Selected mineral deposit profiles: a compilation

A collection of 120 mineral deposit profiles published by the British Columbia Geological Survey between 1995 and 2012.

Profile editors: Z.D. Hora, T. Höy, D.V. Lefebure, G.E. Ray and G.J. Simandl

Compilation and introduction by D.V. Lefebure and L.D. Jones

“book format” - Version 8d Oct 29, 2020

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page i

Foreword

The mineral deposit profiles were published by the British Columbia Geological Survey (BCGS) between

1995 and 2012. They used a standard format and were written to be concise, comprehensive descriptions

for a metallic, industrial mineral, gemstone and coal deposit types. They were also displayed on an

interactive BCGS website until 2018 when technical changes resulted in the removal of the indexed

individual profiles.

All 120 completed profiles are now included in this single compilation report. Most of the profiles in this

report were initially published in three BCGS open file reports or several Geological Fieldwork volumes.

The information in the individual deposit profiles is unchanged from the date of publication or posting to

the Survey website, except for the correction of occasional typographic errors. All have been shifted to a

standard format to help the reader access the information.

The text preceding and following the mineral deposit profiles has been significantly updated from the

information published in the original three open file reports. As well, the three index tables in Table 3 and

Appendices 1 and 2 that were originally published in the 1990s have been edited to correspond accurately

with the final versions of the 120 mineral deposit profiles.

The deposit profiles contain large amounts of accurate and very useful descriptive information that has

not changed since their publication. For example, the information in the sections on synonyms,

commodities, examples, depositional environment/geological setting, host/associated rock types, deposit

form, texture/structure, ore mineralogy, gangue mineralogy and weathering is still accurate, and in most

cases, would only require minor modifications to be updated. Other sections, such as those under the

headings of exploration guides and economic factors would benefit from the addition of new exploration

techniques or the updating of pertinent economic information. The sections on ore controls and genetic

models for many of the deposit profiles need updating.

We believe that the mineral deposit profile collection is the best, integrated collection of concise and

standardized descriptions for a wide variety of mineral deposits published in English. It can be used to

assist with mineral exploration, to educate students, geologists and prospectors, to support resource

assessments and to enable artificial intelligence engineering applications. The deposit profiles are

particularly useful as a starting point if you wish to learn about an unfamiliar mineral deposit type. The

utility of these profiles for a variety of users has been amply demonstrated over the last 25 years.

David Lefebure and Larry Jones October 15, 2020

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page ii

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page i

Table of contents Foreword .......................................................................................................................................................... i

1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Starting Point - a Provincial Mineral Potential Assessment ............................................................. 1

3. Utility of mineral deposit models ..................................................................................................... 2

4. Mineral deposit profiles .................................................................................................................... 3

4.1 Selection of types of mineral deposit profiles ...................................................................... 3

4.2 Grade and Tonnage Data ...................................................................................................... 5

5. Classification of the Mineral Deposit Profiles .................................................................................. 6

5.1 Deposit group index ............................................................................................................. 7

5.2. Commodity Index ................................................................................................................. 7

5.3 Earth Material Affinities Index ............................................................................................. 8

6. Developing the deposit profile format .............................................................................................. 8

6.1 Author guidelines ................................................................................................................. 8

7. Individual Mineral Deposit Profiles ................................................................................................. 8

8. Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................... 9

9. Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... 9

10. References cited ............................................................................................................................. 10

11. Individual Deposit Profiles ............................................................................................................. 24

11.1 Citation of mineral deposit profiles .................................................................................... 24

A – Organic .................................................................................................................................................. 25

A01 - Peat ....................................................................................................................................... 27

A02 - Lignite .................................................................................................................................. 31

A03 - Sub-bituminous Coal ............................................................................................................ 33

A04 - Bituminous Coal ................................................................................................................... 35

A05 - Anthracite ............................................................................................................................. 37

B – Residual/Surficial/Supergene ................................................................................................................. 39

B05 - Residual Kaolin .................................................................................................................... 41

B09 - Carbonate-hosted, Nonsulphide Zn–Pb (supergene) ............................................................ 45

B12 - Sand and Gravel ................................................................................................................... 51

C – Placer...................................................................................................................................................... 55

C01 - Surficial Placers .................................................................................................................... 57

C02 - Buried-Channel Placers ........................................................................................................ 61

C03 - Marine Placers ...................................................................................................................... 65

D – Continental Sedimentary and Volcanic Rocks ....................................................................................... 69

D01 - Open-System Zeolites .......................................................................................................... 71

D02 - Closed-Basin Zeolites .......................................................................................................... 75

D03 - Volcanic Redbed Cu ............................................................................................................. 79

D05 - Sandstone U±V .................................................................................................................... 83

D07 - Iron Oxide Cu±Au±P±REE .................................................................................................. 87

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page ii

E – Sediment-Hosted ..................................................................................................................................... 93

E02 – Carbonate-Hosted Cu±Pb±Zn .............................................................................................. 95

E03 - Carbonate-hosted Disseminated Au-Ag ................................................................................ 99

E04 - Sediment-hosted Cu-Ag-Co ................................................................................................ 103

E05 - Sandstone-Pb ....................................................................................................................... 107

E06 - Bentonite ............................................................................................................................. 111

E07 - Sedimentary Kaolin ............................................................................................................. 115

E08 - Carbonate-Hosted Talc ........................................................................................................ 119

E09 - Sparry Magnesite ................................................................................................................ 123

E12 – Mississippi Valley-type Pb-Zn ........................................................................................... 127

E13 - Irish-type Carbonate-hosted Zn-Pb ..................................................................................... 131

E14 - Sedimentary Exhalative Zn-Pb-Ag ..................................................................................... 135

E15 - Blackbird Sediment-Hosted Cu-Co ..................................................................................... 139

E16 - Shale-Hosted Ni-Zn-Mo-PGE ............................................................................................. 143

E17 - Sedimentary-Hosted, Stratiform Barite ............................................................................... 147

E18 - Carbonate-hosted, Nonsulphide Zn (hypogene) .................................................................. 151

F – Chemical Sediment ............................................................................................................................... 157

F01 - Sedimentary Manganese ...................................................................................................... 159

F02 – Bedded Gypsum.................................................................................................................. 163

F03 - Gypsum-Hosted Sulphur ..................................................................................................... 167

F07 - Sedimentary Phosphate ....................................................................................................... 171

F10 – Iron-Formation Lake Superior and Rapitan-Types ............................................................. 177

F11 – Ironstone ............................................................................................................................. 183

G – Marine Volcanic Association ............................................................................................................... 187

G01 - Algoma-Type Iron-Formation ............................................................................................ 189

G04 - Besshi Massive Sulphide .................................................................................................... 193

G05 - Cyprus Massive Sulphide Cu (Zn) ...................................................................................... 195

G06 - Noranda/Kuroko Massive Sulphide Cu-Pb-Zn ................................................................... 197

G07 - Subaqueous Hot Spring Au-Ag .......................................................................................... 201

H – Epithermal ............................................................................................................................................ 205

H01 - Travertine ............................................................................................................................ 207

H02 – Hot Spring Hg .................................................................................................................... 209

H03 – Hot Spring Au-Ag .............................................................................................................. 213

H04 - Epithermal Au-Ag-Cu: High Sulphidation ......................................................................... 217

H05 - Epithermal Au-Ag: Low Sulphidation ................................................................................ 221

H07 - Sn-Ag Veins ....................................................................................................................... 225

H08 - Alkalic Intrusion-Associated Au-Ag .................................................................................. 229

H09 - Hydrothermal Clays ............................................................................................................ 233

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page iii

I – Vein, Breccia and Stockwork ................................................................................................................ 237

I01 - Au-Quartz Veins .................................................................................................................. 239

I02 - Intrusion-Related Au Pyrrhotite Veins ................................................................................ 243

I03 - Turbidite-Hosted Au Veins .................................................................................................. 247

I04 - Iron Formation-Hosted Au ................................................................................................... 251

I05 - Polymetallic Veins Ag-Pb-ZnAu ....................................................................................... 255

I06 - Cu-Ag Quartz Veins ............................................................................................................ 259

I08 - Silica-Carbonate Hg ............................................................................................................. 263

I09 - Stibnite Veins and Disseminations ...................................................................................... 267

I10 - Vein Barite ........................................................................................................................... 271

I11 - Vein Fluorite-Barite ............................................................................................................. 275

I14 - Five-Element Veins Ag-Ni-Co-As+/-(Bi, U) ....................................................................... 279

I15 - “Classical” U Veins ............................................................................................................. 283

I16 - Unconformity-Associated U ................................................................................................ 287

I17 - Cryptocrystalline Ultramafic-Hosted Magnesite Veins ....................................................... 291

J - Manto ..................................................................................................................................................... 295

J01 - Polymetallic Mantos Ag-Pb-Zn ........................................................................................... 297

J02 - Manto and Stockwork Sn .................................................................................................... 301

K - Skarn ..................................................................................................................................................... 305

K01 - Cu Skarns ........................................................................................................................... 307

K02 - Pb-Zn Skarns ...................................................................................................................... 311

K03 - Fe Skarns ............................................................................................................................ 315

K04 - Au Skarns ........................................................................................................................... 319

K05 - W Skarns ............................................................................................................................ 325

K06 - Sn Skarns ............................................................................................................................ 329

K07 - Mo Skarns .......................................................................................................................... 331

K08 - Garnet Skarns ..................................................................................................................... 333

K09 - Wollastonite Skarns............................................................................................................ 335

L - Porphyry................................................................................................................................................ 339

L01 - Subvolcanic Cu-Au-Ag (As-Sb) ......................................................................................... 341

L03 - Porphyry Cu-Au: Alkalic .................................................................................................... 345

L04 - Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au ......................................................................................................... 349

L05 - Porphyry Mo (Low F-Type) ............................................................................................... 355

L06 - Porphyry Sn ........................................................................................................................ 359

L07 - Porphyry W ......................................................................................................................... 363

L08 - Porphyry Mo (Climax-Type) .............................................................................................. 367

L09 - Plutonic-Related Au Quartz Veins & Veinlets ................................................................... 371

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page iv

M - Ultramafic / Mafic ................................................................................................................................ 377

M03 - Podiform Chromite ............................................................................................................ 379

M04 - Magmatic Ti-Fe+/-V Oxide Deposits ................................................................................ 383

M05 - Alaskan-Type Pt+/-Os+/-Rh+/-Ir ....................................................................................... 387

M06 - Ultramafic-Hosted Chrysotile Asbestos ............................................................................. 391

M07 - Ultramafic-Hosted Talc-Magnesite .................................................................................... 395

M08 - Vermiculite ........................................................................................................................ 399

N – Carbonatites, Kimberlites and Lamproites ........................................................................................... 403

N01 - Carbonatite-Associated Deposits:Magmatic, Replacement and Residual .......................... 405

N02 - Kimberlite-Hosted Diamonds ............................................................................................. 409

N03 - Lamproite-Hosted Diamonds .............................................................................................. 413

O – Pegmatite .............................................................................................................................................. 417

P – Metamorphic-Hosted ............................................................................................................................ 419

P01 - Andalusite Hornfels ............................................................................................................. 421

P02 - Kyanite, Muscovite, Garnet in Metasediments .................................................................... 425

P03 - Microcrystalline Graphite .................................................................................................... 429

P04 - Crystalline Flake Graphite ................................................................................................... 433

P05 - Vein Graphite in Metamorphic Terrains.............................................................................. 437

P06 - Corundum in Alumina-Rich Metasediments ....................................................................... 441

Q – Gems and Semi-Precious Stones (diamonds Under N) ....................................................................... 445

Q01 - Jade (Nephrite).................................................................................................................... 447

Q02 - Rhodonite ............................................................................................................................ 451

Q06 - Colombia-Type Emeralds ................................................................................................... 455

Q07 - Schist-Hosted Emeralds ...................................................................................................... 459

Q08 - Sediment-Hosted Precious Opal ......................................................................................... 465

Q09 - Ultramafic-Related Corundum (Contact Metamorphic/Metasomatic) ................................ 469

Q10 - Alkali Basalt and Lamprophyre-Hosted Sapphire and Ruby .............................................. 475

Q11 - Volcanic-Hosted Precious Opal .......................................................................................... 479

R – Industrial Rocks .................................................................................................................................... 485

R01 - Cement “Shale” ................................................................................................................... 487

R02 - Expanding “Shale” .............................................................................................................. 491

R03 - Dimension Stone - “Granite” .............................................................................................. 495

R04 - Dimension Stone - “Marble” ............................................................................................... 499

R06 - Dimension Stone - Sandstone ............................................................................................. 503

R07 - Silica-Rich Rocks ................................................................................................................ 507

R08 - Flagstone ............................................................................................................................. 511

R09 - Limestone ............................................................................................................................ 515

R10 - Dolomite ............................................................................................................................. 519

R11 - Volcanic Ash/Cinder and Pumice ....................................................................................... 523

R12 - Perlite .................................................................................................................................. 527

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page v

R – Industrial Rocks (cont.)

R13 - Nepheline Syenite ............................................................................................................... 531

R14 - Feldspar-Rich Rocks (Alaskite) .......................................................................................... 535

S – Other ..................................................................................................................................................... 539

S01 - Broken Hill-Type Pb-Zn-Ag+/-Cu ...................................................................................... 541

Tables Table 1. Distribution of classified British Columbia MINFILE occurrences by deposit group. .................... 4 Table 2. Mineral deposit group names used for the principal index for the profiles (version 2.2). ................ 7 Table 3. Mineral deposit profiles listed by deposit group ............................................................................. 14

Appendices Appendix 1 – Commodity listing of mineral deposit profiles ..................................................................... 545 Appendix 2– Earth material affinities of the mineral deposit profiles ........................................................ 559 Appendix 3- Author’s guide provided for mineral deposit profiles ............................................................ 571

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page vi

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 1

1. Introduction

This is a compilation of 120 mineral deposit model descriptions for metallic minerals, industrial minerals,

gemstones, precious stones and coal. They were published by the British Columbia Geological Survey (BCGS)

between 1995 and 2012. These descriptions are identified as “mineral deposit profiles” to distinguish them from

other collections of mineral deposit models and underline that a major objective is to provide key information in an

easily accessible format.

The profiles provide concise and standardized descriptions of geological characteristics, mineral exploration

techniques, resource information and genesis for the deposit models. They are particularly relevant for exploration

geologists and prospectors, natural resource assessment professionals, geoscience students and knowledge engineers

developing related artificial intelligence applications.

This collection of indexed profiles is the most current set of concise, integrated mineral deposit models published

in English. Although a number of them warrant being revised, there are others that require no, or only minimal

updating. All of the mineral deposit profiles contain considerable descriptive and factual information that is still

current and very useful. The utility of these profiles for a variety of users has been amply demonstrated over the last

25 years.

The BCGS is publishing all the mineral deposit profiles and related index tables in this document, just as the

United States Geological Survey (USGS) recognized the importance of placing all their mineral deposit model

publications related to their resource assessments completed in the 1980s and 1990s in one place to enable their

clients to find the relevant information (Stoeser and Heran, 2000). The profiles are presented as originally published,

except for changes to the formatting to ensure a standard appearance. The introductory text and tables have been

updated to match the complete collection.

The mineral deposit profiles were generated by a team of experienced economic geologists with extensive field

experience with a variety of types of mineral deposits (Höy, 1988; McMillan et al., 1991; Diakow et al., 1991;

MacIntyre, 1992; Alldrick, 1993; Levson et al., 1993; Ash, 1994; Ryan and Dawson, 1994; Hora and Hancock,

1995; Schroeter, 1995; Ray et al., 1995; Panteleyev et al., 1996; Simandl et al., 1996; Nixon et al., 1997). They

published 105 deposit profiles in the 1990s and as separate articles in the annual Geological Fieldwork volume.

Another 15 deposit profiles were published by the BCGS in the early 2000s.

The BCGS collaborated on specific profiles with geoscientists working for the Geological Survey of Canada

(GSC), the (USGS), universities and mineral exploration companies in order to benefit from their knowledge of

mineral deposits. Their contributions contributed greatly to quality and breadth of the mineral deposit profiles and

are much appreciated by the BCGS.

2. Starting Point - a Provincial Mineral Potential Assessment

A mineral potential assessment of the province of British Columbia was initiated by the BSGS in 1992 and

completed by 1997 (Grunsky et al., 1994; Kilby, 1995; Kilby, 1996; Grunsky, 1997; Bobrowsky et al., 1998). This

was the first detailed mineral potential evaluation completed by any country for an entire province or state. It was

also the first assessment to evaluate the potential for finding a broad spectrum of industrial mineral deposits (Kilby

et al., 1998).

The BCGS recognized that it would require well defined and standardized mineral deposit models to establish a

common base for all experts providing the mineral potential estimations. The mineral deposit profiles were used to

classify known deposits and occurrences and to group deposits to allow compilation of the representative grade and

tonnage data (Grunsky, 1995). Most importantly they provided “deposit definitions” to guide experts in their

estimation of the number of possible undiscovered mineral deposits. This latter aspect continues to be an important

ongoing value of the mineral deposit profiles in completing modern resource assessments, including those

incorporating artificial intelligence applications.

The inspiration for the mineral deposit profiles was provided by two collections of mineral deposit model

descriptions by the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) and the USGS. Both these publications used standardized

approaches with numerous headings and limited the descriptions to one or two pages of key information. They

demonstrated the value of having editors who review not only the scientific content, but also how the deposit types

relate to each other to ensure that they do not overlap. The GSC report titled “Canadian Mineral Deposit Types: A

Geological Synopsis” provided a preliminary template and author guidelines (Eckstrand, 1984) that became the

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 2

basis for the template used for the mineral deposit profiles. The USGS Bulletin 1693 edited by Cox and Singer

(1986) demonstrated the importance of including a wide variety of discrete mineral deposit models with associated

grade and tonnage data. It also identified a large number of metallic ore deposit types that helped guide the selection

of types of profiles by the BCGS.

Other organizations have published similar collections of standardized and concise mineral deposit models. For

example, the Ontario Geological Survey published 27 metallic and 21 industrial mineral deposit models (Rogers et

al., 1995) that are relevant to their province with an emphasis on metallic deposits found in the Canadian Shield. The

Geological Association of Canada solicited and published individual models in their journal, Geoscience Canada.

Subsequently, these model descriptions were published as collections in two stand alone publications (Sheahan et

al., 1988; Sheahan and Cherry, 1993). Twenty-four of the British Columbia mineral deposit profiles were upgraded

by the Yukon Geological Survey to include more Yukon information and references (Fonseca and Bradshaw, 2005)

and then used to classify their mineral occurrence database.

Australian geologists have published descriptions of mineral deposit models which describe some of the styles of

mineralization that are best represented on their continent, for example Solomon and Groves (2000) and Phillips

(2017). A collection of selected types of mineral deposits has also been published (Hodgson, 1998). The Australians

have taken the lead in developing a mineral systems approach to better understand the origin of mineral deposits and

applying that to both mineral exploration and resource assessments (Pirajno, 2009; McCuaig and Hronsky, 2014;

Pirajno, 2015; Kreuzer et al., 2015; Huston et al., 2016). Deposit models, similar to the profiles in many respects, for

Australia's major mineral deposit types were published in an Australian Mines Atlas.

3. Utility of mineral deposit models

Industry, government and academic scientists and engineers develop and/or use deposit models to suit their own

purposes. Exploration geologists and prospectors utilize them to help decide what regions to explore and which

mineral occurrences present the best economic targets. Mine geologists, metallurgical engineers and others can find

them helpful as a starting point to decide how best to exploit ore bodies and mitigate their environmental impacts.

Researchers generate and modify mineral deposit models to better understand different deposit types by completing

detailed research on specific mineral occurrences mines and mining districts.

Hodgson (1993) defines an ore deposit model as “a conceptual and/or empirical standard, embodying both the

descriptive features of the deposit type, and an explanation of these features in terms of geological processes.”

Deposit model descriptions span the spectrum from detailed and fulsome descriptions of very similar mines and

occurrences to more generalized descriptions of less well-known, and sometimes more diverse, mineral deposits.

The latter deposits may be more difficult to incorporate properly into a resource assessment or classification system

as their geological characteristics may not be defined sufficiently.

As authors develop a specific deposit model, they publish their results in technical articles and company reports.

Over time this can lead to a wealth of information and sometimes result in a model incorporating mineral deposits

that are assigned to a different deposit model by other geoscientists. Therefore, it requires the appropriate expertise

and takes considerable time to distill the relevant published information into accurate, standardized descriptions for

a specific deposit model.

Sometimes more research reveals that an early stage model represents a family of two or more deposit types. A

current example is the iron oxide copper gold (IOCG) deposit model which possibly encompasses four related, but

distinguishable types (Fraser et al., 2007). Often it is the deposits that cannot be classified, or the observation that

cannot be explained by an existing model, which results in an advance in our understanding of ore-forming

processes and sometimes the discovery of a new mine.

There has been discussion of the importance and dangers of deposit models (Cox, 1993; Hodgson, 1993) and their

relevance to exploration (Thompson, 1993; Etheridge and Henley, 1996). One of the key points underscored by this

debate is that while models are an extremely useful method of organizing data, they may lead to oversimplification

of complex natural phenomena and important data may be ignored because it does not fit the model. Interactions

between the constructors of models, who are often government and academic geologists, and the explorationists who

use them, are critical to the evolution of more accurate and useable models (Hodgson, 1993).

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 3

4. Mineral deposit profiles

The mineral deposit profiles in this compilation are usually global in scope with sufficient information to describe

the ore deposit type anywhere in the world. However, they do provide information that may apply more specifically

to British Columbia with respect to tectonic setting, age of mineralization, references, resource data and economic

factors.

The mineral deposit profiles were written between 1995 and 2012. As a consequence, they are missing information

regarding recent advances in our understanding of these deposit types. This applies mainly to those styles of

mineralization that have attracted considerable recent mineral exploration interest that has resulted in new mines

being discovered and then studied by industry, government and academic geoscientists. However, all the deposit

profiles contain large amounts of accurate and useful information that is as relevant today as when it was published.

For example, the information in the sections on synonyms, commodities, examples, depositional

environment/geological setting, host/associated rock types, deposit form, texture/structure, ore mineralogy, gangue

mineralogy and weathering is accurate, but possibly not complete. Other sections, such as those under the headings

of exploration guides and economic factors, only require the addition of new exploration techniques or the updating

of pertinent economic information.

Modern deposit model descriptions for some industrial minerals have lagged behind those for metalliferous

orebodies. While this is not particularly critical for a number of the easily understood mineral deposits, such as

industrial rocks and aggregate, it is important for many others. A key factor leading to this problem has been the

relatively small number of geologists working on industrial mineral deposits combined with a dramatic reduction in

the number of universities offering courses on industrial minerals (Simandl, 1998). For this reason, the BCGS

deposit profiles and the USGS deposit models related to industrial minerals are a particularly valuable source of

information (Simandl et al., 1999).

4.1. Selection of types of mineral deposit profiles

A key aspect was to determine which mineral deposit models warranted consideration for the mineral potential

assessment of British Columbia. Although this started with a provincial focus, it was quickly realized that a more

global outlook was warranted to ensue that all mineral resources would be considered. The USGS classifications of

metallic and industrial mineral deposits (Cox and Singer, 1986; Orris and Bliss, 1991; Orris and Bliss, 1992) were

extremely helpful in this regard. The selection of a complete list of mineral deposit types involved considerable

discussion within the BCGS, interaction with economic geologists from other government agencies, industry and

universities that led to the creation of lists of potential deposit models to be considered (Lefebure et al., 1995). As

discussed below, these initial lists were largely on target, but have changed somewhat over time as new deposit

models emerged and our understanding of other profiles improved.

The general criteria used to choose the deposit types to include as profiles and how best to establish the boundaries

between them are listed below. In some cases, it took considerable discussion between the authors and the editors to

decide on the final approach for a particular deposit profile.

1. The deposit models should have their own distinct characteristics that relate to a particular style of mineralization and/or related geological characteristics that are important to guide mineral exploration and to carry out mineral potential assessments.

2. All profiles should include examples of mineral deposits that are being mined, or that have been mined. Some profiles were created for deposit types, such as Shale-hosted Ni-Zn-Mo-PGE and Alaskan-type PGEs (Pt±Os±Rh±Ir), that had only been mined on a small scale. These were included as they were judged to have the potential to become more economically important mineral deposits in the future.

3. No individual mineral deposit can be described by more that one deposit profile.

4. There needs to be enough knowledge of the deposit type to produce a coherent deposit model and ensure that it is a distinct deposit type.

British Columbia was fortunate in the early 1990s to have one of best mineral occurrence databases in the world

and were leaders in converting it into a digital format (Jones and MINFILE team, 1997). This provided a much-

needed database with associated computer programs for with the more than 11,000 mineral occurrences that had

been identified in the province as of 1994. In the initial stage of the mineral potential assessment, Robert Brown,

Nick Carter, Robert Helgason and Ron McMillan, experienced mineral exploration geologists, classified 9,936 of

the better described mineral occurrences using the mineral deposit profiles as guidelines. This was a key early stage

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation Page 4

for the mineral resource potential assessment. It provided a check on the effectiveness of existing deposit models to adequately describe the complete array of mineral occurrences in British Columbia and identified the abundance of each deposit type. This exercise should be completed as an early step for any mineral potential assessment for any region with a reasonable mineral occurrence database.

The 1995 work by Brown, Carter, Helgason and McMillan show that the most abundant groups of deposit types in British Columbia are vein, porphyry and skarn (Table 1). This reflects a number of factors, including the types of deposit models targeted by mineral industry exploration since the initial gold rush in the late 1850s, the geology of the Canadian Cordillera and the current levels of erosion throughout the province. The most abundant deposit type, polymetallic silver-lead-zinc veins, comprised roughly 25% of the classified occurrences in the province in 1995. No other deposit type exceeded 5%. Porphyry copper, alkalic porphyry, copper skarn, gold-bearing quartz veins and basaltic copper were the next most common deposit types. Some deposit types that were not well known as occurring in British Columbia, such as mantos and some types of gemstones, were also identified. The classification of the MINFILE occurrences did not produce any major surprises to geologists knowledgeable about British Columbia’s mineral wealth, but was very helpful in drawing up the master list of types of mineral deposit models to consider for the mineral potential assessment.

A recent analysis of the MINFILE database shows that the most abundant groups of deposit types in British Columbia are still vein, porphyry and skarn (Table 1) and polymetallic silver-lead-zinc veins are still the most abundant deposit type at 25% of the classified occurrences.

Table 1. Distribution of classified British Columbia MINFILE occurrences by deposit group in 1995 and 2020. The full deposit group names are provided in Table 2.

Deposit Group # of Deposits

1995 2020 Deposit Group # of Deposits

1995 2020 I Vein, breccia and stockworks 3728 5685 H Epithermal 224 611 L Porphyry 1818 2524 M Ultramafic/mafic association 207 342 K Skarn 822 1085 F Chemical Sediment 195 216 E Sediment-hosted 530 765 J Manto 158 215 R Industrial rocks 439 572 B Residual/surficial/supergene 154 304 D Continental sediments/volcanics 415 461 O Pegmatite 89 104 G Marine Volcanic association 407 581 P Metamorphic-hosted 85 100 C Placer 309 443 Q Gems/semi-precious stones 57 151 A Organic (primarily coal) 272 303 N Carbonatites/kimberlites 27 34

Some deposit types were considered unlikely to occur in British Columbia; therefore, no mineral deposit profile was completed for them. For example, there seems little likelihood of Bushveld type Fe-Ti-V or komatiitic nickel deposits occurring in the province.

In the 1980s and 1990s there were also new styles of mineralization being found in British Columbia, or being recognized elsewhere, that were being described by industry and research geologists that needed to be considered. For example, a mineral deposit profile titled “Subaqueous hot spring Au-Ag” (G07) was developed based largely on the Eskay Creek deposit in northwest British Columbia (Alldrick, 1996; Alldrick, 1999). Research results from the southeast Pacific at the time had documented shallow, precious metal-rich, exhalative sulphide deposits (Hannington, 1993) which underlined the requirement for a totally new deposit model.

Another deposit type with potential for discoveries in British Columbia is a Carlin-type gold deposit. While a few exploration companies had assessed different parts of the province for this type of deposit, it was not until the 1990s that economic geologists started publishing articles identifying favourable terranes in the Canadian Cordillera (Poulsen, 1996). For this reason, a profile titled carbonate-hosted disseminated Au-Ag (E03) was created (Schroeter and Poulsen, 1996). The classical Carlin-type gold model is a regional model as it has been based on deposits found only in the United States and virtually all in Nevada. There are a number of deposits located outside of the United States that are definitely Carlin-like, including the Golden Bear mine in British Columbia. However, it was not until 2009 that exploration drilling in the Keno Hill mining district in the Yukon discovered classical Carlin-type mineralization in Canada on the Rau property.

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 5

The discovery of the nickel-bearing, shale-hosted Nick occurrence in the Yukon in the early 1990s led to the

consideration of the mineral resource potential of thin shale-hosted Ni-Zn-Mo-PGE layers (Lefebure, 1995)which

had been mined in China, but were not yet economically attractive to exploit elsewhere. Virtually all the information

known about these deposits was from outside of Canada. Since these deposits are polymetallic, can be extensive and

are found in geological environments present in British Columbia, a profile was created called Shale-hosted Ni-Zn-

Mo-PGE (E16) (Lefebure and Coveney Jr., 1995) with an eye to their future potential if more cost-effective

extraction methods emerged. The Talvivaara mine in Finland is this deposit type and opened in 2008. It is the

world’s first biological heap leach project for nickel and also produces zinc with the potential to recover other

metals (Jowitt and Keays, 2011).

In identifying individual mineral deposit models, it is always very helpful to have a number of examples from

different regions that have been documented by geologists. However, there are some types of deposits that are

restricted in their global distribution reflecting factors, such as occurring in specific plate tectonic and/or geological

settings. A British Columbia example of this situation is a distinct group of porphyry copper-gold deposits found in

the province that are associated with alkalic intrusive and volcanic rocks (profile L03 - Porphyry Cu-Au: Alkalic).

Geologists in Canada have used their distinctive characteristics as guides for mineral exploration for more than 50

years as clearly shown by an article titled “The alkaline suite porphyry deposits: a summary” by Barr et al. (1976) in

the first volume on Porphyry Deposits of the Canadian Cordillera. It is only in the last couple of decades that it has

been widely recognized that there are copper-gold deposits in New South Wales which belong to this type of

porphyry deposit. For this reason geologists from British Columbia took the lead in the 1990s to describe this style

of porphyry mineralization which had been ignored by the USGS in their set of deposit models (Cox and Singer,

1986).

It is critical to separate mineral deposits into their most appropriate deposit type to identify their distinctive

characteristics, such as average grades and tonnages, geological settings and host rocks. If a deposit model includes

two distinct mineral deposit types it will homogenize the characteristics and provide less utility for mineral

exploration and resource assessments. Therefore, the approach taken with mineral deposit profiles is to separate

distinct deposit types wherever possible as this will provide the most accurate descriptions. An example of this

choice was to maintain separate deposit profiles for I01 - Au-quartz veins , I02 - Intrusion-related Au pyrrhotite

veins and I03 - Turbidite-hosted Au veins even though they might all be grouped as mesothermal gold-quartz veins

by some geologists or orogenic gold deposits by others.

Over the 1990s and early 2000s as the mineral deposit profiles were being written, some adjustments were made to

the master listing of deposit profiles and decisions were made on a few models to drop and others to add. Several

closely related deposit types were combined after authors started writing up individual profiles. For example, the

limited number of significant basal uranium mineral deposits led to the proposed D04 profile being included as a

subtype of D05 Sandstone Uranium. A deposit profile had been originally considered for manganese-bearing veins

and replacements; however, as work proceeded on manganese profiles, it was considered to be covered by J01

Polymetallic mantos and I05 Polymetallic veins. Similarly, the R05 Dimension stone – andesite profile has been

dropped as all igneous rock materials used for dimension stone are commonly referred to in the industrial mineral

sector as “granite”; therefore, it was felt that only one deposit profile was needed.

A mineral deposit profile titled E18 Carbonate-hosted, nonsulphide Zn (hypogene) was added to acknowledge the

emerging understanding of the importance and genesis of these deposits (Paradis and Simandl, 2012). Similarly, a

new style of gold mineralization best exemplified by the Fort Knox gold mine in Alaska was attracting considerable

attention in the 1990s and early 2000s. Now commonly referred to as reduced intrusion-related gold deposits (Hart

and Goldfarb, 2005), this required a new deposit profile titled L09 - Plutonic-related Au quartz veins and veinlets.

4.2. Grade and Tonnage Data

As part of the mineral potential assessment of the province, grade and tonnage data were compiled from the

provincial MINFILE database for all the mines and significant deposits in the province (Grunsky, 1995). British

Columbia grade and tonnage data for 21 mineral deposit profiles were tabulated in BCGS Open File 1996-13

(Lefebure and Höy, 1996). Initially, this data was used to complement data produced by the USGS (Singer et al.,

1993). As the assessment progressed, British Columbia data was utilized whenever possible. Current resource data

can be retrieved by deposit type in digital form from MINFILE, the BCGS mineral occurrence database.

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 6

5. Classification of the Mineral Deposit Profiles

The early identification of mines in ancient times focused on classifying them by the use of the mining product

and/or the substance being produced. As a better understanding of ore deposits emerged over time, the early miners

learned how important knowing the shape or form of different types of deposits was to their discovery and

extraction. Late in the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth, the emphasis in North America and Europe on

classification shifted largely to the origin or genesis of the mineral deposits, particularly for metallic ores. The more

sophisticated classifications using genesis, host environment, plate tectonics and/or mineral systems have emerged

over the last century and a half and they continue to evolve.

Economic geologists still use all the different classification schemes as they serve different purposes. In general

conversation they may use the commodity produced by a mine as a way of describing an ore deposit, such as a

limestone quarry or gold mine. Many industrial mineral textbooks place the different deposit types in order by

commodity name. On the other hand, form is often the first feature noted for the many types of veins. As mentioned

by Franklin et al. (2005) for volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits, the preferred method for exploration geologists

and researchers is to use the broadly defined geological settings which can include host environment, tectonic setting

and genesis.

Despite the progress in understanding of the different types of mineral deposits and how they form, geologists

have been frustrated that specific mineral deposit classification systems do not work well for all types of mineral

occurrences and deposits. For example, Guilbert and Park (1986) describe the problem of ore deposit classification

at some length in their book on the geology of ore deposits. Evans (1993) shares some of those misgivings and states

that the best classifications do not utilize the origin of the ore deposits as a discriminating factor.

Jensen and Bateman (1979) capture the challenge by stating that “ever since Agricola first classified ore deposits,

successive writers have attempted classification of mineral deposits, none of which has obtained unanimous

endorsement”. This less than desirable outcome is not particularly surprising given the complexity of some mineral

deposits and their related ore-forming processes. The recent development of a mineral systems approach does hold

out the promise of helping remedy at least some of these challenges, but is still at the stage where experts are often

proposing different aspects for their preferred mineral system for a particular mineral deposit model. Ultimately, the

sheer complexity and variety of mineral deposits will require the development of multi-hierarchical classification

system using knowledge engineering to provide a universal classification system (Lefebure and Smyth, 2018).

The USGS uses a lithologic-tectonic environment classification system to organize the table of contents for their

collection of mineral deposit models (Cox and Singer, 1986). It serves its purpose; however, this classification was

developed largely for a suite of metallic mineral deposits associated with igneous rocks leading to an incomplete

approach with limited differentiation for deposits hosted by sedimentary rocks and surficial earth materials. Cox and

Singer also provide commodity/geochemical, mineralogical and deposit name indexes to help users locate specific

deposit types.

An admirable example of providing multiple indexes to mineral deposit types is presented by Laznicka (1985) in

his book on “Empirical Metallogeny”. Dill (2010) uses a spreadsheet approach to list the different mineral deposit

types differentiating them by their mineralogy.

Based on these examples, the BCGS chose to adopt three indexes to organize and list the mineral deposit profiles -

deposit group, lithology and commodity. The deposit group index is a single-entry system using terms well known

by economic geologists to group similar mineral deposits. The commodity index lists the profiles by mining

products and is a multiple entry index for mineral deposit profiles that can produce more than one commodity. The

earth material affinity index uses lithology, surficial materials and other terms to sort the mineral deposit profiles

and is also a multiple entry index for some mineral deposits that form in more than one environment.

Deposit group index is used as the primary index for organizing the mineral deposit profiles in this compilation

because the single-entry listing of terms that are often used by economic geologists proved to be most useful.

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 7

5.1. Deposit group index

The deposit profiles included in this compilation are grouped into families of deposit types (Table 2), such as

porphyry, industrial rocks, organic, placer and manto. These are common terms for economic geologists and will

help geoscientists, prospectors and others to find a specific deposit profile and other similar ones. The different

group names reflect a variety of characteristics derived from associated earth materials, formational environment,

style of mineralization, orebody form or use. The deposit group index does not always provide clear boundaries

between groups and there is not always only one choice of deposit group for a specific deposit type. Originally

published in Geological Fieldwork (Lefebure et al., 1995), there have been minor changes to some of the deposit

profiles and over the years to the current version 2.2 (Table 3).

Table 2. Mineral deposit group names used for the principal index for the profiles (version 2.2).

A – Organic

B – Residual/surficial

C – Placer

D – Continental sedimentary and volcanic rocks

E – Sediment-hosted

F – Chemical sediment

G – Marine volcanic association

H – Epithermal

I – Vein, breccia and stockwork

J – Manto

K – Skarn

L – Porphyry

M – Ultramafic/mafic association

N – Carbonatites, kimberlites and lamproites

O – Pegmatite

P – Metamorphic-hosted

Q – Gems and semi-precious stones

R – Industrial rocks

S – Other

The different deposit profiles are numbered sequentially using the mineral deposit group letters combined with a

number to create a BCGS alphanumeric reference code for each deposit profile. For example, C01 is the code for the

surficial placers profile and C03 is the code for the marine placers profile in the same group. Where possible,

individual profiles are placed adjacent to similar ones within deposit groups and between deposit groups. If the

BCGS does not yet have a published profile for a deposit type, this is indicated by an asterisk after the code (e.g.

B01*). The BCGS alphanumeric reference code for the deposit profiles is recorded in all tables and used to order the

individual deposit profiles in this compilation.

The reader searching for a particular mineral deposit profile is often best served by referring to Table 3. Helpful

information presented in this table consists of alternate deposit model names and example deposits from British

Columbia and the world.

For the convenience of readers familiar with the USGS deposit models from the 1980s and 1990s (Cox and Singer,

1986; Orris and Bliss, 1991; Orris, 1992) and others, the relevant codes of the USGS models are listed in this table

as well. As with the BCGS profiles, these codes are marked by an asterisk (39f*) to show that they were not

published as of 1999. In a few cases Orris and Bliss (1991) have created a USGS model code (13g*, 27e, 25ka*)

that also has been used by other USGS authors for a metallic mineral deposit; therefore, references to these three

industrial mineral models are prefixed with IM (IM13g*, IM27e, IM25ka*).

5.2. Commodity Index

The commodity index for the mineral deposit profiles provides another easy method for finding a particular

deposit type or identifying which profiles relate to a specific commodity (Lefebure and Höy, 1996). This multiple

entry index is presented in Appendix 1 and has been updated to be consistent with all the deposit profiles

incorporated in this publications and changes to Table 3.

The mineral deposit profiles span a broad spectrum of commodities and related mines that could potentially

produce metals, coal, industrial minerals, gemstones and/or semi-precious stones. The profiles frequently list two or

more commodities that can be primary products or byproducts. Note that minor commodities that are produced by

only one or two mines associated with a particular deposit profile are often not included. Similarly, byproducts that

have been produced by old mines related to a specific deposit profile may not be included if they are no longer

considered to be economically attractive to extract.

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 8

5.3. Earth Material Affinities Index

A third index characterizes the mineral deposit profiles according to the most commonly associated host earth

materials which are primarily rocks, but can also be unconsolidated surficial and residual soils, sediments, etc.

(Appendix 2). The earth materials affinities index can be particularly useful for mineral potential assessments where

the bedrock geology is a key criterion for estimating the number of undiscovered deposits It is a multiple entry index

which has been updated for this compilation.

This index only provides one to three associated types of earth materials per mineral deposit profile. For many

profiles this does not capture all the associated earth materials, particularly those hosted by rocks. It is anticipated

that as mineral deposit classifications start incorporating multi-hierarchical classifications that it will be more

practical to capture all the associated earth materials relevant to a particular mineral deposit model.

6. Developing the deposit profile format

The initial step taken to develop the mineral deposit profiles was to identify the general types of mineral deposits

that needed to be included. Given the diversity of deposits found in British Columbia, it was recognized from the

start that it was important to consider metallic mineral, coal, industrial mineral and gemstone deposits. No

consideration was given to anthropogenic deposits with economic potential for mining, such as abandoned tailings

impoundments, because they were not a significant enough resource to include in a mineral potential assessment.

However, tailings impoundments and other earth material deposits produced by human activity are now included in

British Columbia’s mineral database (MINFILE) and should be considered for modern mineral deposit

classifications.

An industrial mineral is defined for this publication as any rock, mineral, or other naturally occurring substance of

economic value, exclusive of metallic ores, mineral fuels, and gemstones. Simandl (1998) discusses this definition

and associated challenges in grouping this diverse collection of mineral products. Gemstone is defined as any

mineral, rock, or other natural material (including organic materials, such as pearl, amber, jet, shell, ivory, and coral)

that, when cut and polished, has sufficient beauty and durability for use as a personal adornment or other ornament.

The next step was to review the approaches taken by others to build the standard headings and sequence for the

mineral deposit profile descriptions. As the objective was to have concise deposit profiles, the initial profiles

completed were usually two to three pages. Over time the average length of a profile grew to three or four pages.

This increased the information contained in the deposit profile, but did not seem to be a problem for users as the

information was presented in the same sequence with the same protocols for each one.

The format and degree of detail for the mineral deposit profiles was discussed at the beginning of the mineral

potential assessment. The approaches taken by other authors of compilations of concise descriptions of mineral

deposit models were reviewed, particularly those by the GSC and USGS. The USGS started publishing

geoenvironmental mineral deposit models at about this time (du Bray, 1995) and has continued to make important

contributions in this area (Seal and Foley, 2002). The BCGS considered incorporating this information into their

profiles; however, it lacked the appropriate staff expertise to tackle this aspect of mineral deposit models.

The present approach of concise, two to six-page descriptions with numerous, standardized headings was adopted

early on and has remained the same for all the profiles. The most recent profiles have included pictures which are

particularly useful for members of the mineral exploration community and students (F07 - Paradis and Simandl,

2011; E18 - Simandl et al., 2012).

6.1. Author guidelines

The authors were provided with guidelines for writing the mineral deposit profiles using specific headings in a set

sequence with instructions on the appropriate content (Lefebure and Ray, 1995) which are reprinted in Appendix 3.

Given the number of deposit profiles and their diversity, the BCGS actively sought authors and co-authors from the

GSC, BCGS, universities and industry to assist in their completion. The profiles were reviewed and edited to ensure

the required information was provided for each heading and to meet the BCGS publication requirements.

7. Individual Mineral Deposit Profiles

More than 160 deposit models were originally considered for completion and currently over 150 mineral deposit

profiles are considered significant for British Columbia. The vast majority of these are global in nature, while a

couple are only recognized in a few places A total of 120 have been published or posted online. They vary in length

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 9

from two to six pages and use the same headings which enables the reader to make easy comparisons between

different deposit models and facilitates extraction of information, such as ore minerals or associated rock types.

The mineral deposit profiles were published in a number of BCGS publications between 1995 and 2012. Eighty-

nine profiles were published in three open file reports along with explanatory text, index tables and grade and

tonnage data for selected British Columbia mineral deposits (Lefebure and Ray, 1995; Lefebure and Höy, 1996;

Simandl et al., 1999). Thirteen of the deposit profiles in the 1999 open file report were initially published in the

BCGS 1997 Geological Fieldwork paper and in some cases minor edits were made for the more recent open file

publication.

Another five profiles were published in BCGS Geological Fieldwork papers in 1998, 2011 and 2012. One deposit

profile for L09 – Plutonic-Related Au Quartz veins & Veinlets was published by the Yukon Geological Survey in

2005 and is incorporated in this compilation. Two existing deposit profiles for Au skarns and Iron Oxide

Cu±Au±P±REE were updated in Geological Fieldwork articles in 1998 and 2000 (Ray, 1998; Ray and Lefebure,

2000) and these are the versions included in this compilation.

All of these profiles were posted to the BCGS website for many years along with another 20 deposit profiles that

were completed between 1997 and 2009, but not included in a formal publication. The profiles were organized by

deposit group on the website and used by numerous industry, government and university clients. A number of these

profiles have been copied and posted to other websites over the years since their publication. Due to changes to the

government-wide website, the mineral deposit profile portal was retired in 2018.

The mineral deposit profiles included in this document have been compiled, but have not been updated. The date

of publication is included in the reference provided at the top of the first page of each profile. The affiliations

provided for the authors reflects their status as of the time of publication of the profile.

The mineral deposit profiles are also available online at the British Columbia Data Catalogue. The BCGS is

planning to produce some updated mineral deposit profiles that will be added to this data catalog.

8. Conclusions

This compilation contains 120 mineral deposit profiles that were published or posted online by the British

Columbia Geological Survey between 1995 and 2012. Their standardized design and concise presentation are key

aspects that add value for many users.

The profiles provide an important collection of integrated deposit models for use by economic geologists, mineral

explorers, prospectors and students. They are particularly useful as a starting point if you wish to learn about an

unfamiliar mineral deposit type. They have also been used as a key element for resource assessments in British

Columbia.

Some of the profiles are as current today as when they were published. However, with new data about mineral

deposits being produced every day by industry and research geologists, many of the deposit profiles could benefit

from being updated.

All of the mineral deposit profiles contain considerable descriptive and factual information that is still current and

very useful. The utility of these profiles for a variety of users has been amply demonstrated over the last 25 years.

9. Acknowledgements

This compilation is possible thanks to the many authors who contributed their expertise and time to write the

mineral deposit profiles. BCGS staff contributed the majority of the deposit models, performed the role of technical

editors, and developed the conceptual approach for the collection. Users of the profiles will notice that geologists

from government, universities and industry have also contributed as authors. Staff of the Geological Survey of

Canada have been particularly helpful in this regard. This support was crucial to the completion of such an

ambitious project.

Many economic geologists from outside the Survey provided useful suggestions on how to design the profiles in

the early days, including Dennis Cox, Paul Barton and Ted Theodore of the USGS, Ken Dawson and Rod Kirkham

of the GSC and John Thompson of the University of British Columbia. Comments volunteered by James

MacDougall of J.J. MacDougall and Associates Ltd. and Felix Mutschler of Eastern Washington University were

much appreciated.

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 10

The sustained support of the BCGS was the key element enabling completion of so many deposit profiles. Brian

Grant and John Newell provided the final editorial comments prior to publication. The Resource Geology section

have acted as data custodians for the profiles and integrated them with MINFILE, the provincial mineral occurrence

database. The Chief Geologist, Ron Smyth, is especially thanked for providing the leadership and vision that was

key to the success of the provincial mineral potential assessment and the importance of the mineral deposit profiles

to achieving that goal.

10. References cited

Alldrick, D.J., 1993. Geology and metallogeny of the Stewart Mining Camp, northwestern B.C. (NTS 104B, 103O), British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Bulletin 85, 113 p.

Alldrick, D.J., 1996. Subaqueous hot spring Au-Ag. In: Selected mineral deposit profiles, volume 2 - metallic deposits, British Columbia Ministry of Employment and Investment, British Columbia Geological Survey Open File 1996-13, pp. 55–57.

Alldrick, D.J., 1999, Subaqueous hot spring Au-Ag: v. In: British Columba, British Columbia Ministry of Mines,

British Columbia Geological Survey Open File 1999-14, Appendix 1, pp. 10–14. Ash, C.H., 1994. Origin and tectonic setting of ophiolitic ultramafic and related rocks in the Atlin Area,

northwestern British Columbia (NTS 104N), British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Bulletin 94, 54 p.

Barr, D.A., Fox, P.E., Northcote, K.E., and Preto, V.A., 1976. The alkaline suite porphyry deposits: a summary. The Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, pp. 359–367.

Bobrowsky, P.T., Massey, N.W.D., and Matheson, A.H., 1998. Aggregate resource potential of the Okanagan Area: British Columbia. Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Open File 1998-05, 12 - 1:50,000 scale maps.

Cox, D.P., 1993. The development and use of mineral deposit models in the United States Geological Survey. in Kirkham, R.V., Sinclair, W.D., Thorpe, W.D., and Duke, J.M., eds., Mineral deposit modeling, Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 40, pp. 15–19.

Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., 1986. Mineral deposit models. United States Geological Survey. Bulletin, 1693, 378 p. Diakow, L.J., Panteleyev, A., and Schroeter, T.G., 1991. Jurassic epithermal deposits in the Toodoggone River area,

northern British Columbia; examples of well-preserved, volcanic-hosted, precious metal mineralization. Economic Geology, v. 86, pp. 529–554.

Dill, H.G., 2010. The “chessboard” classification scheme of mineral deposits. Mineralogy and geology from aluminum to zirconium: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 100, pp. 1–420.

du Bray, E.A., ed., 1995, Preliminary compilation of descriptive geoenvironmental mineral deposit models: United

States Geological Survey, Open File Report 95-831, p. 272. Eckstrand, O.R., ed., 1984. Canadian mineral deposit types: a geological synopsis. Geological Survey of Canada,

Economic Geology Report 36, 86 p.

Etheridge, M.A., and Henley, R.W., 1996, Making Models Matter: British Columbia Ministry of Employment and

Investment, British Columbia Geological Survey, Exploration in British Columbia 1995, p. 139–140. Evans, A.M., 1993. Ore geology and industrial minerals - an introduction. London, England, Blackwell Science,

389 p. Fonseca, A., and Bradshaw, G., eds., 2005. Yukon mineral deposit profiles. Energy, Mines and Resources, Yukon

Geological Survey, compiled by A. Fonseca and G. Bradshaw, YGS Open File 2005-5, p. 175.

Franklin, J.M., Gibson, H.L., Jonasson, I.R., and Galley, A.G., 2005, Volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits.

Society of Economic Geologists, Inc., Economic Geology 100th Anniversary Volume, pp. 523–560. Fraser, G.L., Huston, D.L., Gibson, G.M., Neumann, N.L., Maidment, D., Kositcin, N., Skirrow, R.G., Jaireth, S.,

Lyons, P., Carson, C., Cutten, H., and Lambeck, A., 2007. Geodynamic and metallogenic evolution of Proterozoic Australia from 1870 - 1550 Ma: a discussion. Geoscience Australia, Record 2007/16, 76 p.

Grunsky, E.C., 1995. Grade-tonnage data for mineral deposit models in British Columbia. In: Geological Fieldwork 1994, British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1995-1, pp. 417–423.

Grunsky, E.C., 1997. Mineral resource estimation: the Mineral Potential Project: an evaluation of estimator responses for selected mineral deposit types for the Province. In: Geological Fieldwork 1996, British Columbia Ministry of Employment and Investment, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1997-1, pp. 267–282.

Grunsky, E.C., Kilby, W.E., and Massey, N.W.D., 1994. Resource assessment in British Columbia. Nonrenewable Resources, v. 3, n. 4, pp. 271–283.

Guilbert, J.M., and Park, C.F., 1986. The geology of ore deposits. New York, W.H. Freeman, 985 p.

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 11

Hannington, M.D., 1993. Shallow submarine hydrothermal systems in modern island arc settings. Geological Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division Newsletter, The Gangue, pp. 6-8.

Hart, C., and Goldfarb, R., 2005. Distinguishing intrusion-related from orogenic gold systems. Proceedings of Scientific Conference on Minerals, New Zealand, pp. 125-133.

Hodgson, C. J., 1993. Uses (and abuses) of ore deposit models in mineral exploration. Geoscience Canada, Reprint Series 6, pp. 1–11.

Hodgson, I., 1998, Exploration models for major Australian mineral deposit types: AGSO Journal of Australian

Geology and Geophysics, v. 17, p. 314. Hora, Z. D., and Hancock, K. D., 1995. Quesnel area - industrial minerals assessment. In: Geological Fieldwork

1994, British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1995-1, pp. 395–407.

Höy, T., 1988. Geology of the Cottonbelt lead-zinc-magnetite layer, carbonatites and alkalic rocks in the Mount Grace area, Frenchman Cap dome, southeastern British Columbia. British Columbia Geological Survey, Bulletin 80, 99 p.

Huston, D.L., Mernagh, T.P., Hagemann, S.G., Doublier, M.P., Fiorentini, M., Champion, D.C., Lynton Jaques, A., Czarnota, K., Cayley, R., Skirrow, R.G., and Bastrakov, E., 2016. Tectono-metallogenic systems; the place of mineral systems within tectonic evolution, with an emphasis on Australian examples. Ore Geology Reviews, v. 76, pp. 168–210.

Jensen, M.L., and Bateman, A.M., 1979. Economic mineral deposits. New York, Toronto, John Wiley & Sons, 593 p.

John, D.A., Ayuso, R.A., Barton, M.D., Blakely, R.J., Bodnar, R.J., Dilles, J.H., Gray, F., Graybeal, F.T., Mars, J.L.,

McPhee, D.K., Seal II, R.R., Taylor, R.D., and Vikre, P.G., 2010. Porphyry copper deposit model: Chapter B in

Mineral deposit models for resource assessment. United States Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations

Report 2010-5070-B, 184 p. Jones, L.D., and MINFILE team, 1997. MINFILE: B.C. reserves & resources inventory 1996: British Columbia

Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Open File 1997-04, 174 p.

Jowitt, S.M., and Keays, R.R., 2011. Shale-hosted Ni-(Cu-PGE) mineralisation: a global overview. Applied Earth Science IMM Transactions, section B 120(4), pp. 187–197.

Kilby, W.E., 1995. Mineral Potential Project – overview. In: Geological Fieldwork 1994, British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1995-1, pp. 411–416.

Kilby, W.E., 1996. Mineral Potential Assessment Project - an update. In: Geological Fieldwork 1995, British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1996-1, pp. 301–308.

Kilby, W.E., Simandl, G.J., Lefebure, D.V., Hora, Z.D., and Desjardins, P.J., 1998. Systematic evaluation of industrial mineral potential, British Columbia, Canada - possible worldwide applications. The 33rd Forum on Geology of Industrial Minerals, Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Special Volume 50, pp. 254-260.

Kreuzer, O.P., Miller, A.V.M., Peters, K.J., and Payne, C., 2015. Comparing prospectivity modelling results and past exploration data: a case study of porphyry Cu–Au mineral systems in the Macquarie Arc, Lachlan Fold Belt, New South Wales. Ore Geology Reviews, v. 71, pp. 516–544.

Laznicka, P., 1985. Empirical metallogeny - depositional environments, lithologic associations and metallic ores, volume 1: Phanerozoic environments, associations and deposits. Elsevier, New York, 1758 p.

Lefebure, D.V., 1995. Two intriguing mineral deposit profiles for British Columbia. In: Geological Fieldwork 1994, British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1995-1, pp. 491–499.

Lefebure, D.V., and Coveney Jr., R.M., 1995. Shale-hosted Ni-Zn-Mo-PGE. In: Selected mineral deposit profiles, volume 1 - metallics and coal, British Columbia Ministry of Employment and Investment, British Columbia Geological Survey, Open File 1995-20, pp. 45–47.

Lefebure, D.V., and Höy, T., eds., 1996. Selected British Columbia mineral deposit profiles, volume 2, metallic deposits. British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, Open File 1996-13, 172 p.

Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., 1995. Selected British Columbia mineral deposit profiles: volume 1 – metallics and coal, Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Open File 1995-20, 136 p.

Lefebure, D.V., and Smyth, C., 2018. Mineral deposit models – evolving to marry human knowledge and artificial intelligence. Resources for Future Generations Conference, International Union of Geological Sciences, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, abstract for a presentation.

Selected Mineral Deposit Profiles Compilation

Page 12

Lefebure, D.V., Alldrick, D.J., and Simandl, G.J., 1995, Mineral deposit profile tables - listed by deposit group and lithological affinities. British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia, Open File 1995-8.

Lefebure, D.V., Alldrick, D.J., Simandl, G.J., and Ray, G.E., 1995c. British Columbia deposit profiles for British Columbia. In: Geological Fieldwork 1994, British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1995-01, pp. 469-490.

Levson, V.M., Clarkson, R., and Douma, M., 1993. Evaluating buried placer deposits in the Cariboo Region of central British Columbia. In: Geological Fieldwork 1992, British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1993-1, pp. 463–473.

MacIntyre, D.G., 1992. Geological setting and genesis of sedimentary exhalative barite and barite-sulfide deposits, Gataga District, northeastern British Columbia. Exploration and Mining Geology, v. 1, pp. 1–20.

McCuaig, T.C., and Hronsky, J.M.A., 2014. The mineral system concept: the key to exploration targeting. in Building Exploration Capability for the 21st Century: Society of Economic Geologists, pp 153-175.

McMillan, W.J., Höy, T., MacIntyre, D.G., Nelson, J.L., Nixon, G.T., Hammock, J.L., Pantelyev, A., Ray, G.E., and Webster, I.C.L., 1991. Ore deposits, tectonics and metallogeny of the Canadian Cordillera. British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1991-4, 276 p.

Nixon, G.T., Hammack, J.L., Ash, C.H., Cabri, L.J., Case, G., Connelly, J.N., Haeman, L.M., Laflamme, J.H.G., Nutall, C., Paterson, W.P.E., and Wong, E.H., 1997. Geology and platinum-group-element mineralization of Alaskan-Type ultramafic-mafic complexes in British Columbia: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Bulletin 93, 155 p.

Orris, G.J., 1992. Industrial mineral deposit models; descriptive models for three lacustrine deposit types. United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 92–593, 14 p.

Orris, G.J., and Bliss, J.D., 1991. Some industrial mineral deposit models: descriptive deposit models: United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 91-11-A, 73 p.

Orris, G.J., and Bliss, J.D., eds., 1992, Industrial minerals deposit models: grade and tonnage models: United States

Geological Survey, Open File Report 92-3472017-115588-46, pp. 84. Panteleyev, A., Bailey, D.G., Bloodgood, M.A., and Hancock, K.D., 1996. Geology and mineral deposits of the

Quesnel River - Horsefly Map Area, Central Quesnel Trough, British Columbia. British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, British Columbia Geological Survey, Bulletin 97, 167 p.

Paradis, S., and Simandl, G.J., 2011. Carbonate-hosted, nonsulphide Zn-Pb (supergene) Mineral Deposit Profile B09. In Geological Fieldwork 2010, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 2001--1, pp. 189–193.

Paradis, S., and Simandl, G.J., 2012. Carbonate-hosted, nonsulphide Zn (hypogene) mineral deposit profile E18: In: Geological Fieldwork 2011, British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 2012-1, pp. 211–216.

Phillips, N., ed., 2017. Australian ore deposits. Sixth Edition: The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 879 p.

Pirajno, F., 2009. Hydrothermal processes and mineral systems. Dordrecht, London, Springer/Geological Survey of Western Australia, 1250 p.

Pirajno, F., 2015. A classification of mineral systems, overviews of plate tectonic margins and examples of ore deposits associated with convergent margins. Gondwana Research, v. 33, pp. 44–62.

Poulsen, K.H., 1996. Carlin-type gold deposits: Canadian potential. British Columbia Ministry of Employment and Investment, British Columbia Geological Survey, Exploration in British Columbia 1995, pp. 145–146.

Ray, G.E., 1998. Au skarns. In: Geological Fieldwork 1997, Ministry of Employment and Investment, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 1998-1, pp. 24H1-24H4.

Ray, G.E., and Lefebure, D.V., 2000. A synopsis of iron oxide ± Cu ± Au ± P ± REE deposits of the Candelaria- Kiruna-Olympic Dam family. In: Geological Fieldwork 1999, British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines, British Columbia Geological Survey, Paper 2000-1, pp. 267–271.

Ray, G.E., Webster, I.C.L., and Ettlinger, A.D., 1995. The distribution of skarns in British Columbia and the chemistry and ages of their related plutonic rocks. Economic Geology, v. 90, pp. 920–937.

Rogers, M.C., Thurston, P.C., Fyon, J.A., K