The origin of Mount Royal remains a matter of some debate.

  1. According to Tourisme Montreal, what is the myth surrounding this prominent feature of
    the city? [2 marks]
  2. Other sources suggest that the Monteregian Hills have an origin that is analogous to the
    Hawaiian islands and seamounts.
    a. Identify the island/seamount chain that the Monteregian Hills (including Mount
    Royal) are deemed to be a part of. [1 mark]
    b. Briefly described the Plate Tectonic setting required for the island/seamount
    chain origin. [2 marks]
    c. Based on the island/seamount interpretation for the origin of the Monteregian
    Hills, describe plate motion and ages in relative terms. [4 marks]
  3. Does Eby’s grain-size data, for this feature’s igneous rocks, encourage or discourage
    belief in this ‘volcanic myth’? Explain by paying special attention to the style of volcanism
    required to account for a volcano (Assignment 2, Question 1(a)) or a island/seamount
    chain (Assignment 2, Question 1(b)). [3 marks]
  4. Distinguish between seamount and island. [1 mark]
  5. Using Google Maps (or a similar mapping capability) in satellite view, locate the New
    England Seamounts in the Atlantic Ocean:
    a. Estimate the distance between the Bear and Nashville seamounts. [1 marks]
    b. Using this view, or NOAA’s map view here, estimate the trend of these
    seamounts as a relative compass direction. [1 marks]
  6. Referring to Eby’s Figure 1:
    a. Estimate the trend of the Monteregian Hills as a relative compass direction.
    Report any challenges you encounter. [2 marks]
    b. Estimate the trend of the White Mountains as a relative compass direction. [1
    mark]
  7. Using the NOAA case study here, for these Atlantic Ocean Basin mountains and
    seamounts state the approximate:
    a. Ages for each of the Monteregian Hills, the New England Seamounts, the Corner
    Rise Seamounts, and the Great Meteor Group. [2 marks]
    b. Water depth for a mountain or seamount in each of the Monteregian Hills, the
    New England Seamounts, the Corner Rise Seamounts, and the Great Meteor
    Group. (Note: An annotated version of the relevant graph from the NOAA study
    MUST be included as a part of your submission.) [2 marks, -5 marks if annotated
    graph is absent.]
  8. Are the trend and age estimates for the Monteregian Hills, the New England Seamounts,
    the Corner Rise Seamounts, and the Great Meteor Group, consistent with a
    hotspot-based narrative? Discuss. [4 marks]
  9. Provide a geologically oriented sketch that accounts for a stationary hotspot and moving
    plates. Based on your sketch, and the above narrative, what must be the case for the
    location of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge relative to the hotspot? [4 marks]
  10. Eby claims that a failed aulacogen allows for an interpretation that is more consistent
    with the geological/geochronological evidence.
    a. Define this term and provide a sketch of its Plate Tectonic context. [4 marks]
    b. In stating “… note the approximately 120° angle between the [Monteregian Hills]
    and younger [White Mountain] plutons …” draws our attention to the spatial
    appearance of these intrusions. By annotating Eby’s Figure 1, are you able to
    confirm the angular relationship between these series of plutons? [3 marks]
    c. Is this interpretation consistent with the Tourisme Montreal myth? Explain. [3
    marks]