Chicago Paper - Recent Studies of Domestic Manganese Deposits

Since early in 1916, when it became apparent that the steel industry of the United States could not depend for the duration of the war on several important foreign sources of manganese and might have to depend entirely on domestic ores, the U. S. Geological Survey, with the assistance of several cooperating organizations, has made a comprehensive investigation of domestic manganese resources. The work has included field studies in a number of states well as annual, quarterly, and monthly canvasses among operators concerning current and future production. In order that the interested public might have access to the important results of the studies, preliminary reports concerning the field work as well as periodic summaries of production were issued as promptly as possible. Although numerous summaries of production l2, l3, l4 have been prepared from time to time for the use of the several boards and committees responsible for the conduct of the war, it has been thought for some months that those engaged in the industry, as well as others, might be interested in a preliminary summary of the accumulated geologic and production data. The cessation of hostilities, in November, 1918, probably detracts from the usefulness of much of the material that is here presented, but apart from the historic interest in the performance of an important industry in war time, there is a possibility that some of the conclusions may be helpful to those who continue to exploit domestic deposits, as well as to those who wish to measure the country's independence in mineral supplies. Appropriate final geologic reports are being prepared by the geologists who did the field work. The present authors, having done but a small part of the recent field work, acknowledge with great appreciation the use of preliminary and unpublished reports and the cordial informal cooperation of the following geologists in the preparation of this paper: F. L. Ransome, G. W. Stose, F. C. Schrader, J. T. Pardee, E. L. Jones, Jr., H. D. Miser, Laurence LaForge, J. B. Umpleby, Arthur Keith, F. J. Katz, and E. S. Larsen, of the U. S. Geological Survey. Field work in Virginia was carried out in cooperation with the Virginia Geological Survey, T. L. Watson, State Geologist; in Georgia, with the Georgia