Search Documents

By K. C. Shaver

Detailed examination of the Sloan Ranch diamond prospect has shown that the Sloan 1 diatreme, the Sloan 2 dike, and the Sloan 3 horizontal sheet complex are all parts of the same kimberlite complex. Geologic mapping, geophysics, soil chemistry, test pitting, and drilling all helped to delineate the structure. Bulk sample testing yielded moderate grades with encouraging gem-to-industrial ratios, but no large stones were recovered. These test results, along with supporting mineral chemistry data, suggest that the Sloan Ranch complex is analogous to sub- economic occurrences located near the margins of the Archean cratons in southern Africa.

Jan 1, 1987

By K. C. Shaver

The Sloan Ranch kimberlite complex is located approximately 130 km north-northwest of Denver in the Precambrian core of the northern Colorado Front Range (Figure 1). A Devonian age for the complex is suggested by the fossil assemblages in limestone xenoliths (Chronic and others, 1969), and by paleomagnetism of the kimberlite (E. E. Larson, personal communication, 1986). The presence of diamond was first reported in rocks from the Sloan diatreme by McCallum and Mabarak (1976). Prior to this time, the distinctive- appearing host rock of the Sloan diamonds had been quarried for use as terrazzo stone; examples may be seen in the floors of the airports in Cheyenne and Laramie, Wyoming. The Minerals Division of The Superior Oil Company obtained a lease on the Sloan property in 1980. During the next four years Superior built and fine-tuned a highly efficient diamond recovery facility, explored and tested the Sloan deposit, and used Sloan as a site for testing numerous exploration techniques for future use in a continuing exploration program in the Colorado-Wyoming kimberlite province. The Sloan property was ultimately determined to be sub- economic, but the lessons learned there have been very helpful in subsequent exploration efforts.

Jan 1, 1987

By Charles Bruce

Although much has been said about the high cost of exploration, both at home and overseas, little of a specific nature has been published on actual finding costs, if indeed such data has been developed. This contrasts sharply with our sister industry, petroleum, where finding costs for oil and gas are available for virtually any country In the world. The reason is largely attributable to the genetic complexity of the hard minerals, as opposed to petroleum, and the increasing difficulties we are facing in the search for new orebodies. We have available to us data on the annual exploration budgets of most of the major mining companies which show them to run into the tens of millions of dollars. My co-panelist, Dr. Walthier, Director - Corporation Exploration, St. Joe Minerals Corporation, New York, NY, summed up the feelings of many explorationists in a recent keynote address when he stated, "I would not recommend a mineral exploration program of a general nature in North America budgeted at less than three to four million dollars annually, spread over four to five years -- or smaller amounts for more years". We have the fact that many of the major companies now prefer to "buy into" a new mineral discovery, particularly overseas, because of the high-risk and high-cost of exploration. Is there, then, a place for the small investor, let us say with a budget of under $200,000 per year and, if so, where and how? This paper is directed toward the above question and is based on experience gained while managing a limited international exploration program, on a shoestring, over the past three years.

Jan 1, 1976

By Collon C. Kennedy, Frances C. Hartogh, C. Joel Casburn

INTRODUCTION During the nineteenth century, the federal mining law was enacted with the objective of promoting the development of the western United States by providing unrestricted access to vast areas of federal land for mineral exploration. Prior to the advent of comprehensive federal, state and local land use plans, there was little, if any, regulation or restriction of mineral exploration activities. Today, the laissez-faire policies of the past that encouraged mineral exploration have gradually given way to the public's legitimate concerns regarding environmental protection, multiple use and planned land development. As a result, the contemporary prospector confronts a maze of statutes, ordinances and regulations with which he must comply to obtain the requisite approvals and permits before commencing mineral exploration on federal, state or private lands. This presentation will provide a broad overview of the exploration permitting process. The first section of this paper recommends certain general management practices to follow when attempting to obtain exploration permits. The second section presents two hypothetical cases, one involving a drilling program on private property in California and the other involving a drilling program and the removal of a bulk sample for metallurgical tests from federal land in Nevada. The cases are used to discuss jurisdictional issues and application of certain federal, state and county laws and regulations that pertain to mineral exploration. The final section contains a brief analysis of three important recent United States Supreme Court decisions. These decisions address the scope of the federal pre-emption doctrine as it applies to activities conducted on unpatented mining claims and the constitutional limits of permissible state and local land use and zoning regulations. PERMITTING PRACTICES The environmental impacts associated with mineral exploration generally result from the construction of drill sites, roads or trenches. Consequently, after the regulatory authority has considered the issues of permissible land use, the primary emphasis of the permitting process is to address problems related to pre-construction site identification and clearance, and post-construction site reclamation. The approaches taken to address these and other related issues vary with the scope of proposed work, the site, the appli-

Jan 1, 1987

By C. G. Clifton

The Oatman District produced approximately 2.2 x 10 6 ounces of gold and 0.8 x 10 ounces of silver between 1897 and 1942. A total of 3.8 x 10 tons of ore averaging 0.58 O/T gold and 0.17 O/T silver was extracted from eight major orebodies and a number of lesser deposits. Oatman lies at the center of a trachyte-latite-rhyolite volcanic complex which contains at least one resurgent caldera. The orebodies are typical epithermal quartz-calcite + adularia lode deposits which are very deficient in sulfur. Ore deposition has occurred within dilatant zones on faults which radiate from a common point within-the complex. Fischer-Watt Mining approached the Oatman District with an integrated exploration program utilizing four basic procedures to define the characteristics of past productive areas the results of which were applied to unexplored portions of the vein system. These procedures, listed in their order of usefulness, in defining known and prospective mineralized zones are: vein contouring, detailed alteration mapping, fluid inclusion temperature determinations, and geochemical sampling.

Jan 1, 1980

As metal prices fluctuated over the years, so too have the fortunes of many of those mining in Canada?s Yukon province. With a rich mining history that dates back to the Klondike gold rush of 1896 to 1898 and continues to thrive today, Yukon has experienced several ?boom-and-bust? cycles. However, during the world?s most recent mining ?bust? Yukon has held strong and has re-mained one of the world?s hottest destinations for mineral exploration. In fact, the area even exceeded forecasts in 2009, more than doubling last year. And the near-future looks just as bright.

Jan 1, 2010

By D. R. Wilburn

This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2007 draws upon available information from industry, literature and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) specialists. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analysis of the mineral industry based upon these data. Two types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration for the year 2007: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. nominal dollars provided by Metals Economics Group (MEG) of Halifax, Nova Scotia, and 2) information on regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2007 and compiled by the USGS.

Jan 1, 2008

By D. R. Wilburn

This summary of international mineral exploration activities for 2008 draws upon available information from industry sources, published literature and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) specialists. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry, and presents analyses of exploration activities by the mineral industry based upon these data. Two types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration for 2008: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. nominal dollars provided by Metals Economics Group (MEG) of Halifax, Nova Scotia (Metals Economics Group, 2008a, b), and 2) information on regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2008 and compiled by the USGS. The MEG information summarizes planned company budgets for worldwide exploration activities in 2008, primarily for precious metals (gold, platinum-group metals and silver) and base metals (copper, lead, nickel and zinc). MEG includes information on additional mineral commodities only where it is available. Information on uranium exploration was included in the MEG overview for the first time in 2007, although this information was not included in the USGS analysis. The MEG survey methodology was changed in 1999 to include companies with exploration budgets between $100,000 and $2.9 million, as well as those companies included in prior studies whose anticipated budgets were above $2.9 million. MEG estimates that its post-1999 surveys cover at least 90 percent of world nonferrous nonfuel mineral exploration budgets. The 2008 survey is reported by MEG to cover an estimated 95 percent. Companies that chose not to participate in the MEG study, private companies that do not publish data, and government-funded exploration activities make up the majority of the remaining 5 percent. MEG included 91 more companies in its 2008 survey than it did in 2007 USGS compilations of site data described here primarily include nonfuel minerals, with an emphasis on base metals, diamond and precious metals. Analyses are based on information provided by USGS mineral commodity and country specialists and by other USGS scientists, as well as industry contacts and trade journals.

Jan 1, 2009

By N. A. Karl, D. R. Wilburn

"This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2016 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature, SNL Metals & Mining (SNL), an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence (New York, NY), and specialists in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Minerals Information Center. Three types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. dollars provided by SNL; 2) regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2016 as compiled by the USGS and 3) regional events and legislation that affected exploration activities including economic, social and political conditions, which were derived from published sources and discussions with USGS and industry specialists. Commodity and regional compilations are presented in this summary. Because multiple sources were used to develop commodity and regional compilations, statistics may vary depending on the source and type of data that are being reported. The SNL data summarize budget estimates for worldwide exploration activities in 2016 for 30 nonfuel mineral commodities and metal alloys, based on company surveys. Surveys focused on precious metals (gold, platinumgroup platinumgroup metals (PGMs) and silver), base metals, (cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, tin and zinc), bulk commodities (bauxite, chromite, iron ore, manganese, phosphate and potash) and other commodities (aluminum, antimony, diamond, graphite, heavy-mineral sands, lithium, niobium, rare-earth elements (REEs), scandium, tantalum, tungsten, uranium, vanadium and yttrium). Information on uranium exploration activities was included in SNL’s survey for the first time in 2007. Data on lithium, niobium, phosphate, potash, REE and tungsten were compiled for the first time in 2010, and scandium, vanadium and yttrium were added in 2014 because of their increased topical significance. Since 1999, companies with exploration budgets of $100,000 and greater were included in the SNL surveys. SNL budget estimates exclude coal, and oil and gas. The 2016 SNL mining company survey compilation was reported by SNL to include an estimated 95 percent of the world’s nonfuel mineral exploration budgets. The 5 percent that was not covered was accounted for by companies that chose not to participate in the SNL survey, private companies that do not publish their budget data and government-funded exploration activities."

Jan 5, 2017

By N. A. Karl, D. R. Wilburn

"This summary of international mineral exploration activities during 2017 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature, SNL Metals & Mining (SNL), an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence (New York, NY) and specialists in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Minerals Information Center. Three types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. dollars provided by SNL; 2) regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2017 as compiled by the USGS and 3) regional events and legislation that affected exploration activities including economic, social and political conditions, which were derived from published sources and discussions with USGS and industry specialists. Commodity and regional compilations are presented in this summary. Because multiple sources were used to develop commodity and regional compilations, statistics may vary depending on the source and type of data that are being reported.The SNL data summarize budget estimates for worldwide exploration activities in 2017 for 30 nonfuel mineral commodities and metal alloys, based on company surveys. Surveys focused on precious metals (gold, platinumgroup metals (PGMs) and silver), base metals (cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, tin and zinc), bulk commodities (bauxite, chromite, iron ore, manganese, phosphate and potash), and other commodities (aluminum, antimony, diamond, graphite, heavy-mineral sands, lithium, niobium, rare-earth elements (REEs), scandium, tantalum, tungsten, uranium, vanadium and yttrium). Information on uranium exploration activities was included in SNL’s survey for the first time in 2007. Data on lithium, niobium, phosphate, potash, REE and tungsten were compiled for the first time in 2010, and scandium, vanadium and yttrium were added in 2014 because of their increased topical significance. Since 1999, companies with exploration budgets of $100,000 and greater were included in the SNL surveys. SNL budget estimates exclude coal, and oil and gas. The 2017 SNL mining company survey compilation was reported by SNL to include an estimated 95 percent of the world’s nonfuel mineral exploration budgets. The 5 percent that was not covered was accounted for by companies that chose not to participate in the SNL survey, private companies that do not publish their budget data, and government-funded exploration activities."

Jan 5, 2018

By K. A. Stanley, N. A. Karl, D. R. Wilburn

"This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2014 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature and specialists in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Minerals Information Center. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analyses of exploration activities performed by the mineral industry.Three types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. current dollars provided by SNL Metals & Mining (SNL) of Charlottesville, VA; 2) regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2014 as compiled by the USGS and 3) regional events that affected exploration activities including economic, social and political conditions, which were derived from published sources and discussions with USGS and industry specialists. Commodity and regional compilations are presented in this summary. Because multiple sources are used to develop these compilations, statistics may differ depending on the source and type of data that are being reported.The SNL data summarize planned company budgets for worldwide exploration activities in 2014 for 19 nonfuel mineral commodities based on company surveys. Research focused on precious metals (gold, platinum-group metals and silver), base metals (cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, tin and zinc), bulk commodities (iron ore, phosphate and potash), and specialty mineral commodities (diamond, lithium, niobium, rare-earth elements, tantalum and uranium). Information on uranium exploration activities was included for the first time in 2007. Data on lithium, niobium, phosphate, potash, rare-earth elements and tantalum were compiled for the first time in 2010 because of their increased significance. Since 1999, companies with exploration budgets of $100,000 and greater were included in the SNL compilations. SNL budget estimates exclude bauxite, coal and oil and gas. Exploration budget estimates for iron ore have been compiled since 2011 but reported separately. The 2014 SNL company survey is reported by SNL to cover an estimated 95 percent of the world’s nonferrous, nonfuel mineral exploration budgets. The 5 percent that is not covered includes companies that chose not to participate in the SNL survey, private companies that do not publish their budget data, and government-funded exploration activities"

Jan 1, 2014

By D. R. Wilburn

This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2013 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) specialists. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analyses of exploration activities performed by the mineral industry. Three sources of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration for the year 2013: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. nominal dollars provided by SNL Metals & Mining (SNL) of Halifax, NS, Canada (formerly Metals Economics Group (MEG); 2) regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2013 as compiled by the USGS; and 3) regional events that affected exploration activities, including economic, social and political conditions, that were derived from published sources and unpublished discussions with USGS and industry specialists. Commodity and regional compilations are presented in this summary. Because multiple sources are used to develop commodity and regional compilations, reported statistics may vary depending on the source and type of data that are being reported. The SNL data summarize planned company budgets for worldwide exploration activities in 2013 for 20 nonfuel mineral commodities based on surveys returned by companies primarily focused on precious metals (gold, platinum-group metals and silver), base metals (cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, tin and zinc), bulk commodities (coal, iron ore, phosphate and potash), and specialty commodities (diamond, lithium, niobium, rare-earth elements, tantalum and uranium). Information on uranium exploration activities was included in the MEG overview for the first time in 2007. MEG included data on the commodities lithium, niobium, phosphate, potash, rare-earth elements and tantalum for the first time in 2010 because of the increased topical significance of these commodities. Since 1999, companies with exploration budgets of $100,000 and greater were included in the MEG and SNL compilations. SNL budget estimates exclude aluminum, coal, and oil and gas. Budget estimates for iron ore have been compiled since 2011 but reported separately. The post-1999 budget surveys by MEG and SNL cover at least 90 percent of world?s reported nonferrous, nonfuel mineral exploration budgets; the 2013 survey is reported by SNL to cover an estimated 95 percent of these budgets. The 5 percent that is not covered is accounted for by companies that chose not to participate in the SNL survey, private companies that do not publish their budget data, and government-funded exploration activities.

By D. R. Wilburn

This summary of international mineral exploration activities for 2012 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) specialists. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analyses of exploration activities performed by the mineral industry. Three sources of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration for 2012: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. nominal dollars provided by SNL Metals Economics Group (MEG) of Halifax, Nova Scotia; 2) regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2012 as compiled by the USGS and 3) regional events including economic, social and political conditions that affected exploration activities, which were derived from published sources and unpublished discussions with USGS and industry specialists.

May 1, 2013

By D. R. Wilburn

This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2009 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) specialists. The summary provides data on industry exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analyses of exploration activities by the mineral industry based upon these data. Two types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration for the year 2009: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. nominal dollars provided by Metals Economics Group (MEG) of Halifax, Nova Scotia, and 2) information on regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2009 and were compiled by the USGS. The MEG information summarizes planned company budgets for worldwide exploration activities in 2009, primarily for base metals (copper, lead, nickel and zinc), diamond and precious metals (gold, platinum-group metals and silver). Information on uranium exploration was included in the MEG overview for the first time in 2007, although this information was not included in the USGS analysis prior to 2008. The MEG survey methodology was changed in 1999 to include companies with exploration budgets greater than $100,000, as well as those companies included in prior studies whose anticipated budgets were above $2.9 million. MEG estimates that its post-1999 surveys cover at least 90 percent of world nonferrous nonfuel mineral exploration budgets. The 2009 survey is reported by MEG to cover an estimated 95 percent. Companies who chose not to participate in the MEG study, private companies that do not publish data and government-funded exploration activities make up the majority of the remaining 5 percent. MEG included 86 more companies in its 2009 survey than it did in 2008.

May 1, 2010

By D. R. Wilburn

This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2010 draws upon available information from industry sources, published literature and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) specialists. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analyses of exploration activities performed by the mineral industry. Three sources of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration for the year 2010: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. nominal dollars provided by Metals Economics Group (MEG) of Halifax, Nova Scotia; 2) regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2010, as compiled by the USGS, and 3) regional events including economic, social and political conditions that affected exploration activities. These were derived from published sources and unpublished discussions with USGS and industry specialists.

Jan 1, 2011

Sweden is beginning to reap the rewards of a process that has transformed a country with a history of metal mining into one of Europe's most vibrant exploration regions. Exploration and mining companies from North America, Europe and Australia have joined local firms in the search of gold, base metals and diamonds. This has been due to changes in Sweden's mining laws in the early 1990s. These changes opened the way for unhindered private sector investment in the country's mineral industry. More than 20,000 km2 (4.9 million acres), mainly in northern Sweden, is now held under granted or applied exploration claims. Exploration permits diamonds, applied or granted covers more than half of Sweden's surface. This is a greater proportion of the country than ever before. Major mining companies and junior explorationists are evaluating a geological potential that bears favorable comparison to other major mining centers. Historically, Sweden's gold re- sources occur in greenstone belts in northernmost Sweden and in association with massive sulfide deposits in the Skellefte district. These are receiving particular attention by exploration companies. In addition, new areas in Sweden are also being explored for gold. This increases the probability that Swedish gold production - already the highest in Europe - will increase in the future (Table 1). Sweden's recorded mining history goes back for much of the last large pool of expertise in exploration, mining, equipment manufacturing and minerals industry research. In addition, the Geological Survey of Sweden provides sup- port for exploration in terms of data archives, processing and publications. Other benefits for exploration companies are Sweden's communications infrastructure, its member- ship in the European Union, bringing access to one of the world's major markets and the high level of educational, technical and language skills held by the country's work- force. And deregulation of the economy and the introduction of competitive corporate tax rates have made Sweden a favorable destination for investment in Europe.

Jan 1, 1997

By B. G. Stone

"INTRODUCTION “Sampling is the process of taking a small portion of an article such that the consistency of the portion shall be representative of the whole” (Baxter and Parks, 1939) “An orebody is a mixture of minerals in proportions that vary in different parts of the mass. As a consequence the proportion of contained metals also varies from place to place. Therefore, a single sample taken in any particular place would not contain the same proportion of metals as does the orebody as a whole except by a highly improbable coincidence. The probable error, which would be very large if only one sample were taken, decreases with the number of samples, but it never disappears completely unless the samples are so numerous and so large that their aggregate is equal to the orebody itself, in which case the orebody would be completely used up in the process of sampling. Since carrying sampling to such an extreme would defeat its own purpose, some probable error is always present in actual cases and the practical objective is to reduce this probable error to allowable limits. This means balancing the number of samples against the desired accuracy; if there are not enough samples the result is unreliable; if there are too many, the time and expense of taking them is excessive.” (McKinstry, et al., 1948). In an actual orebody, the accuracy of sampling depends not alone on the number of samples but also on proper distribution of them throughout the orebody, for it would obviously be incorrect to take all of the samples either in a rich part or a lean part. Therefore it is important to select the places in such a way that all parts of the orebody will be represented. “For those who cultivate land which is alike arid, heavy , and barren, and in which they sow seeds, do not make so great a harvest as those who cultivate a fertile and mellow soil and sow their grain in that. And since by far the greater number of miners are unskilled rather than skilled in the art, it follows that mining is a profitable occupation to very few men, and a source of loss to many more.” (Georgius Agricola page 5 Book 1 as translated by H.C. Hoover and Lou Henry Hoover, 1950)“It is evident that mining is very profitable to those who give it care and attention”"

Jan 1, 2015

By Barton G. Stone

"Sampling is the process of taking a small portion of an article such that the consistency of the portion shall be representative of the whole," (Baxter and Parks, 1939)."An orebody is a mixture of minerals in proportions that vary in different parts of the mass. As a consequence, the proportion of contained metals also varies from place to place. Therefore, a single sample taken in any particular place would not contain the same proportion of metals as does the orebody as a whole except by a highly improbable coincidence."The probable error, which would be very large if only one sample were taken, decreases with the number of samples, but it never disappears completely unless the samples are so numerous and so large that their aggregate is equal to the orebody itself, in which case the orebody would be completely used up in the process of sampling."Since carrying sampling to such an extreme would defeat its own purpose, some probable error is always present in actual cases and the practical objective is to reduce this probable error to allowable limits. This means balancing the number of samples against the desired accuracy; if there are not enough samples the result is unreliable; if there are too many, the time and expense of taking them is excessive." (McKinstry, et al., 1948).In an actual orebody, the accuracy of sampling depends not only on the number of samples but also on their proper distribution throughout the orebody, for it would obviously be incorrect to take all of the samples either in a rich part or a lean part. Therefore, it is important to select the places in such a way that all parts of the orebody will be represented."

Jan 1, 2014

By Jr. Cook

Panned stream-sediment,geochemistry-based gold exploration in those parts of the southeastern Piedmont proximal to the Fall Line must take into account potential contamination from basal fluvial gravels of the Coastal Plain. Anomalies attributable to the incorporation of placer gold of Coastal Plain origin into modern Piedmont drainages have been identified in portions of Lee, Macon, and Tallapoosa counties, Alabama, and Baldwin and Hancock counties, Georgia. Identification of such multicyclic anomalies must be based on knowledge of the local maximum Cretaceous transgression, paleotopography, modern and paleofluvial system dynamics, and fineness trends and Au-Ag zoning in gold grains.

Jan 1, 1988

By J. A. Nelen, R. B. Cook

Panned stream-sediment, geochemistry-based gold exploration in those parts of the southeastern Piedmont proximal to the Fall Line must take into account potential contamination from basal fluvial sediments of the Coastal Plain. Anomalies attributable to the incorporation of placer gold of Coastal Plain origin into modern Piedmont drainages have been identified in portions of Lee, Macon, and Tallapoosa Counties, AL, and Baldwin and Hancock Counties, GA. Identification and interpretation of such multicyclic anomalies must be based on knowledge of the local maximum Cretaceous transgression, paleotopography, modern and paleofluvial system dynamics, and fineness trends and Au-Ag zoning in gold grains.

Jan 1, 1990