Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Jeanine M. Schmidt

Publications and source records attributed to Jeanine M. Schmidt.

18 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2015

GIS-Based Identification of Areas with Mineral Resource Potential for Six Selected Deposit Groups, Bureau of Land Management Central Yukon Planning Area, Alaska

This study, covering the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Central Yukon Planning Area (CYPA), Alaska, was prepared to aid BLM mineral resource management planning. Estimated mineral resource potential and certainty are mapped for six selected mineral deposit groups: (1) rare earth element (REE) deposits associated with peralkaline to carbonatitic intrusive igneous rocks, (2) placer and paleoplacer gold, (3) platinum group element (PGE) deposits associated with mafic and ultramafic intrusive igneous rocks, (4) carbonate-hosted copper deposits, (5) sandstone uranium deposits, and (6) tin-tungsten-molybdenum-fluorspar deposits associated with specialized granites. These six deposit groups include most of the strategic and critical elements of greatest interest in current exploration. This study has used a data-driven, geographic information system (GIS)-based method for evaluating the mineral resource potential across the large region of the CYPA. This method systematically and simultaneously analyzes geoscience data from multiple geospatially referenced datasets and uses individual subwatersheds (12-digit hydrologic unit codes or HUCs) as the spatial unit of classification. The final map output indicates an estimated potential (high, medium, low) for a given mineral deposit group and indicates the certainty (high, medium, low) of that estimate for any given subwatershed (HUC). Accompanying tables describe the data layers used in each analysis, the values assigned for specific analysis parameters, and the relative weighting of each data layer that contributes to the estimated potential and certainty determinations. Core datasets used include the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Alaska Geochemical Database (AGDB2), the Alaska Division of Geologic and Geophysical Surveys Web-based geochemical database, data from an anticipated USGS geologic map of Alaska, and the USGS Alaska Resource Data File. Map plates accompanying this report illustrate the mineral prospectivity for the six deposit groups across the CYPA and estimates of mineral resource potential. There are numerous areas, some of them large, rated with high potential for one or more of the selected deposit groups within the CYPA.

Alaska↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals science strategy: A resource lifecycle approach

Executive Summary The economy, national security, and standard of living of the United States depend heavily on adequate and reliable supplies of energy and mineral resources. Based on population and consumption trends, the Nation’s use of energy and minerals can be expected to grow, driving the demand for ever broader scientific understanding of resource formation, location, and availability. In addition, the increasing importance of environmental stewardship, human health, and sustainable growth places further emphasis on energy and mineral resources research and understanding. Collectively, these trends in resource demand and the interconnectedness among resources will lead to new challenges and, in turn, require cutting-edge science for the next generation of societal decisions. The long and continuing history of U.S. Geological Survey contributions to energy and mineral resources science provide a solid foundation of core capabilities upon which new research directions can grow. This science strategy provides a framework for the coming decade that capitalizes on the growth of core capabilities and leverages their application toward new or emerging challenges in energy and mineral resources research, as reflected in five interrelated goals. Goal 1.—Understand fundamental Earth processes that form energy and mineral resources Goal 2.—Understand the environmental behavior of energy and mineral resources and their waste products Goal 3.—Provide inventories and assessments of energy and mineral resources Goal 4.—Understand the effects of energy and mineral development on natural resources and society Goal 5.—Understand the reliability and availability of energy and mineral supplies Within each goal, multiple actions are identified. The level of specificity and complexity of these actions varies, consistent with the reality that even a modest refocus can yield large payoffs in the near term whereas more ambitious plans may take years to reach fruition. As such, implementation of these actions is largely dependent on available resources and the sequencing of prerequisite steps. This science strategy places an emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration and leveraging of expertise across the U.S. Geological Survey and with external partners.

Circular↗
USGS2013

Alaska Geochemical Database, Version 2.0 (AGDB2)–Including “best value” data compilations for rock, sediment, soil, mineral, and concentrate sample mediaI

The Alaska Geochemical Database Version 2.0 (AGDB2) contains new geochemical data compilations in which each geologic material sample has one “best value” determination for each analyzed species, greatly improving speed and efficiency of use. Like the Alaska Geochemical Database (AGDB, http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/637/) before it, the AGDB2 was created and designed to compile and integrate geochemical data from Alaska in order to facilitate geologic mapping, petrologic studies, mineral resource assessments, definition of geochemical baseline values and statistics, environmental impact assessments, and studies in medical geology. This relational database, created from the Alaska Geochemical Database (AGDB) that was released in 2011, serves as a data archive in support of present and future Alaskan geologic and geochemical projects, and contains data tables in several different formats describing historical and new quantitative and qualitative geochemical analyses. The analytical results were determined by 85 laboratory and field analytical methods on 264,095 rock, sediment, soil, mineral and heavy-mineral concentrate samples. Most samples were collected by U.S. Geological Survey personnel and analyzed in U.S. Geological Survey laboratories or, under contracts, in commercial analytical laboratories. These data represent analyses of samples collected as part of various U.S. Geological Survey programs and projects from 1962 through 2009. In addition, mineralogical data from 18,138 nonmagnetic heavy-mineral concentrate samples are included in this database. The AGDB2 includes historical geochemical data originally archived in the U.S. Geological Survey Rock Analysis Storage System (RASS) database, used from the mid-1960s through the late 1980s and the U.S. Geological Survey PLUTO database used from the mid-1970s through the mid-1990s. All of these data are currently maintained in the National Geochemical Database (NGDB). Retrievals from the NGDB were used to generate most of the AGDB data set. These data were checked for accuracy regarding sample location, sample media type, and analytical methods used. This arduous process of reviewing, verifying and, where necessary, editing all U.S. Geological Survey geochemical data resulted in a significantly improved Alaska geochemical dataset. USGS data that were not previously in the NGDB because the data predate the earliest U.S. Geological Survey geochemical databases, or were once excluded for programmatic reasons, are included here in the AGDB2 and will be added to the NGDB. The AGDB2 data provided here are the most accurate and complete to date, and should be useful for a wide variety of geochemical studies. The AGDB2 data provided in the linked database may be updated or changed periodically.

Alaska↗
USGS2013

Energy and minerals science at the U.S. Geological Survey

The economy, national security, and standard of living of the United States depend on adequate and reliable supplies of energy and mineral resources. Based on population and consumption trends, the Nation’s and World’s use of energy and minerals is expected to grow, driving the demand for scientific understanding of resource formation, location, and availability. The importance of environmental stewardship and human health in sustainable growth emphasizes the need for a broader understanding of energy and mineral resources. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is a world leader in conducting research needed to address these challenges and to provide a scientific foundation for policy and decisionmaking with respect to resource use, sustainability, environmental protection, and an adaptive resource management approach.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2012

Alaska Geochemical Database - Mineral Exploration Tool for the 21st Century - PDF of presentation

The U.S. Geological Survey has created a geochemical database of geologic material samples collected in Alaska. This database is readily accessible to anyone with access to the Internet. Designed as a tool for mineral or environmental assessment, land management, or mineral exploration, the initial version of the Alaska Geochemical Database - U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 637 - contains geochemical, geologic, and geospatial data for 264,158 samples collected from 1962-2009: 108,909 rock samples; 92,701 sediment samples; 48,209 heavy-mineral-concentrate samples; 6,869 soil samples; and 7,470 mineral samples. In addition, the Alaska Geochemical Database contains mineralogic data for 18,138 nonmagnetic-fraction heavy mineral concentrates, making it the first U.S. Geological Survey database of this scope that contains both geochemical and mineralogic data. Examples from the Alaska Range will illustrate potential uses of the Alaska Geochemical Database in mineral exploration. Data from the Alaska Geochemical Database have been extensively checked for accuracy of sample media description, sample site location, and analytical method using U.S. Geological Survey sample-submittal archives and U.S. Geological Survey publications (plus field notebooks and sample site compilation base maps from the Alaska Technical Data Unit in Anchorage, Alaska). The database is also the repository for nearly all previously released U.S. Geological Survey Alaska geochemical datasets. Although the Alaska Geochemical Database is a fully relational database in Microsoft® Access 2003 and 2010 formats, these same data are also provided as a series of spreadsheet files in Microsoft® Excel 2003 and 2010 formats, and as ASCII text files. A DVD version of the Alaska Geochemical Database was released in October 2011, as U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 637, and data downloads are available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/637/ . Also, all Alaska Geochemical Database data have been incorporated into the interactive U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resource Data web portal, available at http://mrdata.usgs.gov/ .

Alaska↗
USGS2012

U.S. Geological Survey energy and minerals science strategy

The economy, national security, and standard of living of the United States depend heavily on adequate and reliable supplies of energy and mineral resources. Based on current population and consumption trends, the Nation's use of energy and minerals can be expected to grow, driving the demand for ever broader scientific understanding of resource formation, location, and availability. In addition, the increasing importance of environmental stewardship, human health, and sustainable growth place further emphasis on energy and mineral resources research and understanding. Collectively, these trends in resource demand and the interconnectedness among resources will lead to new challenges and, in turn, require cutting-edge science for the next generation of societal decisions. The contributions of the U.S. Geological Survey to energy and minerals research are well established. Based on five interrelated goals, this plan establishes a comprehensive science strategy. It provides a structure that identifies the most critical aspects of energy and mineral resources for the coming decade. * Goal 1. - Understand fundamental Earth processes that form energy and mineral resources. * Goal 2. - Understand the environmental behavior of energy and mineral resources and their waste products. * Goal 3. - Provide inventories and assessments of energy and mineral resources. * Goal 4. - Understand the effects of energy and mineral development on natural resources. * Goal 5. - Understand the availability and reliability of energy and mineral resource supplies. Within each goal, multiple, scalable actions are identified. The level of specificity and complexity of these actions varies, consistent with the reality that even a modest refocus can yield large payoffs in the near term whereas more ambitious plans may take years to reach fruition. As such, prioritization of actions is largely dependent on policy direction, available resources, and the sequencing of prerequisite steps that will lead up to the most visionary directions. The science strategy stresses early planning and places an emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration and leveraging of expertise across the U.S. Geological Survey.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2012

Geologic map of the Cook Inlet region, Alaska, including parts of the Talkeetna, Talkeetna Mountains, Tyonek, Anchorage, Lake Clark, Kenai, Seward, Iliamna, Seldovia, Mount Katmai, and Afognak 1:250,000-scale quadrangles

In 1976, L.B. Magoon, W.L. Adkinson, and R.M. Egbert published a major geologic map of the Cook Inlet region, which has served well as a compilation of existing information and a guide for future research and mapping. The map in this report updates Magoon and others (1976) and incorporates new and additional mapping and interpretation. This map is also a revision of areas of overlap with the geologic map completed for central Alaska (Wilson and others, 1998). Text from that compilation remains appropriate and is summarized here; many compromises have been made in strongly held beliefs to allow construction of this compilation. Yet our willingness to make interpretations and compromises does not allow resolution of all mapping conflicts. Nonetheless, we hope that geologists who have mapped in this region will recognize that, in incorporating their work, our regional correlations may have required some generalization or lumping of map units. Many sources were used to produce this geologic map and, in most cases, data from available maps were combined, without generalization, and new data were added where available. A preliminary version of this map was published as U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009–1108. The main differences between the versions concern revised mapping of surfical deposits in the northern and eastern parts of the map area. Minor error corrections have been made also.

Alaska↗
USGS2011

Alaska Geochemical Database (AGDB)-Geochemical data for rock, sediment, soil, mineral, and concentrate sample media

The Alaska Geochemical Database (AGDB) was created and designed to compile and integrate geochemical data from Alaska in order to facilitate geologic mapping, petrologic studies, mineral resource assessments, definition of geochemical baseline values and statistics, environmental impact assessments, and studies in medical geology. This Microsoft Access database serves as a data archive in support of present and future Alaskan geologic and geochemical projects, and contains data tables describing historical and new quantitative and qualitative geochemical analyses. The analytical results were determined by 85 laboratory and field analytical methods on 264,095 rock, sediment, soil, mineral and heavy-mineral concentrate samples. Most samples were collected by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) personnel and analyzed in USGS laboratories or, under contracts, in commercial analytical laboratories. These data represent analyses of samples collected as part of various USGS programs and projects from 1962 to 2009. In addition, mineralogical data from 18,138 nonmagnetic heavy mineral concentrate samples are included in this database. The AGDB includes historical geochemical data originally archived in the USGS Rock Analysis Storage System (RASS) database, used from the mid-1960s through the late 1980s and the USGS PLUTO database used from the mid-1970s through the mid-1990s. All of these data are currently maintained in the Oracle-based National Geochemical Database (NGDB). Retrievals from the NGDB were used to generate most of the AGDB data set. These data were checked for accuracy regarding sample location, sample media type, and analytical methods used. This arduous process of reviewing, verifying and, where necessary, editing all USGS geochemical data resulted in a significantly improved Alaska geochemical dataset. USGS data that were not previously in the NGDB because the data predate the earliest USGS geochemical databases, or were once excluded for programmatic reasons, are included here in the AGDB and will be added to the NGDB. The AGDB data provided here are the most accurate and complete to date, and should be useful for a wide variety of geochemical studies. The AGDB data provided in the linked database may be updated or changed periodically. The data on the DVD and in the data downloads provided with this report are current as of date of publication.

Data Series↗
USGS2011

The Alaska Geochemical Database: v. 1.0 - Geologic Materials

What is the AGDB?: The Alaska Geochemical Database (AGDB) is a new, comprehensive compilation of geologic, spatial, descriptive, mineralogical, and analytical geochemical data for samples collected in Alaska and surrounding waters by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) from 1962 to 2009. Data for geologic materials (rocks, minerals and mineral separates, soils, lake sediments, bulk stream sediments, and a variety of heavy-mineral concentrates) will be released as a two-sided DVD (USGS Digital Data Series DS 637 v. 1.0) in October of 2011. Future data releases will include water, organic and leachate samples. The AGDB contains all Alaskan data from USGS legacy databases (for example, the RASS and PLUTO systems), and all results produced by USGS in-house and contract chemistry laboratories through December 2009. The database includes geochemical data resulting from the reanalysis of archived materials, such as those from the Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment (AMRAP) and National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) programs, for additional elements and by newer methods. Reanalyses include samples collected statewide as part of the National Geochemical Survey, and samples from a project across the Alaska Range (data released in 2010). The AGDB also contains data for geologic materials from Alaska submitted by USGS researchers to non-USGS and non-contract labs, and a variety of other Alaskan geologic materials samples. Quality Control: Data in the AGDB have undergone extensive quality control screening including searching field notes and maps for accurate location information, verifying media and sample type, linking analytical data to geologic parameters recorded by the submitter, and documenting sample preparation and analytical methods. Data Files The AGDB v. 1.0 two-sided DVD includes: * a 4.3 GB Microsoft Access® 2007 relational database (as two linked .mdb files); * the same database in Microsoft Access® 2003; * Microsoft Excel® spreadsheet tables (.xls files) and ASCII text files that display the results of common queries to the database (for example, Ag-Cr values for concentrate samples; rock samples by quadrangle); * references for analytical methods; * references to published data; and * metadata in three file formats. Data Availability: * The Alaska Geochemical Database will be available in a searchable, spatially referenced, online format at http://mrdata.usgs.gov/; estimated availability early 2012. * A 2012 update (AGDB v. 2.0) will include water, organic, leachate, and miscellaneous sample media. For More Information: On sample media or analytical methods: http://minerals.cr.usgs.gov/projects/analytical_chem/references.html Text prepared by Jeanine M. Schmidt and Matt Granitto Figure prepared by Nora Shew; Layout by Jeanine Schmidt Artwork on page 1 by Daniel Granitto (used by permission) The USGS Mineral Resources Program is the sole Federal provider of research and information on nonfuel mineral resources.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2011

Lithogeochemistry of mineralized and altered rock samples from the northern Talkeetna Mountains, south-central Alaska

Mineralized and altered rock samples collected from the northern Talkeetna Mountains, Alaska, were analyzed by two different inductively coupled plasma atomic-emission spectrometry (ICP-AES) methods for as many as 44 elements; by fire assay and either direct-coupled plasma (DCP) or atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AAS) for gold (Au); by cold vapor atomic absorption (CVAA) for mercury (Hg); and by irradiated neutron activation analysis (INAA) for tungsten (W). The analytical results showed that some samples contain high values of multiple elements and may be potential indicators of hydrothermal mineralization in the area.

Alaska↗
USGS2010

Stream-sediment samples reanalyzed for major, rare earth, and trace elements from seven 1:250,000-scale quadrangles, south-central Alaska, 2007-09

During the 1960s through the 1980s, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted reconnaissance geochemical surveys of drainage basins throughout most of the Iliamna, Lake Clark, Lime Hills, and Talkeetna 1:250,000-scale quadrangles and parts of the McGrath, Seldovia, and Tyonek 1:250,000-scale quadrangles in Alaska. These geochemical surveys provide data necessary to assess the potential for undiscovered mineral resources and provide data that may be used to determine regional-scale element baselines. This report provides new data for 1,075 of the previously collected stream-sediment samples. The new analyses include a broader spectrum of elements and provide data that are more precise than the original analyses. All samples were analyzed for arsenic by hydride generation atomic absorption spectrometry, for gold, palladium, and platinum by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry after lead button fire assay separation, and for a suite of 55 major, rare earth, and trace elements by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry after sodium peroxide sinter at 450 degrees Celsius.

Data Series↗
USGS2010

Stream-sediment samples reanalyzed for major, rare earth, and trace elements from ten 1:250,000-scale quadrangles, south-central Alaska, 2007-08

During the 1960s through the 1980s, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted reconnaissance geochemical surveys of the drainage basins throughout most of the Anchorage, Bering Glacier, Big Delta, Gulkana, Healy, McCarthy, Mount Hayes, Nabesna, Talkeetna Mountains, and Valdez 1:250,000-scale quadrangles in Alaska as part of the Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program (AMRAP). These geochemical surveys provide data necessary to assess the potential for undiscovered mineral resources on public and other lands, and provide data that may be used to determine regional-scale element baselines. This report provides new data for 366 of the previously collected stream-sediment samples. These samples were selected for reanalysis because recently developed analytical methods can detect additional elements of interest and have lower detection limits than the methods used when these samples were originally analyzed. These samples were all analyzed for arsenic by hydride generation atomic absorption spectrometry (HGAAS), for gold, palladium, and platinum by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry after lead button fire assay separation (FA/ICP-MS), and for a suite of 55 major, rare earth, and trace elements by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-AES-MS) after sodium peroxide sinter at 450 degrees Celsius.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

The Longview/Lakeview barite deposits, southern National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska (NPRA) — Potential-field models and preliminary size estimates

Longview and Lakeview are two of the larger stratiform barite deposits hosted in Mississippian Akmalik Chert in the Cutaway Basin area (Howard Pass C-3 quadrangle) of the southern National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska (NPRA). Geologic studies for the South NPRA Integrated Activity Plan and Environmental Impact Statement process included an attempt to evaluate the possible size of barite resources at Longview and Lakeview by using potential-field geophysical methods (gravity and magnetics). Gravity data from 227 new stations measured by the U.S. Geological Survey, sparse regional gravity data, and new, high-resolution aeromagnetic data were forward modeled simultaneously along seven profiles perpendicular to strike and two profiles along strike of the Longview and Lakeview deposits. These models indicate details of the size and shape of the barite deposits and suggest thicknesses of 15 to 24 m, and 9 to 24 m for the Longview and Lakeview deposits, respectively. Two groups of outcrops span 1.8 km of strike length and are likely connected below the surface by barite as much as 10 m thick. Barite of significant thickness (>-5 m) is unlikely to occur north of the presently known exposures of the Longview deposit. The barite bodies have irregular (nonplanar) bases suggestive of folding; northwest-trending structures of small apparent offset cross strike at several locations. Dip of the barite is 10 to 25 degrees to the southeast. True width of the bodies (the least certain dimension) is estimated to be 160 to 200 m for Longview and 220 to 260 m for Lakeview. The two bodies contain a minimum of 4.5 million metric tons of barite and more than 38 million metric tons are possible. Grades of the barite are relatively high, with high specific gravities and low impurities. The potential for the Cutaway Basin to host economically minable quantities of barite is uncertain. Heavy-mineral concentrate samples from streams in the area, trace-element analyses, and physicalproperty measurements of bulk samples derived from trenching or drilling would be valuable for future assessment work.

Alaska↗
USGS2007

Geoscience for Alaska's D-1 lands: A preliminary report

Purpose of This Report This interim report follows from the June 2006 recommendations to Congress by the BLM concerning disposition of the d-1 lands. That report recommended lifting of a significant number of d-1 PLOs, through the ongoing land management process within the BLM (e.g. resource management planning areas), or through Congressional action. The strategic actions outlined in this document refer only to Federal lands under US Bureau of Land Management (BLM) jurisdiction that 1) are affected by temporary withdrawals from mineral entry and mineral leasing by PLOs made pursuant to the Section 17(d)(1) of the ANCSA; 2) have been identified by the BLM as candidates for possible lifting of these PLOs and restrictions (U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 2006); and 3) lie outside of current Federal parks, preserves, monuments, refuges, reserves, wilderness areas and military installations that are closed to mineral entry, because within those areas the potential lifting of the d-1 restrictions has no practical effect. The resulting lands discussed here comprise approximately 121,000 km2 (29.9 million acres) of Alaska (Table 1) that, pending final resolution of Native and State land claims, will or may remain under Federal (BLM) control, and could be opened to mineral entry. For the purposes of this report, only these 29.9 million acres will hereafter be referred to as 'd-1' lands. This report gives a brief overview of the spatial distribution and physiographic setting, mineral occurrences, and mineral resource potential of the d-1lands. It outlines further geoscience information which could be compiled, collected, and evaluated in order to make a more accurate and comprehensive examination of the potential for undiscovered, locatable mineral resources on these Federal lands. This information is intended to provide guidance to USGS program managers and Federal land managers on matters of future exploration, access needs, and consequences of land status changes.

Alaska↗
USGS2003

New mapping near Iron Creek, Talkeetna Mountains, indicates presence of Nikolai greenstone

Detailed geologic mapping in the Iron Creek area, Talkeetna Mountains B-5 Quadrangle, has documented several intrusive bodies and rock units not previously recognized and has extended the geologic history of the area through the Mesozoic and into the Tertiary era. Greenschist-facies metabasalt and metagabbro previously thought to be Paleozoic are intruded by Late Cretaceous to Paleocene dioritic to granitic plutons. The metabasalts are massive to amygdaloidal, commonly contain abundant magnetite, and large areas are patchily altered to epidote ± quartz. They host numerous copper oxide–copper sulfide–quartz–hematite veins and amygdule fillings. These lithologic features, recognized in the field, suggested a correlation of the metamafic rocks with the Late Triassic Nikolai Greenstone, which had not previously been mapped in the Iron Creek area. Thin, discontinuous metalimestones that overlie the metabasalt sequence had previously been assigned a Pennsylvanian(?) and Early Permian age on the basis of correlation with marbles to the north, which yielded Late Paleozoic or Permian macrofossils, or both. Three new samples from the metalimestones near Iron Creek yielded Late Triassic conodonts, which confirms the correlation of the underlying metamafic rocks with Nikolai Greenstone. These new data extend the occurrence of Nikolai Greenstone about 70 km southwest of its previously mapped extent. Five to 10 km north of the conodont sample localities, numerous microgabbro and diabase sills intrude siliceous and locally calcareous metasedimentary rocks of uncertain age. These sills probably represent feeder zones to the Nikolai Greenstone. In the Mt. Hayes quadrangle 150 km to the northeast, large sill-form mafic and ultramafic feeders (for example, the Fish Lake complex) to the Nikolai Greenstone in the Amphitheatre Mountains host magmatic sulfide nickel–copper–platinum-group-element (PGE) mineralization. This new recognition of Nikolai Greenstone and possible magmatic feeders in the Iron Creek area suggests a much greater potential for large PGE, copper, or nickel deposits in the Talkeetna Mountains than previous mineral resource appraisals of the area have suggested, and requires reevaluation of large-scale tectonic models for the area.

Alaska↗
USGS2003

Alaska resource data file: Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle

Descriptions of the mineral occurrences shown on the accompanying figure follow. See U.S. Geological Survey (1996) for a description of the information content of each field in the records. The data presented here are maintained as part of a statewide database on mines, prospects and mineral occurrences throughout Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS1992

Deep-water facies of the Lisburne Group, west-central Brooks Range, Alaska

Deep-water lithofacies of the Lisburne Group (chiefly Carboniferous) occur in thurst sheets in the western part of the foreland fold-and-thrust belt of the Brooks Range and represent at least three discrete units. The Kuna Formation (Brooks Range allochthon) consists mostly of spiculitic mudstone and lesser shale; subordinate carbonate layers are chiefly diagenetic dolomite. The Akmalik Chert (Picnic Creek allochthon) is mostly radiolarian-spiculitic chert; rare limy beds are calcitized radiolarite. The Rim Butte unit (Ipnavik river allochthon) consists chiefly of calcareous turbidites, derived from shallow- and deep-water sources, interbedded with spiculitic mudstone. Much of the material in the turbidites came from a contemporaneous carbonate platform and margin, but some fossils and lithic clasts were eroded from older, already lithified carbonate-platform rocks. All three units appear to be roughly coeval in the Howard Pass area and are chiefly late Tournaisian and early Viséan (late Early Mississippian) in age. Shallow-water lithofacies of the Lisburne Group exposed in the Howard Pass area (Brooks Range allochthon) are mostly of Viséan and younger (Late Mississippian) age. Thus, these carbonate-platform rocks were not the source of the calcareous turbidites in the Rim Butte unit. Rim Butte turbidites could have been derived from older carbonate-platform rocks such as the Utukok Formation of Tournaisian age (Kelly River allochthon) exposed mainly to the west of the Howard Pass quadrangle.

Alaska↗