Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Rocks & Minerals”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
USGS2010

Devonian through early Carboniferous (Mississippian) metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 6 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Late Carboniferous through early Jurassic metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 7 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Middle Jurassic through Quaternary metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 8 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Tectonic and metallogenic model for northeast Asia, Chapter 9 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Appendix A: Description of the Northeast Asia Project and Associated Products

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2009

Appendix B: Description of Map Units for Northeast Asia Summary Geodynamics Map

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Appendix C: Summary of Major Metallogenic Belts in Northeast Asia (the Russian Far East, Yakutia, Siberia, Transbaikalia, Northern China, Mongolia, South Korea, and Japan)

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2014

The geobiology of sediment-hosted mineral deposits

The role of biological processes in the formation of sediment-hosted ore deposits has long been recognized. In this review, we focus on the biogeochemical cycling of C, Mn, Fe, and S as they relate to the formation of sediment-hosted Mn and Fe deposits, metalliferous black shales, clastic-dominated (CD) Pb-Zn deposits, and phosphorites. Biological mediation of ore-forming processes occurs over large spans of space and time. The most important step is oxygenic photosynthesis, a biological innovation dating from the Archean Eon that releases free oxygen into the surface oceans and atmosphere and delivers chemical potential, in the form of reduced carbon, to the seafloor. Photosynthetic oxygen is available to precipitate dissolved Fe 2 + and Mn 2 +, and therefore it augments the formation of sedimentary Mn and Fe deposits, and drives oxidative weathering of exposed crust, thereby delivering sulfate and transition metals to the ocean. Where reduced carbon accumulates in the deep oceans and on the seafloor, bacterial sulfate reduction produces hydrogen sulfide thereby facilitating the formation of metalliferous black shales, sediment-hosted Pb and Zn sulfide deposits, and phosphorites. Thus, an understanding of major biogeochemical processes and how they have evolved over time is required in order to refine genetic models for sediment-hosted ore deposits and to guide future mineral exploration. A close secular relationship between deposit formation and trends in major biogeochemical cycles provides a potentially powerful tool for mineral resource assessment. Sedimentary basins that formed during a time that is known to lack deposits of a particular metal can be eliminated during exploration programs, whereas others of permissive ages should be considered priorities. For example, sedimentary basins older than ca. 1.8 Ga are unlikely to contain large CD Pb-Zn deposits, and basins that formed between 1.6 and 0.6 Ga are not prospective for phosphorites. Recent technological advances in the application of nanometer-, micron-, and bulk-scale analytical techniques allow for imaging of complex biological structures and have provided new insights into the role of bacteria, not only in direct formation of mineral deposits, but also in leaching of metals from ore and mineralized rocks. Future exploration for, and exploitation of, mineral deposits may include offshore or land-based, low-grade, high-tonnage targets; understanding the role of bacteria in mineral growth, mineral dissolution, and redox transformations will aid in predicting where such deposits exist, and how metal extraction from ores can be enhanced.

Book chapter↗
USGS1979

Mineral resources of the Minarets Wilderness and adjacent areas, Madera and Mono counties, California

A mineral survey of the Minarets Wilderness area and adjacent areas in the central Sierra Nevada, Calif., was conducted during 1973 through 1975. The total area covers about 620 km 2 (237 sq mi) in the Sierra and Inyo National Forests, of which about 440 km 2 (170 sq mi) are within the officially designated Minarets Wilderness. The mineral resource potential was evaluated by geological, geochemical, and geophysical studies by the U.S. Geological Survey, and by examination of mineralized rocks, prospects, and mining claims by the U.S. Bureau of Mines. The results of the survey indicate that the study area has small to moderate submarginal to paramarginal resources of copper, silver, zinc, lead, iron, and tungsten and an unevaluated potential for molybdenum resources. Limestone is present, but not of commercial quantity or quality. No other industrial minerals have been recognized in quantity. Granitic rocks have potential use as decorative stone and sand and gravel could be produced from either alluvial deposits or glacial drift. However, these commodities are more accessible elsewhere at localities closer to markets. The study area has no potential for fossil fuels, and, because of the general geologic environment, the potential for nuclear fuel minerals is considered to be low. The study area has low geothermal potential, even though it is on the western edge of the Mono-Long Valley "Known Geothermal Resource Area" (KGRA). The area is underlain by metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks that have been intruded by granitic rocks of the Sierra Nevada batholith. Pliocene volcanic rocks are present locally. With few exceptions, the known occurrences of mineralized rock are confined to the metamorphic rocks, and the exceptions appear to be confined to plutonic rocks that are older than the Late Cretaceous granitic rocks that make up the bulk of the batholithic rocks in the study area. Although no mineral production has been recorded from prospects within the study area, mines adjacent to it have produced significant amounts of gold and tungsten. Production figures are incomplete, but mines in the Mammoth mining district (fig. 1) may have produced as much as $1 million worth of gold, silver, and other metals at the then-existing prices. The Monte Cristo mine in the Mammoth district was in production during 1978.

California↗
USGS2010

Fluorine, fluorite, and fluorspar in central Colorado

Fluorine (F) is a widespread element that was deposited in a variety of rocks, minerals, and geologic environments in central Colorado. It occurs as a trace element, as a major component of the mineral fluorite (CaFs), and as a major economic source of fluorine in fluorspar deposits, which are massive concentrations of fluorite. This study has compiled available geochemical analyses of rocks, both unmineralized and mineralized, to determine the distribution of fluorine in specific age-lithologic categories, ranging from 1.8-giga-annum (Ga) metamorphic rocks to modern soils, throughout central Colorado. It also draws upon field studies of fluorine-rich mineral deposits, including fluorspar deposits, to decipher the nearly two-billion-year-long geologic history of fluorine in the study area, with implications for mineral-resource evaluations and exploration. The resulting compilation provides an important inventory of the naturally occurring levels and sources of fluorine that ultimately weather, erode, and become part of surface waters that are used for domestic water supplies in densely populated areas along the Colorado Front Range. Most commonly, fluorine is a trace element in virtually all rocks in the region. In the 3,798 unmineralized rocks that were analyzed for fluorine in the study area, the average fluorine content was 1,550 parts per million (ppm). The median was 640 ppm, nearly identical to the average crustal abundance of 650 ppm, and some high-fluorine rocks in the Pikes Peak area skewed the average to a value much greater than the median. Most unmineralized age-lithologic rock suites, including Proterozoic metamorphic rocks, 1.7- and 1.4-Ga granitic batholiths, Cambrian igneous rocks, Phanerozoic sedimentary rocks, and Laramide and Tertiary igneous rocks, had median fluorine values of 400 to 740 ppm fluorine. In all suites, however, a small number of analyzed samples contained more than 1 percent (10,000 ppm) fluorine. The 1.1-Ga plutonic rocks related to the Pikes Peak batholith had a mean fluorine content of 1,700 ppm, and primary magmatic fluorite and fluorite-bearing pegmatites are common throughout that igneous mass. Fluorine was deposited in many types of economic mineral deposits in central Colorado, and it currently is a significant trace element in some thermal springs. In the fluorspar deposits, fluorine contents were as high as 37 percent. Some fluorine-rich porphyry systems, such as Jamestown, had fluorine values that ranged from 200 ppm to nearly 37 percent fluorine, and veins in other deposits contained hydrothermal fluorite, although it was not ubiquitous. For the 495 samples from non-fluorspar mining districts (and excluding Jamestown), however, the median fluorine content was 990 ppm. This is above the crustal average but still relatively modest compared to the fluorspar deposits, and it indicates that the majority of the mineralizing systems in central Colorado did not deposit large amounts of fluorine. Nevertheless, the fluorine- and fluorite-rich mineral deposits could be used as guides for the evaluation and discovery of related but concealed porphyry and epithermal base- and precious-metal deposits. The Cenozoic geologic history of central Colorado included multiple periods during which fluorine-bearing rocks and mineral deposits were exposed, weathered, and eroded. This protracted history has released fluorine into soils and regoliths, and modern rainfall and snowmelt interact with these substrates to add fluorine to the hydrosphere. This study did not evaluate the fluorine contents of water or make any predictions about what areas might be major sources for dissolved fluorine. However, the abundant data that are available on fluorine in surface water and ground water can be coupled with the results of this study to provide additional insight into natural sources of fluorine in domestic drinking water.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2010

Co-Cu-Au deposits in metasedimentary rocks-A preliminary report

A compilation of data on global Co-Cu-Au deposits in metasedimentary rocks refines previous descriptive models for their occurrence and provides important information for mineral resource assessments and exploration programs. This compilation forms the basis for a new classification of such deposits, which is speculative at this early stage of research. As defined herein, the Co-Cu-Au deposits contain 0.1 percent or more by weight of Co in ore or mineralized rock, comprising disseminated to semi-massive Co-bearing sulfide minerals with associated Fe- and Cu-bearing sulfides, and local gold, concentrated predominantly within rift-related, siliciclastic metasedimentary rocks of Proterozoic age. Some deposits have appreciable Ag ? Bi ? W ? Ni ? Y ? rare earth elements ? U. Deposit geometry includes stratabound and stratiform layers, lenses, and veins, and (or) discordant veins and breccias. The geometry of most deposits is controlled by stratigraphic layering, folds, axial-plane cleavage, shear zones, breccias, or faults. Ore minerals are mainly cobaltite, skutterudite, glaucodot, and chalcopyrite, with minor gold, arsenopyrite, pyrite, pyrrhotite, bismuthinite, and bismuth; some deposits have appreciable tetrahedrite, uraninite, monazite, allanite, xenotime, apatite, scheelite, or molybdenite. Magnetite can be abundant in breccias, veins, or stratabound lenses within ore or surrounding country rocks. Common gangue minerals include quartz, biotite, muscovite, K-feldspar, albite, chlorite, and scapolite; many deposits contain minor to major amounts of tourmaline. Altered wall rocks generally have abundant biotite or albite. Mesoproterozoic metasedimentary successions constitute the predominant geologic setting. Felsic and (or) mafic plutons are spatially associated with many deposits and at some localities may be contemporaneous with, and involved in, ore formation. Geoenvironmental data for the Blackbird mining district in central Idaho indicate that weathering of abundant Fe, S, As, Co, and Cu in sulfide minerals of the deposits produces acidic waters, especially in pyrite-rich deposits; mine runoff has high concentrations of Fe, Cu, and Mn that exceed U.S. drinking water or aquatic life standards.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2011

Review and interpretation of previous work and new data on the hydrogeology of the Schwartzwalder Uranium Mine and vicinity, Jefferson County, Colorado

The Schwartzwalder deposit is the largest known vein type uranium deposit in the United States. Located about eight miles northwest of Golden, Colorado it occurs in Proterozoic metamorphic rocks and was formed by hydrothermal fluid flow, mineralization, and deformation during the Laramide Orogeny. A complex brittle fault zone hosts the deposit comprising locally brecciated carbonate, oxide, and sulfide minerals. Mining of pitchblende, the primary ore mineral, began in 1953 and an extensive network of underground workings was developed. Mine dewatering, treatment of the effluent and its discharge into the adjacent Ralston Creek was done under State permit from about 1990 through about 2008. Mining and dewatering ceased in 2000 and natural groundwater rebound has filled the mine workings to a current elevation that is above Ralston Creek but that is still below the lowest ground level adit. Water in the 'mine pool' has concentrations of dissolved uranium in excess of 1,000 times the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking-water standard of 30 milligrams per liter. Other dissolved constituents such as molybdenum, radium, and sulfate are also present in anomalously high concentrations. Ralston Creek flows in a narrow valley containing Quaternary alluvium predominantly derived from weathering of crystalline bedrock including local mineralized rock. Just upstream of the mine site, two capped and unsaturated waste rock piles with high radioactivity sit on an alluvial terrace. As Ralston Creek flows past the mine site, a host of dissolved metal concentrations increase. Ralston Creek eventually discharges into Ralston Reservoir about 2.5 miles downstream. Because of highly elevated uranium concentrations, the State of Colorado issued an enforcement action against the mine permit holder requiring renewed collection and treatment of alluvial groundwater. As part of planned mine reclamation, abundant data were collected and compiled into a report by Wyman and Effner (2007), which was to be used as a basis for eventual mine site closure. In 2010 the U.S. Geological Survey was asked by the State of Colorado to provide an objective and independent review of the Wyman and Effner (2007) report and to identify gaps in knowledge regarding the hydrogeology of the mine site. Key findings from the U.S. Geological Survey assessment include geological structural analysis indicating that although the primary uranium-hosting fault likely does not cross under Ralston Creek, many complex subsidiary faults do cross under Ralston Creek. It is unknown if any of these faults act as conduits for mine pool water to enter Ralston Creek. Reported bedrock permeabilities are low, but local hydraulic gradients are sufficient to potentially drive groundwater flow from the mine pool to the creek. Estimated average linear velocities for the full range of reported hydraulic conductivities indicate groundwater transit times from the mine pool to the creek on the order of a few months to about 3,800 years or 11 to 65 years using mean reported input values. These estimates do not account for geochemical reactions along any given flow path that may differentially enhance or retard movement of individual dissolved constituents. New reconnaissance data including 34S isotope and 234U/238U isotopic activity ratios show potentially distinctive signatures for the mine pool compared to local groundwater and Ralston Creek water above the mine site. Although the mine pool may be near an equilibrium elevation, evidence for groundwater recharge transients indicates inflow to the workings that are greater than outflow. There is not enough hydraulic head data adjacent to the mine workings to adequately constrain a final equilibrium elevation or to predict how several wet years in succession might affect variations in mine pool elevation. Although ground level adits are sealed with bulkheads, if the mine pool elevation were to rise slightly to the elevation of or abo

Open-File Report↗
USGS1983

Mapping of hydrothermally altered rocks using airborne multispectral scanner data, Marysvale, Utah, mining district

Multispectral data covering an area near Marysvale, Utah, collected with the airborne National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 24-channel Bendix multispectral scanner, were analyzed to detect areas of hydrothermally altered, potentially mineralized rocks. Spectral bands were selected for analysis that approximate those of the Landsat 4 Thematic Mapper and which are diagnostic of the presence of hydrothermally derived products. Hydrothermally altered rocks, particularly volcanic rocks affected by solutions rich in sulfuric acid, are commonly characterized by concentrations of argillic minerals such as alunite and kaolinite. These minerals are important for identifying hydrothermally altered rocks in multispectral images because they have intense absorption bands centered near a wavelength of 2.2 ??m. Unaltered volcanic rocks commonly do not contain these minerals and hence do not have the absorption bands. A color-composite image was constructed using the following spectral band ratios: 1.6??m/2.2??m, 1.6??m/0.48??m, and 0.67??m/1.0??m. The particular bands were chosen to emphasize the spectral contrasts that exist for argillic versus non-argillic rocks, limonitic versus nonlimonitic rocks, and rocks versus vegetation, respectively. The color-ratio composite successfully distinguished most types of altered rocks from unaltered rocks. Some previously unrecognized areas of hydrothermal alteration were mapped. The altered rocks included those having high alunite and/or kaolinite content, siliceous rocks containing some kaolinite, and ash-fall tuffs containing zeolitic minerals. The color-ratio-composite image allowed further division of these rocks into limonitic and nonlimonitic phases. The image did not allow separation of highly siliceous or hematitically altered rocks containing no clays or alunite from unaltered rocks. A color-coded density slice image of the 1.6??m/2.2??m band ratio allowed further discrimination among the altered units. Areas containing zeolites and some ash-fall tuffs containing montmorillonite were readily recognized on the color-coded density slice as having less intense 2.2-??m absorption than areas of highly altered rocks. The areas of most intense absorption, as depicted in the color-coded density slice, are dominated by highly altered rocks containing large amounts of alunite and kaolinite. These areas form an annulus, approximately 10 km in diameter, which surrounds a quartz monzonite intrusive body of Miocene age. The patterns of most intense alteration are interpreted as the remnants of paleohydrothermal convective cells set into motion during the emplacement of the central intrusive body. ?? 1983.

Advances in Space Research↗
USGS1973

Spectrophotometric procedure using rhodamine B for determination of submicrogram quantities of antimony in rocks

A spectrophotometric procedure using Rhodamine B is given for the determination of antimony in mineralized rocks after its separation as stibine. A study of the Rhodamine B reaction points to the importance of the order of addition of reagents in enhancing sensitivity and increasing the stability of the system. The tolerance of some 26 elements is established for the overall procedure. Although the limit of determination is approximately 0·5 ppm Sb in a 0·2-g sample, the procedure is intended primarily for screening samples containing more than 1 ppm Sb. In pure solutions 0·1 μg of antimony can be determined with a relative standard deviation of 25%. For >0·2 μg of antimony a relative standard deviation of 15% or less can be expected.

Talanta↗
USGS1953

Geology of the Shinarump No. 1 uranium mine, Seven Mile Canyon area, Grand County, Utah

The Shinarump No. 1 uranium mine is located about 12 miles northwest of Moab, Utah, in the Seven Mile Canyon area, Grand County, Utah. A study was made of the geology of the Shinarump No. 1 mine in order to determine the habits, ore controls, and possible origin of the deposit. Rocks of Permain, Triassic, and Jurassic age crop out in the area mapped. Uranium deposits are found in three zones in the lower 25 feet of the Upper Triassic Chinle formation. The Shinarump No. 1 mine, which is in the lowermost zone, is located on the west flank of the Moab anticline near the Moab fault. The Shinarump No. 1 uranium deposit consists of discontinuous lenticular layers of mineralized rock, irregular in outline, that, in general, follow the bedding. Ore minerals, mainly uranite, impregnate the rock. High-grade seams of uranite and chalcocite occur along bedding planes. Formation of unraninite is later than or simultaneous with most sulfides. Chalcocite may be of two ages, with some being later than uraninite. Uraninite and chalcocite are concentrated in the poorer sorted parts of siltstones. Guides to ore in the Seven Mile Canyon area inferred from the study of the Shinarump No. 1 deposit are the presence of bleached siltstone, copper sulfides, and carbonaceous matter. Results of spectrographic analysis indicated that the mineralizing solutions contained important amounts of barium, vanadium, uranium, and copper as well as lesser amounts of strontium, chromium, boron, yttrium, lead, and zinc. The origin of the Shinarump No. 1 deposit is thought to be hydrothermal, dated as later or early.

Utah↗
USGS1983

Statistical treatment and preliminary interpretation of chemical data from a uranium deposit in the northeast part of the Church Rock area, Gallup mining district, New Mexico

Statistical treatment of analytical data from 106 samples of uranium-mineralized and unmineralized or weakly mineralized rocks of the Morrison Formation from the northeastern part of the Church Rock area of the Grants uranium region indicates that along with uranium, the deposits in the northeast Church Rock area are enriched in barium, sulfur, sodium, vanadium and equivalent uranium. Selenium and molybdenum are sporadically enriched in the deposits and calcium, manganese, strontium, and yttrium are depleted. Unlike the primary deposits of the San Juan Basin, the deposits in the northeast part of the Church Rock area contain little organic carbon and several elements that are characteristically enriched in the primary deposits are not enriched or are enriched to a much lesser degree in the Church Rock deposits. The suite of elements associated with the deposits in the northeast part of the Church Rock area is also different from the suite of elements associated with the redistributed deposits in the Ambrosia Lake district. This suggests that the genesis of the Church Rock deposits is different, at least in part, from the genesis of the primary deposits of the San Juan Basin or the redistributed deposits at Ambrosia Lake.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1991

Geology of the Bayan Obo iron-rare-earth-niobium deposits, Inner Mongolia, China

The plate tectonic setting, regional geology, and certain aspects of the economic geology of the iron-rare-earth-niobium ore bodies at Bayan Obo, Inner Mongolia, China, were studied by a team of geologists from the Tianjin Geologic Research Academy and the U.S. Geological Survey between 1987 and 1989. These ore bodies were formed by hydrothermal replacement of Middle Proterozoic dolomite in an intracontinental rift setting. A variety of veins and/or dikes that have a carbonatite-like mineralogy cut the footwall clastic rocks and migmatites. The hanging wall is a shale that has been converted to a K-metasomatite and has microcrystalline potassium feldspar as its principal constituent. This shale served as a scaling caprock that contained the chemical solutions that reacted with the dolomite and created the enormous concentration of mineralized rock in an 18-kilometer-long syncline. The rocks that host these ore bodies and the associated mineralized areas occur today as roof pendants in granitoid rocks of Permian age.

Conference Paper↗
USGS1974

Spectrofluorimetric procedure using 2,3-napthalenediamine for determining selenium in rocks

A spectrofluorimetric procedure using 2,3-naphthalenediamine is given for determining submicrogram and microgram quantities of selenium in mineralized rocks. Conditions for the satisfactory isolation and concentration of the selenium are investigated and tested on six USGS standard rocks of various types. Selenium contents of samples treated by an alkaline sinter and leach are compared with those obtained by acid decomposition and with published values determined by neutron-activation analyses. In pure solutions, 0.01 μg of selenium can be determined with a relative standard deviation of 25 percent, thus setting the determination limit at approximately 0.01 ppm Se in a 1.0-g sample. When the amount of selenium is ≥0.1 ppm, a relative standard deviation of 10 percent or less is obtained.

Journal of Research of the U.S. Geological Survey↗