geology of the Takapuna-Silverdale District, Waitemata County, Auckland. Trans. N.Z. Inst., 59, (4), p. 864-902.
Wellman, H. W., and Willett, R. W., 1942A. The Geology of the West Coast from Abut Head to Milford Sound. Pt. 1. Trans. Roy. Soc. N. Z. 71, (4), p. 282-306.
— and , 1942B. Idem. Pt. 2. Glaciation. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 72, (3), p. 199-219.
Willett, R. W., 1940. Orepuki Subdivision. N.Z. Geol. Surv. 34th. Ann. Rep., p. 5.
Williams, G. J., 1934. Auriferous Tin Placers of Stewart Island. N.Z. Journ. Sc. Tech., 15, (5), p. 344-57.