Geology topics

Minerals & deposits

Find USGS publications on mineral resources and deposits. Search commodities and geographic names, then check source reports for geology and assessment methods.

Follow this topic with RSS

At least 703 records · Page 39Linked to original sources

USGS2008

Understanding contaminants associated with mineral deposits

Interdisciplinary studies by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) have resulted in substantial progress in understanding the processes that control the release of metals and acidic water from inactive mines and mineralized areas, the transport of metals and acidic water to streams, and the fate and effect of metals and acidity on downstream ecosystems. The potential environmental effects associated with abandoned and inactive mines, resulting from the complex interaction of a variety of chemical and physical processes, is an area of study that is important to the USGS Mineral Resources Program. Understanding the processes contributing to the environmental effects of abandoned and inactive mines is also of interest to a wide range of stakeholders, including both those responsible for managing lands with historically mined areas and those responsible for anticipating environmental consequences of future mining operations. The recently completed (2007) USGS project entitled 'Process Studies of Contaminants Associated with Mineral Deposits' focused on abandoned and inactive mines and mineralized areas in the Rocky Mountains of Montana, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Arizona, where there are thousands of abandoned mines. Results from these studies provide new information that advances our understanding of the physical and biogeochemical processes causing the mobilization, transport, reaction, and fate of potentially toxic elements (including aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, copper, iron, lead, and zinc) in mineralized near-surface systems and their effects on aquatic and riparian habitat. These interdisciplinary studies provide the basis for scientific decisionmaking and remedial action by local, State, and Federal agencies charged with minimizing the effects of potentially toxic elements on the environment. Current (2007) USGS research highlights the need to understand (1) the geologic sources of metals and acidity and the geochemical reactions that release them from their sources, (2) the pathways that facilitate transport from those sources, and (3) the processes that control the fate of the elements once released from the sources. Experts in the fields of economic geology, structural geology, mineralogy, geophysics, geochemistry, hydrology, ground-water modeling, microbiology, and toxicology came together for a series of studies that address these relationships on scales ranging from the microscopic to the watershed. This Circular presents results and highlights from the detailed, interdisciplinary studies that include investigations in both mining-affected areas and mineralized but unmined areas. The first section of the Circular describes laboratory and site-scale field investigations that primarily focus on mineralogic and biologic controls on the source and release of metals and acidity from mine-waste rock and hydrothermally altered areas. The second section describes a set of basin- to watershed-scale studies that not only investigate the source and release of metals and acidity but also the transport of these constituents away from the source areas. The third section is a summary of results from postremediation ecosystem monitoring. For more information on these and other project-related studies, please visit the project Web site at http://minerals.cr.usgs.gov/projects/contaminants/index.html. The Web site includes a complete bibliography and detailed descriptions of each interdisciplinary study.

Circular↗

USGS2011

Development of industrial minerals in Colorado

Technology and engineering have helped make mining safer and cleaner for both humans and the environment. Inevitably, mineral development entails costs as well as benefits. Developing a mine is an environmental, engineering, and planning challenge that must conform to many Federal, State, and local regulations. Community collaboration, creative design, and best management practices of sustainability and biodiversity can be positive indicators for the mining industry. A better understanding of aesthetics, culture, economics, geology, climate, vegetation and wildlife, topography, historical significance, and regional land planning is important in resolving land-use issues and managing mineral resources wisely. Ultimately, the consuming public makes choices about product use (including water, food, highways, housing, and thousands of other items) that influence operations of the mineral industry. Land planners, resource managers, earth scientists, designers, and public groups have a responsibility to consider sound scientific information, society's needs, and community appeals in making smart decisions concerning resource use and how complex landscapes should change. An effort to provide comprehensive geosciences data for land management agencies in central Colorado was undertaken in 2003 by scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey and the Colorado Geological Survey. This effort, the Central Colorado Assessment Project, addressed a variety of land-use issues: an understanding of the availability of industrial and metallic rocks and minerals, the geochemical and environmental effects of historic mining activity on surface water and groundwater, and the geologic controls on the availability and quality of groundwater. The USDA Forest Service and other land management agencies have the opportunity to contribute to the sustainable management of natural aggregate and other mineral resources through the identification and selective development of mineral resources and the reclamation of mines on lands that they administer. The information in this Circular will help them carry out that task.

Colorado↗

USGS1993

International strategic minerals inventory summary report; niobium (columbium) and tantalum

Major world resources of niobium and tantalum are described in this summary report of information in the International Strategic Minerals Inventory (ISMI). ISMI is a cooperative data-collection effort of earth-science and mineral-resource agencies in Australia, Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. Part I of this report presents an overview of the resources and potential supply of niobium and tantalum based on inventory information; Part II contains tables of both geologic and mineral-resource information and includes production data collected by ISMI participants. Niobium is used principally as an alloying element in special steels and superalloys, and tantalum is used mainly in electronics. Minerals in the columbite-tantalite series are principal ore minerals of niobium and tantalum. Pyrochlore is a principal source of niobium. These minerals are found in carbonatite, certain rocks in alkaline igneous complexes, pegmatite, and placer deposits. ISMI estimates show that there are over 7 million metric tons of niobium and almost 0.5 million metric tons of tantalum in known deposits, outside of China and the former Soviet Union, for which reliable estimates have been made. Brazilian deposits, followed by Canadian deposits, contain by far the largest source of niobium. Tantalum production is spread widely among several countries, and Brazil and Canada are the most significant of these producers. Brazil's position is further strengthened by potential byproduct columbite from tin mining. Present economically exploitable resources of niobium appear to be sufficient for the near future, but Brazil will continue to be the predominant world supplier of ferrocolumbium. Tantalum, a byproduct of tin production, has been captive to the fluctuations of that market, but resources in pegmatite in Canada and Australia make it likely that future increases in the present modest demand will be met.

Circular↗

USGS1993

International strategic minerals inventory summary report; rare-earth oxides

Bastnaesite, monazite, and xenotime are currently the most important rare-earth minerals. Bastnaesite occurs as a primary mineral in carbonatites. Monazite and xenotime also can be found in primary deposits but are recovered principally from heavy-mineral placers that are mined for titanium or tin. Each of these minerals has a different composition of the 15 rare-earth elements. World resources of economically exploitable rare-earth oxides (REO) are estimated at 93.4 million metric tons in place, composed of 93 percent in primary deposits and 7 percent in placers. The average mineral composition is 83 percent bastnaesite, 13 percent monazite, and 4 percent of 10 other minerals. Annual global production is about 67,000 metric tons of which 41 percent is from placers and 59 percent is from primary deposits; mining methods consist of open pits (94 percent) and dredging (6 percent). This output could be doubled if the operations that do not currently recover rare earths would do so. Resources are more than sufficient to meet the demand for the predictable future. About 52 percent of the world's REO resources are located in China. Ranking of other countries is as follows: Namibia (22 percent), the United States (15 percent), Australia (6 percent), and India (3 percent); the remainder is in several other countries. Conversely, 38 percent of the production is in China, 33 percent in the United States, 12 percent in Australia, and 5 percent each in Malaysia and India. Several other countries, including Brazil, Canada, South Africa, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, make up the remainder. Markets for rare earths are mainly in the metallurgical, magnet, ceramic, electronic, chemical, and optical industries. Rare earths improve the physical and rolling properties of iron and steel and add corrosion resistance and strength to structural members at high temperatures. Samarium and neodymium are used in lightweight, powerful magnets for electric motors. Cerium and yttrium increase the density and heat resistance of sintered ceramics. Yttrium and gadolinium contribute to the efficiency of electronic switches and sensors. Cerium improves the effectiveness of catalysts in the petroleum and automotive industries. Cerium oxides speed glass melting and are used to polish glass by chemical, rather than mechanical, means. Cerium, europium, terbium, and yttrium, as phosphoric compounds, promote the vivid colors of television screens. Consumption of rare earths is expected to grow by about 2.6 percent per year.

Circular↗

USGS2013

Lead isotope determinations from sulfide mineral occurrences--Russian Far East

The lead isotope database for sulfide deposits and occurrences in the Russian Far East was funded by the Mineral Resources Program, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in conjunction with the collaborative studies of mineral resources by the Russian Academy of Sciences and the U. S. Geological Survey (Nokleberg and others, 1996). Comparisons of these data with similar lead isotope data from Alaska published in Church, Delevaux, and others (1987) and Gaccetta and Church (1989) provide a basis for the following three-fold project objectives: 1. To utilize lead isotope signatures, in conjunction with regional mapping, to assess the relative ages and to categorize the types of mineral deposits studied, 2. To relate the lead isotope and trace-element geochemical signatures of specific deposits and occurrences to ore-forming processes, and 3. To use the lead isotope data to correlate lithotectonic terranes within the northern Cordillera (Alaska, Yukon Territories and British Columbia in Canada, and the western Cordillera of the United States). The report by Church, Gray, and others (1987) shows how this fingerprinting methodology can be applied to trace the offset of lithotectonic (or lithostratigraphic as labeled by some authors) terranes.The lead isotope data presented in table 1 represent the work completed on sulfide mineral deposits located in the Russian Far East from 1993 to 1995, when this study was terminated due to lack of funding. The lead isotope data are reported here for use by investigators who may find them of value in mineral exploration. No attempt is made to summarize the voluminous literature on these mineral deposits.

Data Series↗

USGS1997

Natural and mining-related sources of dissolved minerals during low flow in the Upper Animas River Basin, southwestern Colorado

As part of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-500), all States are required to establish water-quality standards for every river basin in the State. During 1994, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment proposed to the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission (CWQCC) an aquatic-life standard of 225 µg/L (micrograms per liter) for the dissolved-zinc concentration in the Animas River downstream from Silverton (fig.1). The CWQCC delayed implementation of this water-quality standard until further information was collected and a plan for the cleanup of abandoned mines was developed. Dissolved-zinc concentrations in this section of the river ranged from about 270 µg/L during high flow, when rainfall and snowmelt runoff dilute the dissolved minerals in the river (U.S. Geological Survey, 1996, p. 431), to 960 µg/L (Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, written commun., 1996) during low flow (such as late summer and middle winter when natural springs and drainage from mines are the main sources for the streams). Mining sites in the basin were developed between about 1872 and the 1940's, with only a few mines operated until the early 1990's. For local governments, mining sites represent part of the Nation's heritage, tourists are attracted to the historic mining sites, and governments are obligated to protect the historic mining sites according to the National Historic Preservation Act (Public Law 89-665). In the context of this fact sheet, the term "natural sources of dissolved minerals" refers to springs and streams where no effect from mining were determined. "Mining-related sources of dissolved minerals" are assumed to be: (1 ) Water draining from mines , and (2) water seeping from mine-waste dump pile where the waste piles were saturated by water draining from mines. Although rainfall and snowmelt runoff from mine-waste piles might affect water quality in streams, work described in this fact sheet was done during low-flow conditions when springs and drainage from mine were the main sources of dissolved minerals affecting the streams. Data are being collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to determine the magnitude and sources of dissolved minerals during rainfall- and snowmelt-runoff periods. This fact sheet presents results of studies done by the USGS in collaboration with the Animas River Stakeholders Group and was prepared in cooperation with the Southwestern Colorado Water Conservation District. The studies were done at selected sites in the Upper Animas River Basin to determine natural and mining-related sources of dissolved minerals and are continuing in the basin with the Animas River Stakeholders Group and as part of the Department of the Interior Abandoned Mine Lands Initiative. The results of these studies will provide useful information for determining water-quality standards in the basin.

Colorado↗

USGS1992

Map showing mineral resource assessment for vein and replacement deposits of gold, silver, copper, lead, zinc, manganese, and tungsten in the Butte 1° x 2° quadrangle, Montana

The purpose of this report is to assess the potential for undiscovered vein and replacement deposits of gold, silver, copper, lead, zinc, manganese, and tungsten in the Butte 1° x 2° quadrangle. This quadrangle, in west-central Montana, is one of the most mineralized and productive regions in the United States. Its mining districts, including the world famous Butte or Summit Valley district, have produced a variety of metallic and nonmetallic mineral commodities valued at more than $6.4 billion. Because of its importance as a mineral producing region, the Butte quadrangle was selected for study by the U.S. Geological Survey under the Conterminous United States Mineral Assessment Program (CUSMAP). Under this program, new data on geology, geochemistry, geophysics, geochronology, mineral resources, and remote sensing were collected and synthesized. The field and laboratory studies were also supported by funding from the Geologic Framework and Synthesis Program and the Wilderness Program. The methods used in resource assessment include a compilation of all data into data sets, the development of a descriptive model for vein and replacement deposits in the quadrangle, and the analysis of data using techniques provided by the Geographic Information System (GIS). This map is one of a number of reports and maps on the Butte 1 °X2° quadrangle. Other publications resulting from this study include U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Maps 1-2050-A (Rowan and Segal, in press) and I-2050-B (Purdy and Rowan, in press); Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1925 (Wallace, 1987); and Open-File Reports 86-292 (Wallace and others, 1986) and 86--0632 (Elliott and others, 1986). Reports on mineral resource assessment for several other types of deposits in the Butte quadrangle are in preparation.

Montana↗

USGS1993

Maps showing mineral resource assessment for porphyry and stockwork deposits of copper, molybdenum, and tungsten and for stockwork and disseminated deposits of gold and silver in the Butte 1° x 2° quadrangle, Montana

This report documents the assessment for potential occurrences of undiscovered porphyry and stockwork deposits of copper, molybdenum, and tungsten (porphyry Cu-Mo-W) and stockwork and disseminated deposits of gold and silver (disseminated Au-Ag) in the Butte 1 °X2° quadrangle. The Butte quadrangle, in west-central Montana, is one of the best known mineral producing regions in the U.S. Mining districts in the quadrangle, including the world famous Butte or Summit Valley district, have produced a variety of metallic and nonmetallic mineral commodities valued at more than $6.4 billion (at the time of production). Because of its importance as a mineral producing region, the Butte quadrangle was selected for study by the U.S. Geological Survey under the Conterminous United States Mineral Assessment Program (CUSMAP). Under this program, new data on geology, geochemistry, geophysics, geochronology, mineral resources, and remote sensing were collected and synthesized. The field and laboratory studies were supported, in part, by funding from the Geologic Framework and Synthesis Program and the Wilderness Program. The methods used in this resource assessment for porphyry Cu-Mo-W and disseminated Au-Ag deposits in the quadrangle include a compilation of all data, the development of descriptive occurrence models, and the analysis of data using techniques provided by a Geographic Information System (GIS). This map is one of several maps on the Butte 1 °X2° quadrangle. Other deposit types have been assessed for the Butte quadrangle, and maps (U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Miscellaneous Investigation Series Maps) for each of the following have been prepared: Vein and replacement deposits of gold, silver, copper, lead, zinc, manganese, and tungsten (Elliott, Wallace, and others, 1992a) and skarn deposits of gold, silver, copper, tungsten, and iron (Elliott and others, 1992b ). Other publications resulting from this study include linear features map (Rowan and others, 1991 ); limonite and hydrothermal alteration map (Rowan and Segal, 1989); mineral occurrence maps (Elliott and others, 1986; Elliott, Loen, and others, 1992); and geologic maps (Wallace, 1987; Wallace and others, 1987).

Montana↗

USGS1993

Mineral resource assessment of rare-earth elements, thorium, titanium, and uranium in the Greenville 1° x 2° quadrangle, South Carolina, Georgia, and North Carolina

Mineral resources of the Greenville 1° x 2° quadrangle, South Carolina, Georgia, and North Carolina, were assessed between 1984 and 1990 under the Conterminuous United States Mineral Assessment Program (CUSMAP) of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The mineral resource assessments were made on the basis of geologic, geochemical, and geophysical investigations and the presence of mines, prospects, and mineral occurrences from the literature. This report is an assessment of the rare-earth elements (REE), thorium, titanium, and uranium resources in the Greenville quadrangle and is based on heavy mineral concentrates collected in 1951-54 by the USGS (Overstreet and others, 1968; Caldwell and White, 1973; Cuppels and White, 1973); on the results of the U.S. Department of Energy, National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) sampling program (Ferguson, 1978, 1979); on analyses of stream-sediment and heavy-mineral-concentrate samples (Jackson and Moore, 1992, G.C Cullin, USGS, unpub. data, 1992) on maps showing aerial gamma radiation in the Greenville quadrangle (D.L. Daniels, USGS, unpub. data, 1992); and on the geology as mapped by Nelson and others (1987, 1989).

Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina↗

USGS2002

Progress on geoenvironmental models for selected mineral deposit types

Since the beginning of economic geology as a subdiscipline of the geological sciences, economic geologists have tended to classify mineral deposits on the basis of geological, mineralogical, and geochemical criteria, in efforts to systematize our understanding of mineral deposits as an aid to exploration. These efforts have led to classifications based on commodity, geologic setting (Cox and Singer, 1986), inferred temperatures and pressures of ore formation (Lindgren, 1933), and genetic setting (Park and MacDiarmid, 1975; Jensen and Bateman, 1979). None of these classification schemes is mutually exclusive; instead, there is considerable overlap among all of these classifications. A natural outcome of efforts to classify mineral deposits is the development of “mineral deposit models.” A mineral deposit model is a systematically arranged body of information that describes some or all of the essential characteristics of a selected group of mineral deposits; it presents a concept within which essential attributes may be distinguished and from which extraneous, coincidental features may be recognized and excluded (Barton, 1993). Barton (1993) noted that the grouping of deposits on the basis of common characteristics forms the basis for a classification, but the specification of the characteristics required for belonging to the group is the basis for a model. Models range from purely descriptive to genetic. A genetic model is superior to a descriptive model because it provides a basis to distinguish essential from extraneous attributes, and it has flexibility to accommodate variability in sources, processes, and local controls. In general, a descriptive model is a necessary prerequisite to a genetic model.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2002

Policy, a factor shaping minerals supply and demand

Valuable insights about the future availability of minerals for the U.S. economy can be gained from a study of the history of U.S. mineral development. From the beginning, first as corporate ventures, next as colonies, then as States united, American governments have pursued policies that had the effect to encourage development of mineral and other resources. During the frontier period, 1781-1890, all levels of government in the United States spent public money for infrastructure development (canals, forts, ports, railroads, roads, and other), and the Federal government was particularly active in land acquisition, land surveys, and resource title transfer to private interests. These activities were effective support for the development of the nation?s mineral resources. This was a period of rapid growth, wealth building, and substantial land disturbance. During the post-frontier period, 1891-present, the consequences of resource development helped to move values for ecology and culture to the forefront of public policy, making them more competitive with development values. To date, American history?s lesson has been that policy is very important with regard to where and how minerals are placed into the service of human needs. This is also the history of global mining, as mining capital has moved to friendly policy environments. Although policy can create regional dislocations of mining, it has had little effect on the long-term global availability of minerals at continuously decreasing prices.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2003

Preliminary metallogenic belt and mineral deposit maps for northeast Asia

The metallogenic belts and locations of major mineral deposits of Northeast Asia are portrayed on Sheets 1-4. Sheet 1 portrays the location of significant lode deposits and placer districts at a scale of 1:7,500,000. Sheets 2-4 portray the metallogenic belts of the region in a series of 12 time-slices from the Archean through the Quaternary at a scale of 1:15,000,000. For all four map sheets, a generalized geodynamics base map, derived from a more detailed map by Parfenov and others (2003), is used as an underlay for the metallogenic belt maps. This geodynamics map underlay permits depicts the major host geologic units and structures that host metallogenic belts. Four tables are included in this report. A hierarchial ranking of mineral deposit models is listed in Table 1. And summary features of lode deposits, placer districts, and metallogenic belts are described in Tables 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The metallogenic belts for Northeast Asia are synthesized, compiled, described, and interpreted with the use of modern concepts of plate tectonics, analysis of terranes and overlap assemblages, and synthesis of mineral deposit models. The data supporting the compilation are: (1) comprehensive descriptions of mineral deposits; (2) compilation and synthesis of a regional geodynamics map the region at 5 million scale with detailed explanations and cited references; and (3) compilation and synthesis of metallogenic belt maps at 15 million scale with detailed explanations and cited references. These studies are part of a major international collaborative study of the Mineral Resources, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of Northeast Asia that is being conducted from 1997 through 2002 by geologists from earth science agencies and universities in Russia, Mongolia, Northeastern China, South Korea, Japan, and the USA. Companion studies and previous publications are: (1) a detailed geodynamics map of Northeast Asia (Parfenov and 2003); (2) a compilation of major mineral deposit models (Rodionov and Nokleberg, 2000; Rodionov and others, 2000; Obolenskiy and others, 2003); and (3) a database on significant metalliferous and selected nonmetalliferous lode deposits, and selected placer districts (Ariunbileg and others, 2003).

Open-File Report↗

USGS2013

Topographic and hydrographic GIS datasets for the Afghan Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey 2013 mineral areas of interest

Afghanistan is endowed with a vast amount of mineral resources, and it is believed that the current economic state of the country could be greatly improved through investment in the extraction and production of these resources. In 2007, the “Preliminary Non-Fuel Resource Assessment of Afghanistan 2007” was completed by members of the U.S. Geological Survey and Afghan Geological Survey (Peters and others, 2007). The assessment delineated 20 mineralized areas for further study using a geologic-based methodology. In 2011, a follow-on data product, “Summaries and Data Packages of Important Areas for Mineral Investment and Production Opportunities of Nonfuel Minerals in Afghanistan,” was released (Peters and others, 2011). As part of this more recent work, geologic, geohydrologic, and hyperspectral studies were carried out in the areas of interest (AOIs) to assess the location and characteristics of the mineral resources. The 2011 publication included a dataset of 24 identified AOIs containing subareas, a corresponding digital elevation model (DEM), elevation contours, areal extent, and hydrography for each AOI. In 2012, project scientists identified five new AOIs and two subareas in Afghanistan. These new areas are Ahankashan, Kandahar, Parwan, North Bamyan, and South Bamyan. The two identified subareas include Obatu-Shela and Sekhab-ZamtoKalay, both located within the larger Kandahar AOI. In addition, an extended Kandahar AOI is included in the project for water resource modeling purposes. The dataset presented in this publication consists of the areal extent of the five new AOIs, two subareas, and the extended Kandahar AOI, elevation contours at 100-, 50-, and 25-meter intervals, an enhanced DEM, and a hydrographic dataset covering the extent of the new study area. The resulting raster and vector layers are intended for use by government agencies, developmental organizations, and private companies in Afghanistan to assist with mineral assessments, monitoring, management, and investment.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

Draft critical mineral list—Summary of methodology and background information—U.S. Geological Survey technical input document in response to Secretarial Order No. 3359

Pursuant to the Presidential Executive Order (EO) No. 13817, “A Federal Strategy to Ensure Secure and Reliable Supplies of Critical Minerals,” the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, and in consultation with the heads of other relevant executive departments and agencies, was tasked with developing and submitting a draft list of minerals defined as “critical minerals” to the Federal Register within 60 days of the issue of the EO (December 20, 2017). Based on an analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey and other U.S. Government agencies, using multiple criteria, 35 minerals or mineral material groups have been identified that are currently (February 2018) considered critical. These include the following: aluminum (bauxite), antimony, arsenic, barite, beryllium, bismuth, cesium, chromium, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite (natural), hafnium, helium, indium, lithium, magnesium, manganese, niobium, platinum group metals, potash, rare earth elements group, rhenium, rubidium, scandium, strontium, tantalum, tellurium, tin, titanium, tungsten, uranium, vanadium, and zirconium. The categorization of minerals as critical may change during the course of the review process and is thus provisional.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2024

Geospatial PDF map of the compilation of GIS data for the mineral industries and related infrastructure of Africa

Introduction In 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) National Minerals Information Center (NMIC) completed the project titled "Compilation of geospatial data for the mineral industries and related infrastructure of Africa." This project aimed to leverage the expertise and capabilities of the NMIC to collect, synthesize, and interpret geospatial data to inform on the extractive resources of the African region and expand the NMIC's understanding on the impact of mineral industry of African nations in the global economy. The African region, which comprises the independent nations that make up the African continent and its associated islands and dependencies, consists of a total of 58 mineral producing countries. The primary objective of this effort was to create a fully attributed Geographic Information System (GIS) portraying existing mining infrastructure, resources, and development capacity across Africa along with the related infrastructure capable of supporting current (for the reference year 2018) and future extractive industry operations in the region. The compiled GIS geodatabase with supporting documentation including comprehensive metadata was published as a USGS data release titled "Compilation of Geospatial Data (GIS) for the Mineral Industries and Related Infrastructure of Africa." This georeferenced portable document format (GeoPDF) map sheet presents a new geographic information product containing a partial representation of the GIS data. This GeoPDF map provides a visual comparison of the distribution of mineral industry and related infrastructure GIS data, which contributes to a deeper understanding of the intersections and complexities of the extractive industries within Africa.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2024

Geospatial PDF map of the compilation of GIS data for the mineral industries of select countries in the Indo-Pacific region

Introduction In 2024, the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) National Minerals Information Center (NMIC) completed the project titled "Compilation of geospatial data for the mineral industries of select countries in the Indo-Pacific." This project aimed to leverage the expertise and capabilities of the NMIC to collect, synthesize, and interpret geospatial data to inform on the extractive resources of select countries in the Indo-Pacific region (area of study) and expand the NMIC's understanding on the impact of mineral industry of these countries in the global economy. The 19 countries of interest in the Indo-Pacific study area include Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei, Burma, Fiji, Malaysia, Mongolia, Nauru, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Korea (Republic of Korea), Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Timor-Leste, and Vietnam. The primary objective of this effort was to create a fully attributed Geographic Information System (GIS) portraying existing mining infrastructure, resources, and production capacities across the Indo-Pacific study area as well as highlight mineral production and processing sites under development and potential areas of future extractive industry operations and development in the region. The compiled GIS geodatabase with supporting documentation including comprehensive metadata was published as a USGS data release titled "Compilation of Geospatial Data (GIS) for the Mineral Industries of Select Countries in the Indo-Pacific." This georeferenced portable document format (GeoPDF) map sheet presents a new geographic information product containing a partial representation of the GIS data. This GeoPDF map provides a visual comparison of the distribution of mineral industry GIS data, which contributes to a deeper understanding of the intersections and complexities of the extractive industries within the select countries in the Indo-Pacific region.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1980

Summaries of data on and lists of references to metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral deposits in the Ketchikan and Prince Rupert quadrangles, Alaska

These summaries of data on metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral occurrences and lists of selected references to them in Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (and predecessor State and Territorial agencies) reports and maps released before Jan. 1, 1980, and two nongovernmental reports are designed to aid in library research on the mineral resources of the Ketchikan and Prince Rupert quadrangles, Alaska. The references listed are selected in the sense that mainly statistical reports such as the annual Minerals Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and many annual and biennial reports of the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor agencies are not included. Also not included are data on many claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, localities 42 to 50 in Elliott and others, 1978 (OF 7873)). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgement that the claims are not on valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposit that might be present. Geochemical anomalies determined by analysis of rock and stream—sediment samples in which no metallic mineral was identified are also omitted.

Alaska↗

USGS1980

Summaries of data on and lists of references to metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral deposits in the Big Delta and Tanacross quadrangles, Alaska

These summaries of data on metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral occurrences and lists of selected references to them in Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (and predecessor State and Territorial agencies) reports and maps released before Jan. 1, 1980, are designed to aid in library research on the mineral resources of the Big Delta and Tanacross quadrangles, Alaska. The references are selected in the sense that mainly statistical reports such as the annual Minerals Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and many annual and biennial reports of the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor agencies are not included. Also not included are data on many claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, localities 16 to 22 in Menzie and Foster, 1979 (OF 78-529 D), p. 31). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgement that the claims are not on valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposit that might be present. Geochemical anomalies determined by analysis of rock and stream—sediment samples in which no metallic mineral was identified are also omitted. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of data and reference lists arranged alphabetically by occurrence name for each quadrangle; a second section that lists, by quadrangle, synonyms for names in the first section, the names of owners and operators of mines and prospects, and claim names; and a final section that for each quadrangle lists alphabetically by author all references mentioned in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗