Differences Between Barren And Productive Intrusive Porphyry ? Introduction

The close area! relationship of Cretaceous or later intrusive porphyries to larger hydrothermal deposits of Pb, Zn, Au, fig, Cu, Mo, Hg,, and U of similar age in the Basin Range Province, was statistically shown in a recent paper (Stringham1) During the past year this study has been expanded to cover p11 of the larger hydrothermal deposits of similar nature occurring in the entire western United States. The sandstone type uranium deposits of the Colorado Plateau and Wyoming have been excluded since considerable controversy exists regarding their origin. The close relationship between intrusives in general and hydrothermal ore deposits has long been-recognized, but the association involving intrusive porphyry only, was suggested in 1954 when Sales concluded that the formation of porphyry may be an intermediate stage of activity between the development of granitoid rock and certain types of copper deposits. However: he applied this concept to only a few copper deposits. The relationship appears to be true also for a great majority of the hydrothermal deposits of the other metals mentioned above of Cretaceous and later age, at least in the western United States. This situation then leads to the conclusion then when exploring for similar types of hydrothermal deposits of the metals considered one may feel reasonably sure that if an intrusive porphyry of considerable size is. not present he may be facing much greater risk of finding an ore body than if a prophyry were presents Since, there are many intrusive porphyritic rocks which do not seem to be associated with hydrothermal deposit, it is believed that some distinct value can come from the recognition of intrusive porphyry which might be barren as well as the intrusive prophyry which might be productive This paper deals with that problem.