GEOLOGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES OF THE ORTIZ MINE GRANT,SANTA FE COUNTY, NEW MEXICO
Open-file Report 560
By

Stephen R. Maynard
Consulting Geologist
1503 Central Ave., NW, Suite A
Albuquerque, NM 87104

New Mexico Bureau Geology & Mineral Resources
New Mexico Institute of Mining & Technology
Socorro, New Mexico 87801

March 2014

ABSTRACTThe Ortiz Mine Grant, as defined by a patent issued by the US Congress in 1861, forms
an approximately 10 mi x 10 mi tract centered on the old Ortiz Mine in the eastern part of the
Ortiz Mountain range in the southwestern part of Santa Fe County, New Mexico. The Ortiz
Mountains, physiographically and geologically, form part of a north-south trending mountain
range known as the Ortiz Porphyry Belt that includes, from north to south, the Cerrillos Hills, theOrtiz Mountains, the San Pedro Mountains, and South Mountain.
Proterozoic basement rocks, consisting of amphibolite schist and quartzite, crop out in thesouthern part of the Little Tuerto Hills, in the southwestern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant. Theserocks are similar to those exposed in the Monte Largo Hills, about 8 km (5 mi) to the south, andare believed to be approximately 1.6 billion years old.
Mississippian through Permian rocks are exposed in the northern part of the Little Tuerto
Hills, in the San Pedro Mountains (on the Grant’s southern margin), and on low ridges and inarroyo exposures in the area of Tuerto Arroyo, south of the Ortiz Mountains. Paleozoic rocks
cumulative thickness is estimated at 745 m (2,450 ft).
Although somewhat obscured by faulting, intrusions of younger sills and stocks, andthermal metamorphism, there is a nearly complete section of Mesozoic rocks exposed in the
Ortiz Mountains. Total thickness of the Mesozoic section measures about 2590 m (8515 ft).
The Paleocene Diamond Tail Fm and the Eocene Galisteo Fm. were deposited in atectonic basin (the Galisteo Basin) that appears to have been controlled by Laramide movementon the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System (TCFS). More than 450 m (1500 ft) of the Paleocene
Diamond Tail Formation is preserved in the Ortiz Graben. The Diamond Tail Fm is thickest in
the Ortiz Graben, suggesting that the deepest part of the basin during the Paleocene lay in the
Ortiz Mountains.
Igneous rocks on the Ortiz Mine Grant may be divided into an early calc-alkaline phaseand a later slightly alkaline phase. The calc-alkaline phase is represented by extensive
laccolithic intrusions of andesite porphyry that have been dated by 40Ar/39Ar at 34.29 – 35.79
Ma. The laccolithic intrusions occur at all stratigraphic levels. The alkaline phase is represented
by stocks and dikes including augite monzonite, latite porphyry, and trachytic latite with40
Ar/39Ar ages ranging from 33.27 Ma to 31.68 Ma.
Volcanism associated with the igneous activity in the Ortiz Mountains is represented by
the Dolores Gulch vent breccia or diatreme. Lavas and pyroclastic deposits of the Espinaso Fm
are present only in the northeastern corner of the Grant; these represent the distal facies of
volcanoes centered in the Ortiz Mountains, such as the Dolores Gulch vent, and others centeredin the Cerrillos Hills and San Pedro Mountains . 40Ar/39Ar ages of the Dolores Gulch volcanic
are 31.31 to 31.48 Ma, and thus correlate with the alkaline phase.
The major feature of the TCFS in the Ortiz Mountains, the Ortiz Graben, cuts the 34.29 –35.79 Ma laccolithic intrusions, and is cut by the 33.27 Ma augite monzonite, the constraining its
formation to a roughly 1 million-year period from 34.29 to 33.27 Ma. Mid-Tertiary movement
resulted in left-lateral, down-to-the-north movement across the TCFS.
Mineralization in the Ortiz Mountains is mostly located along or adjacent to strands of
the TCFS. Mineralization styles include skarn Au-Cu at Lukas Canyon and the Iron “Vein”
prospect, open-space breccia fillings associated with a collapse breccia pipe at Carache Canyon
and along margins of the Dolores Gulch volcanic vent or diatreme at the Cunningham Hill mineand Florencio prospect, veins at the old Ortiz and Candelaria mines, and porphyry Cu-Au

mineralization in upper Cunningham Gulch. Cross cutting relations at Carache Canyon suggestthat the 31.56 – 32.20 Ma 40Ar/39Ar range of ages of adularia is the age of mineralization. Thisage is taken to be representative of all metallic mineralization in the Ortiz Mountains.
The Old Placers Mining District refers to placer and lode mineral deposits found in the
Ortiz Mountains and its surroundings. Placer gold was discovered in Dolores Gulch, in theeastern part of the Ortiz Mountains, in the early 1820s. Lode deposits began to be developed by1830. From the 1820s to the present (2014), artisanal prospecting, mineral exploration, andmining have resulted in the identification of several mineral prospects, identification of mineral
resources at Lukas Canyon and Carache Canyon, and the extraction of 250,000 troy ounces ofgold and about 50,000 troy ounces of gold at the Cunningham Hill and Old Ortiz Mines,
respectively.
The old Ortiz Mine, on the northwest side of the Dolores vent breccia, was the original
lode discovery in the area and is estimated to have produced about 50,000 troy ounces of gold atintervals from the late 1820s to the 1930s. The mine exploited a narrow magnetite/pyrite-filled
fissure on 8 levels over 350 ft total depth.
At the Cunningham Hill mine gold and tungsten mineralization is hosted by open-space
breccia formed principally in quartzite formed in sandstone of the Diamond Tail Fm immediately
adjacent to a pyritic latite porphyry dike, and, to a lesser extent, in the Dolores Gulch volcanics.
Gold occurs as fine, rarely visible, grains in fractures in pyrite. Tungsten occurs in scheelite inopen spaces, along with pyrite, magnetite, hematite, and calcite gangue. The Cunningham Hill
Mine operated from 1979 to 1987 and produced approximately 250,000 troy ounces of gold from
6 million short tons grading 0.055 oz/st. Tungsten was not recovered. About 12 million shorttons of rock were removed as overburden or waste. Gold was extracted from the crushed ore bya cyanide leach - activated carbon adsorption - electroplating process.
Gold mineralization at Carache Canyon, outlined by an exploration campaign in the
1980s to early 1990s, occurs as coarse, commonly visible, grains with a gangue of pyrite,
pyrrhotite, carbonate minerals, and lesser arsenopyrite, chalcopyrite, and sphalerite in open-space
fractures along and outside of the southern and western margins of a collapse breccia pipe.
Subsidence within the breccia pipe is estimated to be 120 to 240 m (400 to 800 ft). The open
spaces are best preserved in andesite porphyry sills and the Point Lookout sandstone, resulting ina series of “stacked” mineralized bodies separated by lower-grade Menefee and Upper Mancos
shales. A total resource of 1,169,000 troy ounces of gold contained in 16.7 million short tons at
an average grade of 0.07 oz/st was published for Carache Canyon in 1991.
The gold-copper-bearing garnet-pyroxene skarn-altered Greenhorn limestone bed forms
an east-dipping slope in the upper part of Lukas Canyon in the southwestern part of the Ortiz
Mountains. Resources of 180,000 troy ounces of gold and 15,000 short tons of copper
contained in 5.44 million short tons grading 0.03 oz/st gold and 0.25% copper were published in
1991.

TABLE OF CONTENTS……….…………..……………………………………….i
LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………vi
LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………...x
INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………....…1
LOCATION AND HISTORY………………………………………………….…1
PURPOSE……………...…………………………………………………….……1
PREVIOUS WORK……………………………………………………………….4
GEOGRAPHIC SETTING………………………………………………………..6
Physiography……………………………………………………………....6
Climate………………………………………………………………...…11
Vegetation and wildlife……………………………………………….….11
Land use……………………………………………………………….…12
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………….………………………………………..12

SEDIMENTARY ROCKS…………………………………………..……………14
PRECAMBRIAN METAMORPHIC ROCKS………………………………….14
Amphibolite schist…………………………………………………….…14
Quartzite……………………………………………………………….....14
PALEOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS……………………………………….19
MISSISSIPPIAN SYSTEM……………………………………………..19
Del Padre (?) Sandstone (Arroyo Peñasco Group)………………19
PENNSYLVANIAN SYSTEM………………………………………….19
Sandia Formation………………………………………………...19
Madera Formation………………………………………………..19
PERMIAN SYSTEM……………………………………………...……..19
Abo Formation…………………………………………………...20
Yeso Formation……………………………………………….….20
Glorieta Sandstone……………………………………………….20
San Andres Formation…………………………………………...20MESOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS……………………………………...…21
TRIASSIC SYSTEM……………………………………………….……21
Moenkopi Formation………………………………………….…21
Chinle Group…………………………………………………….21
Agua Zarca Formation…………………………………...21
Chinle Group, undifferentiated………………………….21
JURASSIC SYSTEM……………………………………………………22
San Rafael Group…………………………………………….…..22
Entrada Sandstone……………………………………….22
Todilto Formation………………………………….…….22
Summerville Formation……………………………….…22
Morrison Formation………………………………………….…..22i

CRETACEOUS SYSTEM…………………………………..……….….25
Dakota Formation………………………………………….….…25
Mancos Shale…………………………………………………....26
Graneros Shale Member……………………………..…..26
Greenhorn Limestone Member………………………..…26
Carlile Shale Member……………………………….…...28
Juana López Member………………………………….....28
Niobrara Shale Member……………………………….....29
Hosta-Dalton Sandstone (Mesa Verde Group)…………….….…29
Upper Mancos Shale Member……………………….…..29
Mesa Verde Group…………………………………………….…32
Point Lookout Sandstone…………………………….…..32
Menefee Formation………………………………………32
Lower Menefee Member…………………………34
Harmon Sandstone Member……………..………34
Upper Menefee Member…………………………34
CENOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS……………………………………...…35
TERTIARY SYSTEM…………………………………………………...35
Paleocene-Eocene Diamond Tail Formation…………………….35
Eocene-Oligocene Galisteo Formation…………………………..38
Oligocene Espinaso Formation…………………………………..38
Pliocene(?) gravel deposits………………………………………38
TERTIARY–QUATERNARY..…………………………………………39
Oligocene - Pleistocene Santa Fe Group…………………….…..39
Pliocene – Pleistocene Tuerto Gravel……………………….…...39
QUATERNARY SYSTEM……………………………………………..39
Holocene alluvium, stream terraces, colluvium, fandeposits, and talus……………………………………….39

IGNEOUS ROCKS……………………………………………………..………….40
INTRUSIVE ROCKS…………………………………………………………...40
EARLY INTRUSIVES – CALC-ALKALINE GROUP………………..40
Quartz andesite porphyry (Tap)…………………………….……40
Lomas de la Bolsa Laccolith…………………………..…49
Captain Davis Mountain Laccolith……………….….…..49
Cerro Chato, Madrid, Cedar Mountain and Juana
López Laccoliths…………………………..……..49
San Pedro Laccolith……………………………..……….49
Cerro Pelon Laccolith…………………..………………..50
Tuerto Laccolith………………………………………….50
Quartz, Hornblende Monzodiorite……………………………….50
LATE INTRUSIVES – ALKALINE GROUP………………………..…51
Augite monzonite, hornblende-augite monzodiorite,and hornblende monzonite (Tam)…………………….….51
Quartz latite and latite porphyries (Tl)……………………….…..53
POST-VOLCANIC INTRUSIVES in the Ortiz Mountains………….….54ii

Hornblende latite/trachyte porphyry……………………………..54
Porphyritic alkali feldspar trachyte………………………………55
Porphyritic foid-bearing alkali feldspar trachyte………….……..56
Porphyritic quartz-bearing trachyte…………………………...…56
Tephriphonolite porphyry………………………………………..57
RADIAL DIKES…………………………………………………...…….57
Phonotephrite porphyry………………………………………….57
Hornblende-porphyry monzonite………………………………..58
EXTRUSIVE ROCKS………………………...…………………………………58
Espinaso Formation….…………………………………………………..58
Volcanic vent of Dolores Gulch…………………………………………59

STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY……………………………………………………..64
TIJERAS-CAÑONCITO FAULT SYSTEM……………………………………64
Fault segments……………………………………………………….…..67
Little Tuerto Horst……………………………………………….67
Tuerto Arroyo Zone………….…………………………………..67
Ortiz Graben……………………………………………………..67
Captain Davis Mountain…………………………………………68
Gutierrez Fault…………………………………………………………...68
LA BAJADA FAULT……………………………………………………………68
QUATERNARY SEISMIC ACTIVITY……………………………...…………69

ECONOMIC GEOLOGY…………………………………………………………70
METALLOGENIC ASSOCIATION…………………………………………….70
MINERALIZATION IN THE ORTIZ PORPHYRY BELT……………….……71
MINES AND PROSPECTS OF THE ORTIZ MINE GRANT………………….71
BRECCIA-RELATED MINERALIZATION…………………………...76
CUNNINGHAM HILL MINE…………………………………..76
Geologic setting…………………………………………77
Mineralization…………………………………………..79
Ore minerals…………………………………….79
Gangue minerals………………………………...83
Mineral Paragenesis….………………………….83
Fluid Inclusion Study……………………………………83
Mine and plant operation………………………………..86
Ore Estimation…………………………………..86
Mining and grade control…………….………….89
Crushing…………………………………………89
Leaching…………………………………………90
Gold Recovery…………………………………...91
CARACHE CANYON…………………………………………..92
Exploration history………………………………………92
Geologic setting………………………………………….92
Carache Canyon Breccia Pipe……………………………97
Mineralization………………………………..…………99
iii

Paragenesis…………………………………………….....99
Hydrothermal alteration………………………………….99
Fluid inclusion study……………………………………100
Gold Distribution……………………………………….100
Nugget effect……………………………………………102
Resource Estimation……………………………………104
Plan Polygon Method……………………….…..104
Cross Sectional Method………………………...105
FLORENCIO PROSPECT……………………………………..105
SKARNS……………………………………………………………….107
LUKAS CANYON……………………………………………..107
Geologic setting………………………………………..107
Skarn mineralogy and paragenesis……………………..108
Geochemistry..…………………………………………111
Resource estimation……………………………………111
IRON VEIN…………………………………………………….111
Geology…………………………………………………112
Mineralization…………………………………………..113
LONE MOUNTAIN..…………………………………………..114
VEIN MINERALIZATION…………………………………………….115(OLD) ORTIZ MINE...…………………………………………115
Location, history, and development……………………115
Geologic setting...………………………………………115
CANDELARIA MINE...……………………………………….119
BENTON MINE and OLD LIVE OAK MINE...………………123
ENGLISH AND SHOSHONE MINES..………………………126
RED OUTCROP OR CAPTAIN DAVIS PROSPECT………..126
PORPHYRY-RELATED MINERALIZATION……………………….127
CUNNINGHAM GULCH……………………………………..127
CROOKED CANYON…………………………………………127
PLACER DEPOSITS…………………………………………………..128
NON-METALLIC RESOURCES……………………………………...129
COAL…………………………………………………………..129
AGGREGATE………………………………………………….129
GYPSUM………………………………………………………130

GEOPHYSICAL STUDIES….………………………..………………………...131
GROUND-BASED SURVEYS.………………………………………………..131
Magnetics.………………………………………………………………131
Radiometrics……………………………………………………………131
Induced polarization / resistivity……………………………………….131
AIRBORNE SURVEYS………………………………………………………..135
Electromagnetics (EM)…………………………………………………135
Magnetics……………………………………………………………….135
Very Low Frequency (VLF)...………………………………………….135

iv

ISOTOPIC AGE DETERMINATIONS…...………………………………..138
K-Ar AGE DETERMINATIONS……………………………………………..13840
Ar/39Ar AGE DETERMINATIONS…………………………………………139
Andesite Porphyry……………………………………………………..139
Augite monzonite stock………………………………………………..139
Subvolcanic latite stock………………………………………………..139
Volcanics of Dolores Gulch……………………………………………139
Granodiorite stock of Candelaria Mountain……………………………139
Adularia associated with gold mineralization at Carache Canyon……..139
DISCUSSION...………………………………………………………………...140

REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………..143
APPENDIX I. Rock geochemical analysesv

LIST OF FIGURES
Introduction
Figure 1-1. Location map of the Ortiz Mine Grant………………………………………………………..2
Figure 1-2. Simplified geologic map of the Ortiz Mine Grant…………………………………………….3
Figure 1-3. Map of New Mexico, showing major physiographic divisions. ………………………………6
Figure 1-4. Map of the Ortiz Mine Grant, showing principal geomorphic divisions and drainage pattern…7
Figure 1-5. View of southern part of the Ortiz Mountains, as seen from NM-14 about 1.5 km south ofGolden, NM…………………………………………………………………………………………8
Figure 1-6. View of the northwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains, as seen from NM-14, about 1.5 km
south of Madrid, NM………………………………………………………………………………..9
Figure 1-7. Ortiz Mountains as seen from Cerrillos Hills……………………………………………….....10
Figure 1-8. Northeastern part of the Ortiz Mountains from Cunningham Mesa……………………...……10

Sedimentary rocks
Figure 2-1. Amphibolite schist outcrop in Little Tuerto Hills……………………………………………..16
Figure 2-2. Quartzite outcrop in the southern part of the Little Tuerto Hills………………………………16
Figure 2-3. Del Padre(?) sandstone outcrop in Little Tuerto Hills…………………………………………17
Figure 2-4. Madera Formation limestone, Little Tuerto Hills…………………………………………...…18
Figure 2-5. Abo Formation exposure in road cut on NM-14, about 200 m north of Golden, NM…………18
Figure 2-6. Stratigraphic column of Jurassic strata of the western part of the Ortiz Mountains…………...23
Figure 2-7. Todilto Formation limestone (Luciano Mesa Member)……………………………………….24
Figure 2-8. Breccia developed in Todilo Formation gypsum (Tonque Arroyo Member)………………...24
Figure 2-9. El Punto, viewed from the NM-14…………………………………………………………….25
Figure 2-10. Stratigraphic column of the Dakota Formation – Greenhorn Limestone Member interval,
southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains…………………………………………………………27
Figure 2-11. Lukas Canyon garnet skarn developed in Greenhorn Limestone…………………………….28
Figure 2-12. Partially skarn-altered and copper-mineralized Greenhorn limestone outcrop near mouth of
Lukas Canyon……………………………………………………………………………………..28
Figure 2-13. Stratigraphic column of the Carlile Shale – Juana López Member interval, southwestern partof the Ortiz Mountains…………………………………………………………………………….30

vi

Figure 2-14. Stratigraphic column of the Niobrara Shale – Hosta-Dalton interval, southwestern part of the
Ortiz Mountains………………………………………………………………………………..….31
Figure 2-15. Stratigraphic column of the upper Mancos Shale – upper Menefee member interval, southernpart of the Ortiz Mountains…………………………………………………………….………….33
Figure 2-16. Sawed core sample of bioturbated sandstone of the upper Mancos shale……………………34
Figure 2-17. Stratigraphic section of the Diamond Tail Formation preserved in the Ortiz Graben in thesouthern part of the Ortiz Mountains………………………………………………………..…….36
Figure 2-18. Outcrop of Diamond Tail Formation sandstone in entrance to Carache Canyon, southeastern
margin of the Ortiz Mountains…………………………………………………………………….37
Figure 2-19. Petrified wood fragment, Diamond Tail Formation………………………………………….37
Figure 2-20. Espinaso Formation outcrops, northeastern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant…………………..38

Igneous rocks
Figure 3-1a. QAPF plots of intrusive rocks of the Ortiz Mountains………………………………….…..41
Figure 3-1b. Total alkali-silica grid plot of intrusive rocks of the Ortiz Mountains…………………...…42
Figure 3-2. Total alkali-silica diagram showing the line dividing the alkaline and subalkaline fields(MacDonald and Katsura, 1965).………………………………………………………………….43
Figure 3-3. a) Road cut exposure of andesite porphyry on NM-14 on western flank of the Ortiz Mountains.
b) Hand specimen of andesite porphyry…………………………………………………………..44
Figure 3-4. Cross sections showing Keyes’ (1909) models of laccoliths in the Ortiz Porphyry Belt………45
Figure 3-5. Exposed laccoliths of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt…………………………………………...……46
Figure 3-6. Andesite porphyry……………………………………………………………………………..48
Figure 3-7. Examples of augite monzonite…………………………………………………………………52
Figure 3-8. Sawed drill core of latite porphyry, Porphyry Hill - upper Cunningham Gulch………………53
Figure 3-9. Sawed examples of porphyritic alkali feldspar trachyte, Carache Canyon……………………56
Figure 3-10. Outcrop of Espinaso Formation………………………………………………………………59
Figure 3-11. Field exposures of the Dolores Gulch volcanic vent…………………………………………60
Figure 3-12. Schematic diagrams of the igneous succession of the Ortiz Mine Grant. ……….…………..61vii

Structural Geology
Figure 4-1. Tectonic elements of the Ortiz Mine Grant…………………………………………………64
Figure 4-2. Tectonic setting of the Ortiz Mine Grant, showing the relationship of the Tijeras-Canoncito
Fault System to major structures of the Rio Grande Rift……………………………………….66

Economic Geology
Figure 5-1. Great Plains Margin precious-metal districts of New Mexico,modified after North and McLemore (1988)………………………………………………………70
Figure 5-2. Map of the Ortiz Mine Grant, showing mines and prospects
described in this report in relation to major tectonic elements……………………………………75
Figure 5-3. Panoramic view of the Cunningham Hill Mine, looking northeast……………………………77
Figure 5-4. Quartzite breccia, Cunningham Hill Mine…………………………………………………….78
Figure 5-5. Geologic plans of 7000’, 6900’, and 6850’ levels, Cunningham
Hill Mine showing gold grades in ounces per ton………………………………………………... 80
Figure 5-6. North-south cross section of Cunningham Hill ore body, prior tomining, showing distribution of gold grade……………………………………………………….81
Figure 5-7. Tungsten and copper distribution on the 6900’ level, Cunningham Hill Mine…….………….82
Figure 5-8. Paragenetic diagram, Cunningham Hill Mine. From Kay (1986)…………………………….85
Figure 5-9. Flowsheet of crushing procedure, Cunningham Hill Mine……………………………………87
Figure 5-10. Flowsheet of leaching and gold recovery process, Cunningham Hill Mine…………………88
Figure 5-11. Secondary crusher and gantry, Cunningham Hill Mine..…………………………………….89
Figure 5-12. Oblique aerial view of the Gold Fields Cunningham Hill mineand plant in the early 1980s……………………………………………………………………….90
Figure 5-13. Carache Canyon geology.……………………………………………………………………93
Figure 5-14. Stratigraphic section of the Carache Canyon prospect……………………………………….96
Figure 5-15. Black-matrix breccia in drill core…………………………………………………………….98
Figure 5-16. Mineral paragenetic diagram of Carache Canyon..…………………………………………101
Figure 5-17. Schematic diagram of mineralization at Carache Canyon.………………………………….103
Figure 5-18. Geologic map of the Florencio prospect…………………………………………………….106
Figure 5-19. Geology of Lukas Canyon…………………………………………………………………..109
Figure 5-20. Garnet skarn developed in Greenhorn limestone……………………………………………110

viii

Figure 5-21. Breccia developed in Tonque Arroyo gypsum Mbr of
Todilto Fm, Iron Vein prospect……………………………………………………………….….112
Figure 5-22. Drill intercept map of central part of Iron Vein prospect...…………………………………113
Figure 5-23. Section and plan drawings of the old Ortiz Mine (modified after Shorey, 1936)…………..117
Figure 5-24. 1930s-era Candelaria Mine headframe………………………………………………….…..120
Figure 5-25. Candelaria Mine workings………………………………………………………………….122
Figure 5-26. Level plans and longitudinal sections, Candelaria Mine…………………………………...123
Figure 5-27. Map of Benton– Old Live Oak vein and sample locations………………………………….125

Geophysics
Figure 6-1. Pseudosection of time-domain IP/resistivity study of Carache Canyon, line 102E………….133
Figure 6-2. Pseudosection of phase IP/resistivity study of Cunningham Gulch prospect, line 3W………134

Geological maps and cross sections (in pockets):
Plate 1: Geologic map of the Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico (1:24,000)
Plate 2: Ortiz Mine Grant cross sections (1:24,000)
Plate 3: Geologic map of the Cunningham Hill Mine

Maps generated by 1987 airborne geophysical survey (in pockets):
Plate 4: Pole-reduced total field magnetic, Ortiz Mine Grant.
Plate 5: First vertical derivative pole-reduced magnetics, Ortiz Mine Grant.
Plate 6: Apparent resistivity derived from electromagnetic survey, Ortiz Mine Grant.
Late 7: Very low frequency survey, Ortiz Mine Grant.

ix

LIST OF TABLES
Introduction
Table 1 - 1. Average precipitation in inches at Golden, New Mexico………………………………….….11
Table 1 - 2. Vegetation of the Ortiz Mine Grant (Elliot, 1991)……………………………………………12

Sedimentary rocks
Table 2 - 1. Stratigraphy of the Ortiz Mine Grant area…………………………………………………….15

Economic Geology
Table 5 - 1. Ortiz Mine Grant breccia-associated lode prospects and mines………………………………72
Table 5 - 2. Ortiz Mine Grant skarn prospects.…………………………………………………………….73
Table 5 - 3. Ortiz Mine Grant vein mines and prospects...…………………………………………………74
Table 5 - 4. Ortiz Mine Grant porphyry-related stockwork prospects……………………………………..74
Table 5 - 5. Summary of ore reserves at Cunningham Hill from G.R. Griswold report of 1955………….77
Table 5 - 6. Paragenetic stages of mineralization at the Cunningham Hill Mine.…………………………84
Table 5 - 7. Summary of results of fluid inclusion study of Cunningham Hill
Mine by Kay (1986)……………………………………………………………………………….84
Table 5 - 8. Summary of drilling in Carache Canyon………………………………………………………95
Table 5 - 9. Comparison of fluids from inclusions in various minerals of similar paragenesis
from the Cunningham Hill Mine and the Carache Canyon prospect……………………………102
Table 5 - 10. Gold assay variability in metallic screen fire assay checks (Met 1-5)of drill hole OC-11 intersection of #4 sill………………………………………………………..104
Table 5 - 11. Summary of drilling at Lukas Canyon. From Martin (1991)………………………………107
Table 5 - 12.

Gold values of sample from 350’ level, Old Ortiz Mine………………………………….116

Table 5 - 13. Tungsten values from samples at the Candelaria Mine.…………………………………….121
Table 5 - 14. Gold values from underground samples at the Candelaria Mine. ...………………………..121
Table 5 – 15. Assays of 5-ft channel samples shown on Figure 6 – 29,
Benton – Old Live Oak prospect…………………………………………………………………124
Table 5 - 16. Coal production from Cerrillos Coal Field...……………………………………………….129

xGeophysics
Table 6 - 1. Geophysical surveys conducted on the Ortiz Mine Grant……………………………………132
Table 6 - 2. Aerodat geophysical survey specifications...………………………………………………..137

Isotopic dating
Table 7 - 1 . Summary of isotopic dates of rocks from the Ortiz Porphyry Belt………………………….141xi

1) INTRODUCTION
LOCATION AND HISTORYThe Ortiz Mine Grant is located in southern Santa Fe County, New Mexico, about 20
miles south of the city of Santa Fe (Figure 1-1). The village of Golden, New Mexico, lies in thesouthwestern corner of the original Mine Grant. Madrid, New Mexico, lies within the northernpart of the original grant. New Mexico state highway 14, runs from Tijeras to Santa Fe, cuts
across the western part of the Ortiz Mine Grant from south to north, and links Golden andMadrid. Santa Fe County road 22 joins highway 14 about 5 miles north of Golden and meetsInterstate Highway 25 at the Santo Domingo Pueblo exit, about 10 miles to the northwest.
This report refers to 1:24,000 geologic maps of the Golden, Captain Davis Mountain,
Picture Rock, and Madrid 7.5-minute topographic maps (Maynard, 2000; Lisenbee and others,
2001; Maynard and others, 2001; and Maynard and others, 2002). These geologic maps havebeen produced by the StateMap program of the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral
Resources. The position of these quadrangles relative to the Ortiz Mine Grant is indicated on
Figure 1-2.
The Ortiz Mine Grant is one of the oldest mining areas in New Mexico and in the UnitedStates. Its legal status derives from the patenting of surface and mineral rights of an
approximately 16-km by 16-km (10-mi by 10-mi) tract to the New Mexico Mining Company by
the US Congress in 1861. Since the grant’s original designation, the land comprising the grant
has remained in private hands. Surface and mineral rights to parts of the grant were sold off,
most notably the part of the Grant that overlaps the Mesita de Juana López Grant, which includes
the Madrid area and its contained coalfields. Mineral estate owners sold surface rights to the restof the Grant in 1947. The Ortiz Mine Grant includes the Old Placers and part of the New Placers
mining districts as described by Elston (1967). This report covers the geology of the original
Ortiz Mine Grant as delineated on U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps.

PURPOSEThis report on the geology of the Ortiz Mine Grant represents a compilation of work
carried out by the exploration and development staff of LAC Minerals and Pegasus, along withstudies done by the author, Gold Fields Mining Corporation, Conoco, Inc., and C.T. Griswold
and G.R. Griswold, and others. The present describes the relationships of the mineral deposits
with the stratigraphy and structural geology of the Grant, constrains timing and magnitude of
movement on faults in the area, and places these relationships into the broader context of thegeology of north-central New Mexico.
This report does not address matters of surface/mineral ownership, or legal descriptionsof properties within or bordering the Ortiz Mine Grant.

1

Figure 1-1. Location map of the Ortiz Mine Grant.

2

Figure 1-2. Simplified geologic map of the Ortiz Mine Grant

3

PREVIOUS WORK
Geological investigations pertaining to the Ortiz Mine Grant draw a great deal fromcomparison with studies in other parts of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. These investigations,especially in the 19th century, owed their impetus to the work of prospectors and miners.
Francisco Ortiz’s discovery of lode gold in 1828 and his subsequent collaboration with a
Spanish-trained mining engineer, Don Cano, started the modern era of focused investigation on
the Ortiz Mine Grant. Townley (1968 and 1971), Milford (1995), and Baxter (2004) describe theevents leading up to and following Ortiz’s discovery.
Johnson (1903) presents a summary of 19th century investigators in the region of the
Cerrillos Hills, many of whom also visited the Ortiz Mountains. Much of the early attention to
the Ortiz Mountains focused on the placer and lode gold deposits in the Dolores Gulch area
(Wislizenus, 1846; Abert, 1846; and Raymond, 1869 a or b). Further mining-relatedcommentaries on the Ortiz Mountains during the latter half of the 19th
century and first decades of the 20th century generally included descriptions of deposits in the
San Pedro Mountains and the Cerrillos Hills. Jones (1904), Lindgren and Graton (1906) and
Lindgren and others (1910) described the workings and production in the Dolores Gulch area.
Yung and McCaffrey (1903) and Keyes (1909) described the copper-gold skarn mineralization at
Lukas Canyon.
Several authors made detailed descriptions in unpublished reports of the Ortiz Mine andnearby prospects during the early part of the 20th century. Crane (1937) described the geology ofCunningham Hill. Jones (1935) and Perry and Moehlman (1938) reported on gold deposits on
the Ortiz Mine Grant.
Academic descriptions of the geology of the region began with Marcou’s expedition in1853 (Marcou, 1858). Subsequently, Hayden (1869) described the red beds of the Galisteo“sands” and the Santa Fe Marl. Johnson (1903) was the first to describe laccoliths as being
characteristic of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. Ogilvie (1905, 1908) and Keyes (1909, 1918, and1922) advanced the laccolith idea, though they did not distinguish between different intrusive
rock types in the region. Ogilvie described the high-altitude conoplain (1905) and nephelinebearing intrusive rocks (1908).
Stearns (1943, 1953a, 1953b, 1953c) formally described the Tertiary Galisteo andEspinaso Formations, and Tuerto Gravels; and the Upper Cretaceous rocks of the GalisteoTonque area surrounding the Ortiz Mine Grant. Stearns detailed different igneous rock types andproposed a non-laccolithic model in the Cerrillos Hills. Though Stearns’ work did not
specifically include the Ortiz Mine Grant, his stratigraphic and structural framework of the arealaid much of the foundation for the present-day understanding of the geology of the Grant.
Coal deposits of the region, particularly those at Madrid attracted the attention of Johnson(1903) and Lee (1913), who described the Cerrillos (Madrid) coal field, as did Read and others(1950), Turnbull and others (1951), Beaumont (1964 and 1979), Bachman (1976), and Beaumontand others (1976). Gardner (1908) described more isolated coal fields in the region.
Griswold, in an unpublished report to Ortiz Mines, Inc., made the first systematic
inventory of the mineral prospects of the Ortiz Mine Grant and placed them in a geologic
framework (Griswold, 1950). C.T. Griswold and his son, G.R.Griswold, prepared the firstgeologic map of the Grant and described the occurrence of Paleozoic and Mesozoic rocks. They
considered all the sandstone of the southern margin the of Ortiz Mountains to belong theMesaverde Group. The Griswolds’ work represented the first accurate resource estimates at
4

Lukas Canyon and Cunningham Hill, and recognized the potential for gold mineralization at
Carache Canyon.
Bachman’s (1975) map of the 1:62,500 Madrid quadrangle covered the entire Ortiz Mine
Grant. Bachman’s map grouped all the intrusive rocks of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt together as alaccolithic complex. Bachman indicated approximately 5 kilometers (3 miles) of left-lateral
stratigraphic separation on the Tijeras-Cañoncito fault system in the Ortiz Mountains and showed
outcrops of Mesaverde Group Galisteo Formation sedimentary rocks in a graben bounded by two
principal strands of the fault system. Bachman and Mehnert (1978) presented the first published
K-Ar dates on rocks of the region, establishing an Oligocene age for intrusive activity in the
Ortiz Porphyry Belt.
Master’s theses conducted on and near the Ortiz Mine Grant include Emerick’s (1950)
study of the Golden area, and Peterson’s (1958) and McCrae’s (1958) studies of the Ortiz
Mountains. Kay (1986) studied gold mineralization in the area of the then-operating
Cunningham Hill Mine. Kay’s work included fluid-inclusion studies, and K-Ar age dating of thehost rocks and mineralization and alteration. Coles (1990) examined the alteration andmineralization at Carache Canyon, and documented the petrologic distinctions of the calcalkaline and alkaline intrusive rocks of the Ortiz Mine Grant. Schroer (1994) reported on thecopper-gold skarn mineralization at Lukas Canyon. The latter three masters’ theses benefited
from sponsorship by the mining companies exploring the Grant and access to these companies’
exploration data. This study relies heavily on data and many interpretations made by Coles(1990), Schroer (1994), and Kay (1986.)
Picha’s (1982) descriptions of Phanerozoic stratigraphy of the Hagan Basin were used asa basis for correlations in the Ortiz Mountains. Gorham’s (1979) and Lucas’ (1982) work on the
Galisteo Formation in the Hagan Basin and Cerrillos area led to recognition of the wide
distribution of Tertiary sedimentary rocks in the Ortiz Mountains.
Other studies of mineralization and related intrusive complexes in the Ortiz Porphyry
Belt considerably enhanced understanding of the Grant’s geology. Atkinson (1961) and Disbrow
and Stoll (1957) studied the geology of the San Pedro Mountains and Cerrillos Hills,
respectively. Both studies described igneous successions similar to that observed on the Ortiz
Mine Grant. Akright (1979) and Wargo (1964) reported on a gold-bearing copper porphyry
deposit in the Cerrillos Hills. Thompson (1963) studied the geology of the South Mountainintrusive.
The Tijeras-Cañoncito fault system has been studied by many workers. Fulp and others(1982) documented the relationship of mineralization in Precambrian rocks to the TijerasCañoncito fault system in the Manzanita-Northern Manzano Mountains. Woodward (1984)
illustrated the relationship of the Tijeras-Cañoncito fault system to mid-Tertiary mineralization.
Abbott (1995) studied exposures of the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System to the southwest andnortheast of the Ortiz Mine Grant and documented its Laramide and Quaternary activity. Kelson
and others (1998 and 1999) and Koehler and Kelson (2000) assessed seismic risk along the
Tijeras-Cañoncito fault system.
Water supply and mine-working dewatering problems on the Ortiz Mine Grant have beenaddressed by Summers (1977) and Shomaker (1995).

5

GEOGRAPHIC SETTING
Physiography
The Ortiz Mine Grant lies in the Mexican Highland Section of the Basin and Range
Physiographic Province (Figure 1-3).
The most important physiographic features of the Ortiz Mine Grant are the Ortiz
Mountain Range and the surrounding gently sloping gravel-covered surface, known as the Ortiz
Surface (Stearns, 1953b) (Figures 1-3, 1-4, 1-5, 1-6, 1-7, 1-8). The Ortiz Mine Grant occupies
the lower, northern, foothills of the San Pedro Mountains along its southern edge. The Rangeand its outliers, Captain Davis Mountain, Lone Mountain, Las Lomas de la Bolsa and Cerro
Chato, occupy approximately 40% of the Ortiz Mine Grant. Elevations in the Ortiz Mountains
range from 1,964 m (6,500 ft) to 2,688 m (8,897 ft) at the summit of Placer Mountain.
Numerous deep canyons incise the range and drain it in a roughly radial pattern.

Figure 1-3. Map of New Mexico, showing major physiographic divisions. Modified after NM GeologicalSociety (1982).

6

No perennial streams exist on the Ortiz Mine Grant, with the exception of Galisteo Creek,
which crosses the northeastern corner of the Grant. Drainages that are fed from north-facing
mountain slopes may have runoff for a few weeks in the late winter or spring. All arroyos andcanyons are capable of heavy flow during summer downpours.
Drainages in the eastern and northern part of the Grant area incised and flow to theGalisteo River to the north. Tuerto Arroyo, which drains the southwestern part of the Grant,
becomes progressively more incised to the west. It drains to Tonque Arroyo, which in turn
empties into the Rio Grande on the San Felipe Indian Reservation.
The Ortiz Surface ranges in elevation from about 1,843 m (6,100 ft) in the northwesternpart of the Grant to about 2,205 m (7,300 ft) on the southern flank of the Ortiz Mountains. The
Ortiz Surface surrounds the Ortiz Mountains and slopes away from the range in all directions.
To the southeast of the Ortiz Mountains, the Ortiz Surface merges with the surface of the
Estancia Valley. The Plio-Pleistocene Tuerto Gravel, ranging from 0 to 30 m (0 to 100 ft) thick,covers the Ortiz Surface. Ogilvie (1905) coined the term “conoplain” to describe thisgeomorphic feature of the Ortiz Mountains.

Figure 1-4. Map of the Ortiz Mine Grant, showing principal geomorphic divisions and drainage pattern.

7Figure 1-5. View of southern part of the Ortiz Mountains, as seen from NM-14 about 1.5 km south of Golden, NM. Pliocene-Pleistocene Tuerto Gravel
covers gently sloping Ortiz Surface at foot of mountains.

8Figure 1-6. View of the northwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains, as seen from NM-14, about 1.5 km south of Madrid, NM. Highest peaks are composed of late
Oligocene augite monzonite. High hill on left background is composed of Paleocene Diamond Tail Fm. Lower ridge in left middle ground, and Cerro Chato onright held up by Oligocene andesite porphyry.

9

Figure 1-7. Ortiz Mountains as seen from Cerrillos Hills. Note plain sloping away from Ortiz Mountains (“conoplain” of Ogilvie, 1904).

Figure 1-8. Northeastern part of the Ortiz Mountains from Cunningham Mesa. Light-colored hillside to left is reclaimed tailings pile from 1979-1987 mining
operation at Cunningham Hill mine. Soil developed on Tuerto Gravel in foreground was partially scraped off for use in reclamation of the Cunningham Hill
mine.

10

Climate
The Ortiz Mine Grant’s weather is typical of the semi-arid central highlands of New
Mexico. Precipitation is generally light with large variations in annual totals. Much of the
precipitation occurs as late-summer thunderstorms. Climate data is recorded at Golden, New
Mexico (Table 1-1). Winter precipitation usually occurs as snow. Typical snowfalls are a few
inches, though storms have left as much as 18 inches with considerably higher accumulations at
higher elevations. Snow pack on higher north-facing slopes in the Ortiz Mountains can exceed 5
feet in late winter.
Table 1-1. Average precipitation in inches at Golden, New Mexico. Data from Elliot (1991).
Month1979 – 1989
1944-1981
January
0.89
0.61
February
0.86
0.66
March
1.18
0.86
April
1.25
0.58
May
1.54
0.98
June
1.37
0.74
July
1.54
2.28
August1.76
2.44
September
2.40
1.18
October
1.85
0.92
November
0.99
0.56
December
0.79
0.69
Total
16.42
12.50

Vegetation and wildlife
Vegetation on the Ortiz Mine Grant occurs in six groupings, or plant communities (Table
1-2). The distribution of plant types reflects the general lack of surface water. Cottonwoods
and willow grow near springs or where roots reach ground water along ephemeral streambeds.
Isolated stands of aspens occur on a few talus-covered north-facing slopes at elevations above
about 2,425 m (8,000 ft) in the Ortiz Mountains, indicating that the ground under the talus
contains significant moisture.
Mule deer and coyotes are the most common large wild mammals in and around the Ortiz
Mine Grant. Badgers, black bears, and mountain lions have been noted as well. Small mammals
include various mouse and rat species, chipmunks, and squirrels. Reptiles include the western
fence lizard and rattlesnakes. Common birds include the rufus-sided towhee, Bewick’s wren,
piñon jay, scrub jay, ash-throated flycatcher, house finch, mountain chickadee, white-breasted
nuthatch, Stellar’s jay, and western wood-peewee. Ravens are commonly sighted on the Ortiz
Mine Grant, as are red-tailed hawks. Detailed studies of wildlife populations of the Ortiz Mine
Grant were reported by Metric Corporation (1991).

11

Table 1-2. Vegetation of the Ortiz Mine Grant (Elliot, 1991).
Plant Community
Dominant Species
Blue grama, broom snakeweed,
Blue Grama/Broom Snakeweed
galletaPinon, one-seed juniper, Gambel
Pinon/Gambel oak
oak, muttongrass, junegrass.
Mixed confer/Gambel oak
Pinon/one-seed juniper/ blue
grama/muttongrass
One-seed juniper/ grama grasses

Rubber rabbitbrush/ sanddropseed

Douglas fir, white fir, one-seedjuniper, pinon.
Pinon, one-seed juniper, blue
grama, yucca
Yucca, prickly pear, cane cholla,
one-seed juniper, and grama
grasses.
Rubber rabbitbrush (chamisa),sand dropseed, blue grama, canecholla, kochia, cottonwood,
Siberian elm, and coyote willow.

TerrainFlat, lower elevations, southernand southeastern part of OMG.
North and east slopes at higher
elevations,
Highest north and east slopes andnarrow zones along certain
incised drainage bottoms.
Rolling and gently sloping terrain
below 7500 feet elevation
Rocky southern exposures, 7,000
to 7,800 feet elevations
Flood plain terraces of ephemeraldrainages

Land use
The steeper portions of the Ortiz Mountains are covered in forest and scrub and receive
only light human impact. The effects of mineral exploration, mainly drill pads and access roads,
have been largely mitigated by reclamation. At the Cunningham Hill Mine site, LAC Minerals,
USA, Inc., has carried out larger-scale reclamation. Cattle are grazed on the Ortiz Mine Grant on
the Lone Mountain Ranch, the Ortiz Mountain Ranch, and on some smaller parcels in thenortheastern portion of the Mine Grant. Most of the acreage of the Ortiz Mine Grant lies within
the Lone Mountain, Ortiz Mountain, and Dolores Ranches. Much of the remaining acreage has
been subdivided into lots ranging from a few to a few tens of acres.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The present report represents contributions of numerous geologists that have participatedin the exploration of the Ortiz Mine Grant. They include LAC/Pegasus personnel andconsultants: C.J. Nelsen, K.W. Martin, J.L. Schutz, R. Long, M. Hultgren, J.R. Lawrence, G.L.
Kelsey, M. Kisucky, D.M. Jones, P. Hobbie, G. Gierzycky, and M. Jaworsky; Consolidated Gold
Fields personnel: R. Graham and G. Willis; and Conoco personnel: D. Armstrong and M. Seay.
Dr. L.A. Woodward of the University of New Mexico provided valuable guidance in the earlystages of geologic mapping during the LAC Minerals campaign. Craig J. Nelsen, in his role asproject manager for LAC Minerals, encouraged the compilation and synthesis of basic geologic
data that ultimately led to the preparation of this report.
Permission to enter private land was granted by L. Boteihlo and M. Monk of LAC
Minerals, USA, Inc., owner of the Dolores Ranch; M. Lloyd and R. and M. Estrin, owners of theLone Mountain Ranch, and J. Barnett, Lone Mountain Ranch manager; O. Moore, manager of
the Ortiz Mountain Ranch; C. Capling and R. Montoya of Melinda, Inc.; and W. Henderson ofGolden, NM. Their permission and cooperation are gratefully acknowledged.
The late Roger Fischer, Esq., President of Ortiz Mines, which leases the mineral rights to
the Ortiz Mine Grant, graciously allowed full access to all exploration files. The late Gilbert
12Griswold participated in the first systematic study of the Ortiz Mine Grant with his father, C.T.
Griswold, in the late 1940s. Gil continued to represent the interests of Ortiz Mines until the early
1990s. His long-term efforts to promote the development of the Ortiz Mine Grant’s mineral
resources had a key role in the development of understanding of the Grant’s geology.
Encouragement to proceed with the preparation of this bulletin came from Drs. P. Bauerand C. Chapin of the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources. Helpful reviewsof sections were performed by the following: Dr. R. Chamberlain – Igneous Rocks; Dr. L.
Goodwin – Structural Geology, Dr. S. Lucas – Stratigraphy; Dr. J. Geissman - Geophysics; andMr. D. Irving – Economic Geology. 40Ar/39Ar isotopic dating was performed by Dr. W.
McIntosh and staff at New Mexico Tech.

13

2 SEDIMENTARY ROCKS
The entire stratigraphic section of north-central New Mexico appears on the Ortiz Mine
Grant (Table 2-1). The Eocene Galisteo Formation is preserved in the northeastern part of theMine Grant. The Ortiz Graben preserves about 300 m (1000 ft) of Paleocene(?)-Eocene Diamond
Tail Formation. The Galisteo Monocline tilts Triassic and younger sedimentary rocks 10 to 30
degrees to the east north of the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System. Paleozoic sedimentary rocks are
exposed in the San Pedro Mountains and in the northern portion of the Little Tuerto Hills.
Precambrian metamorphic rocks core the Little Tuerto Hills; their descriptions are included inthis section. Certain stratigraphic units are important host rocks for mineralization and thus may
serve as guides for further exploration.
Faulting, intrusive activity, and metasomatic processes considerably complicate identification of
sedimentary units in parts of the Ortiz Mine Grant. Oligocene intrusive rocks consist of
laccoliths of andesitic composition of calc-alkaline affinity and later latitic to monzodioritic
stocks and dikes of alkaline affinity. Laccoliths and sills are widespread and considerably inflate
the stratigraphic section. The present synthesis derives from detailed core drilling and geologic
mapping, and comparison of those findings to well-described and understood stratigraphic
sections in the Hagan Basin (Black, 1979; Picha, 1982) and along Galisteo Creek (Bachman,
1975, 1976; Lucas and others, 1998; Lucas and others, 1999).

PRECAMBRIAN METAMORPHIC ROCKS
Precambrian rocks exposed on the Ortiz Mine Grant are limited to exposures in the Little
Tuerto Hills southwest of the village of Golden. The rock types present, quartzite andamphibolite schist, are similar to rocks exposed in the Monte Largo Hills, about 6 km (4 mi) tothe southwest and described by Huzarski (1971), Timmons and others (1995), and Ferguson andothers (1999). The Precambrian outcrop in the Little Tuerto Hills forms the core of a northeasttrending horst block 760 m (2500 ft) and 3,600 m (12,000 ft) long. The northern part of thehorst block is expressed as a northeast-plunging anticline formed by the Madera Formation.
Amphibolite schist
Black, strongly lineated amphibolite schist crops out on the west flank of the Little
Tuerto Hills near the south border of the Ortiz Mine Grant. Foliation strikes uniformly to thenortheast and dips steeply northwest (Figure 2-1).
Quartzite
White to tan, rarely micaceous quartzite with occasional iron-oxide-rich bands marking
compositional layering is exposed in the southern part of the Little Tuerto Hills. The
compositional layering indicated by iron-oxide bands strikes northeast and dips steeply to thenorthwest (Figure 2-2).

14

TERTIARY

CENOZOIC

Table 2-1. Stratigraphy of the Ortiz Mine Grant area.
Alluvium, colluvium, fan & terrace deposits
QUATERNARY
Tuerto Gravel
Santa Fe Group
PLIOCENE
Pre-Ortiz Surface Santa
Fe Group sediments
MIOCENE
OLIGOCENE

EOCENE
PALEOCENE

Ogallala Formation?

Espinaso Formation – Ortiz Porphyry Belt Magmatism
Galisteo Formation
Diamond Tail Formation
Upper Menefee Member
MesaverdeHarmon Sandstone Member
Group
Lower Menefee Member
Point Lookout Sandstone
Upper Mancos Shale Member
Hosta-Dalton Sandstone Tongue
Niobrara Member
Mancos Shale
Juana Lopez Member
Carlile Shale Member
Greenhorn Limestone Member
Graneros Shale Member
Cubero Member
Dakota Formation
Oak Canyon Member
Jackpile Member
Morrison Formation
Brushy Basin Member
Salt Wash Member
Summerville Formation
Tonque Arroyo Member
Todilto
San Rafael
Fomation
Luciano Mesa Member
Group
Entrada SandstoneJURASSICTRIASSICMESOZOICUPPERCRETACEOUS

Menefee
Formation

UPPER

MIDDLE

Petrified Forest Formation
UPPER

Chinle GroupAgua Zarca Formation
Moenkopi Formation

MIDDLE

PALEOZOICSan Andres Formation
Glorieta SandstoneLOWER
PERMIAN

Yeso Formation
Abo Formation
Madera Formation
Sandia Formation

MIDDLE-UPPERPENNSYLVANIANLOWER-MIDDLEMISSISSIPPIANPROTEROZOIC

Arroyo Peñasco
Group

Del Padre Sandstone?
Quartzite and amphibolite

15

Figure 2-1. Amphibolite schist outcrop in Little Tuerto Hills.

Figure 2-2. Quartzite outcrop in the southern part of the Little Tuerto Hills. Note layering nearly parallel tohammer handle.

16

a
b

Figure 2-3. Del Padre(?) sandstone outcrop in Little Tuerto Hills. a) clean
coarse sandstone overlying brownish conglomeratic sandstone. b) close up of
conglomerate at base of outcrop. c) close up of coarse sandstone.

c17Figure 2-4. Madera Formation limestone, Little Tuerto Hills. Note chert nodules.

Figure 2-5. Abo Formation exposure in road cut on NM-14, about 200 m north of Golden, NM.

18

PALEOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKS
Mississippian(?), Pennsylvanian, and Permian rocks crop out in the southwestern part of
the Ortiz Mine Grant, in the Little Tuerto Hills, around the village of Golden, and in the San
Pedro Mountains. In the Little Tuerto Hills, the base of the section is exposed. Exposures are
small and isolated in the Golden area. The San Pedro Mountains afford continuous exposures,
though the Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks are considerably affected by contact
metamorphism.

MISSISSIPPIAN SYSTEM
Del Padre (?) Sandstone (Arroyo Peñasco Group)
White quartzite-pebble conglomerate nonconformably overlies metamorphic rocks and isoverlain by shale and limestone of the Sandia Formation in the Little Tuerto Hills. The unit isapproximately 15 m (50 ft) thick and is composed of medium to coarse sandstone and pebbles tocobbles of quartzite (Figure 2-3). The quartzite pebbles bear strong resemblance to theunderlying quartzite, suggesting local provenance. This unit was assigned to the Sandia
Formation by Emerick (1950). Read and others (1999a and b) describe similar sandstone andpebble conglomerate in the Sandia Mountains and assign it to the Mississippian Del Padre
Sandstone.

PENNSYLVANIAN SYSTEM
Sandia Formation
Shale and limestone overlies sandstone and conglomerate of the Del Padre Sandstone andunderlies thick-bedded limestone of the Madera Formation in the Little Tuerto Hills. The unit isapproximately 15 m (50 ft) thick and is assigned to the Sandia Formation.
Madera Formation
Gray, thick-bedded limestone of the Madera Formation crops out on the north end of the
Little Tuerto Hills, in isolated overturned beds in an arroyo about 0.5 km (0.3 mi) south of thevillage of Golden, and in the northwestern foothills of the San Pedro Mountains (Figure 2-4).
No thickness was measured, but there appears to be in excess of 60 m (200 ft) exposed thicknessof limestone in the Little Tuerto Hills. Emerick (1950) estimated the thickness of the Madera
Formation in the Golden area at 300 m (1000 ft). In the San Pedro Mountains, Madera
Formation limestone beds have been variously metamorphosed to garnet skarn and marble, andmineralized, in proximity to latite-porphyry intrusive rocks. Shales have been converted tohornfels.

PERMIAN SYSTEM
Permian rocks crop out in the southern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant. The lowermost
formations, the Abo and Yeso Formations, are undifferentiated in the northern foothills of the19San Pedro Mountains. In the San Pedro Mountains these formations are commonly
metamorphosed to a black to green hornfels.
Abo Formation
The Abo Formation is poorly exposed in isolated outcrops of reddish mudstone on thewest side of the Little Tuerto Hills, along NM 14 about 1,200 m (4,000 ft) north of the village ofGolden (Figure 2-5) and along Arroyo del Tuerto about 1,700 m (5,500 ft) east of NM 14.
Atkinson (1961) estimated about 275 m (900 ft) of Abo Formation in the San Pedro Mountains.
Yeso Formation
The Yeso Formation crops out as brownish red sandstone and mudstone in isolated
exposures northeast of the village of Golden and south of Arroyo del Tuerto. Atkinson (1961)
estimated a thickness of about 120 m (400 ft) for the Yeso Formation in the San Pedro
Mountains.
Glorieta Sandstone
The Glorieta Sandstone is a quartzose, white, medium-grained sandstone that crops out
on the western slope of a north-trending ridge northeast of the village of Golden, and on thenorth flank of the San Pedro Mountains, about 2,100 m (7,000 ft) south-southwest of the Lone
Mountain Ranch headquarters, and in a small exposure along Arroyo del Tuerto about 1,500 m(5,000 ft) east of NM 14. The Glorieta’s thickness appears to be about 15 m (50 ft) on the ridge
northeast of Golden and closer to 30 m (100 ft) in the San Pedro Mountains. Glorieta sandstone
has been mined for silica sand from an open cut in the San Pedro Mountains about 1,200 m(4,000 ft) south of the south boundary of the Ortiz Mine Grant.
San Andres Formation
Gray to yellowish limestone of the San Andres Formation crops out on the western slopeof a north-trending ridge northeast of the village of Golden, and on the north flank of the San
Pedro Mountains, about 2,100 m (7,000 ft) south-southwest of the Lone Mountain Ranch
headquarters, and in a small exposure along Arroyo del Tuerto about 1,500 m (5,000 ft) east of
NM 14. The San Andres Formation has not been measured but is estimated to be about 6 m (20ft) thick on the ridge northeast of Golden.

20

MESOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKSTRIASSIC SYSTEM
Triassic rocks underlie much of the Tuerto Gravel-covered pediment west and south of
the Ortiz Mountains. The best exposures of Triassic strata on the Grant are in the north-trending
ridge northeast of the village of Golden and in the northeastern part of the San Pedro Mountains.
Moenkopi Formation
Red siltstone and sandstone form a recessive bench on the western slope of a northtrending ridge northeast of the village of Golden; and on the north flank of the San Pedro
Mountains, about 2,100 m (7,000 ft) south-southwest of the Lone Mountain Ranch headquarters.
The unit overlies San Andres Formation limestone and underlies the Agua Zarca Formation
sandstone. The unit appears to be approximately 6 m (20 ft) thick. On the basis of lithology,
thickness, and stratigraphic and geographic position, the unit is assigned to the Moenkopi
Formation as defined by Lucas and Heckert (1995).

Chinle GroupAgua Zarca Formation
Coarse to locally conglomeratic sandstone of the Agua Zarca Formation forms prominentridges northeast of the village of Golden; and on the north flank of the San Pedro Mountains,
about 2,100 m (7,000 ft) south-southwest of the Lone Mountain Ranch headquarters. The
minimum thickness of Agua Zarca Formation sandstone is estimated at 15 m (50 ft).
Chinle Group undifferentiatedNo attempt has been made on the Ortiz Mine Grant to differentiate the Salitral Formation,
Petrified Forest Formation, and Correo Sandstone of the Chinle Group. The Chinle Group is
exposed in several isolated areas in the southwestern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant. Reddish
brown mudstone and lesser sandstone exposed in Arroyo del Tuerto west of NM-14 and in
Arroyo de la Joya east of the Lone Mountain Ranch headquarters probably correlate to thePetrified Forest Formation. Along the southern foothills of the Ortiz Mountains, in the low hills
about 1,500 m (5,000 ft) northwest of the Lone Mountain Ranch headquarters and in the easternpart of the San Pedro Mountains, mudstone and sandstone of the Chinle Group has been
metamorphosed to a mottled green to black and white hornfels and quartzite. Lucas and Heckert(1995) measured 390 m (1,280 ft) of Chinle Group rocks above the Agua Zarca Formation in the
Hagan Basin. Chinle Group sedimentary rocks are extensively intruded by andesite porphyrylaccoliths and sills in the south-central part of the Ortiz Mine Grant.

21

JURASSIC SYSTEM
Jurassic rocks are exposed on the Ortiz Mine Grant on the western margin of the Ortiz
Mountains and along the southern side (footwall) of the Buckeye Hill Fault. Thicknesses
encountered in drill hole ORT-126, in the southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains, are depicted
in Figure 2-6.
San Rafael Group
Entrada Sandstone
Sandstone overlying mudstone of the Chinle Group and overlain by the limestone
member of the Todilto Formation is exposed in Arroyo del Tuerto 90 m (300 ft) east of NM-14,
in several exposures along the southeastern and southwestern flanks of the Ortiz Mountains, andin Arroyo de la Joya about 1,800 m (6,000 ft) east of the Lone Mountain Ranch headquarters.
Thickness of the Entrada sandstone was measured at 8.8 m (29 ft) in hole ORT-126. In thevicinity of the Iron Vein prospect, on the southern flank of the Ortiz Mountains, the Entrada
sandstone is metamorphosed to quartzite.
Todilto Formation
Thin-bedded limestone of the Luciano Mesa Member of the Todilto Formation crops out
in Arroyo del Tuerto approximately 45 m (150 ft) east of NM-14 (Figure 2-7) , and along thesouthwestern and southern flanks of the Ortiz Mountains. Hole ORT-126 intersected 3.4 m (11ft) of the Todilto limestone. The gypsum (Tonque Arroyo) member of the Todilto is poorly
exposed on the Ortiz Mine Grant and is considerably altered and brecciated in all known
exposures. The limestone member is altered to magnetite-garnet skarn at the Iron Vein prospect.
At the Iron Vein, and in one exposure in Arroyo del Tuerto, the gypsum member is replaced by acarbonate-matrix breccia with clasts of sandstone and andesite porphyry (Figure 2-8).
Summerville Formation
The Summerville Formation is not mapped separately on the surface on the Ortiz Mine
Grant, but instead is mapped with the Morrison Formation. In core drilling, sandstone andmudstone assigned to the Summerville Formation measures 21.2 m (86 ft) thick (Figure 2-6).
Morrison Formation
In the Ortiz Mine Grant, the Summerville Formation and the Salt Wash, Brushy Basin,
and Jackpile members of the Morrison Formation were not distinguished in surface mapping.
All sandstone and mudstone (and quartzite and hornfels derived from them) above the Tonque
Arroyo gypsum member of the Todilto Formation and below the conglomeratic sandstone of the
Dakota Formation were grouped together in the Morrison Formation. The lower part of theMorrison Formation is poorly exposed. Most of the Morrison Formation from the Ortiz
Mountains is known from the 191 m (628 ft) thickness drilled in the southwestern part of the
Ortiz Mountains (Figure 2-6). The kaolinitic sandstone exposed below the Dakota Formation on
the west side of the hill known as El Punto, on the southwestern end of the Ortiz Mountains, isprobably correlative with the Jackpile Member of the Morrison Formation, as described by Picha(1982) and Lucas and others (1999).

22

Figure 2-6. Stratigraphic column of Jurassic strata of the western part of the Ortiz Mountains. Based oncore hole ORT-126.

23

aFigure 2-7. Todilto Formation limestone (Luciano
Mesa Member). a) Outcrops in Tuerto Arroyo. b)
Close up of thin bedded limestone.

b

Figure 2-8. Breccia developed in Todilto Formation
gypsum (Tonque Arroyo Member). Outcrop in
Tuerto Arroyo.

24

Figure 2-9. El Punto (center of photograph), viewed from highway NM-14. Highest point is capped by Dakota
Formation sandstone.

CRETACEOUS SYSTEM
Cretaceous rocks are widespread on the Ortiz Mine Grant and host the principal
laccolithic bodies in the Ortiz Mountains: the Lomas de la Bolsa laccolith and the Captain Davis
Mountain laccolith. Cretaceous rocks occur in a broad band across the western part of the Ortiz
Mountains and underlie much of the area of Captain Davis and Lone Mountain and the subdued
topography of the southeastern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant.
Thicknesses of the Cretaceous units are derived from core drilling in the southern part of
the Ortiz Mountains, from Lukas Canyon to Carache Canyon.
Dakota Formation
The Dakota Formation crops out on the top of El Punto Hill (Figure 2-9), on thesouthwest end of the Ortiz Mountains, and can be traced 1370 m (4500 ft) to the south and 600 m(2000 ft) to the north. Other smaller exposures of the Dakota Formation occur in thesoutheastern foothills of the Ortiz Mountains. The Dakota Formation has not been subdivided
into members as it has been in the Hagan Basin (Picha, 1982), or at Galisteo Dam (Lucas andothers, 1999). Coarse to conglomeratic sandstone with common worm burrows mark the25Dakota. Holes ORT-116 and ORT-126 drilled 32.8 m (108 ft) of Dakota sandstone and shale inthe southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains (Figure 2-10).
Mancos Shale
The Mancos Shale on the Ortiz Mine Grant has been subdivided into seven members withan aggregate thickness of 552.7 m (1,813 ft). A complete section of the Mancos Shale ispreserved in the Ortiz Mountains though it has been extensively intruded by laccoliths and sillsof andesite porphyry. Contact metamorphism and metasomatism have strongly affected the
Mancos Shale, in many places obscuring original sedimentary textures and structures.
Graneros Shale Member
Black shale underlying the Greenhorn Limestone Member and overlying sandstone of the
Dakota Formation is assigned to the Graneros Shale Member. Drilling in the southwestern partof the Ortiz Mountains penetrated 38 m (126 ft) of marine shale below the Greenhorn Limestone
Member and above sandstone of the Dakota Formation (Figure 2-10).
Greenhorn Limestone Member
The Greenhorn Limestone Member of the Mancos Shale serves as an important
stratigraphic marker horizon regionally and locally (Molenaar, 1983). In the Ortiz Mine Grant,
the Greenhorn is metamorphosed to a gold- and copper-bearing garnet-pyroxene-scapolite skarn
in Lukas and Monte del Largo Canyons, in the southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains (Figure2-11). Extensive drilling of the Lukas Canyon deposit shows the metamorphosed Greenhorn
beds to be 15 to 18 m (50 to 60 ft) thick (Figure 2-10). The skarn beds grade laterally into
poorly exposed fresh limestone and shale (Figure 2-12). Other exposures of the Greenhorn
limestone occur on and near Lone Mountain, a southeastern topographic outlier of the Ortiz
Mountains.
The Greenhorn Limestone can be traced from the region of the Galisteo Dam southward into thenorthwestern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant. A small exposure of limestone in the northeastern
portion of the Ortiz Mine Grant is likely to be either the Greenhorn limestone or the Juana López
Member of the Mancos Shale.

26

Figure 2-10. Stratigraphic column of the Dakota Formation – Greenhorn Limestone Member interval, southwesternpart of the Ortiz Mountains.

27

a

b
Figure 2-11. Lukas Canyon garnet skarn developedin Greenhorn Limestone. a) massive garnet-diopsideskarn b)note layering interpreted as relict bedding.

Figure 2-12. Partially skarn-altered and coppermineralized Greenhorn limestone outcrop near mouthof Lukas Canyon.

Carlile Shale Member
The Carlile Shale crops out in the southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains; and on Lone
Mountain and Captain Davis Mountain, in the eastern part of the range. A third area of Carlile
Shale exposure lies about 2,440 m (8,000 ft) west of the Bull Mill camp, in the southeastern partof the Ortiz Mine Grant. In the southwestern Ortiz Mountains, the Carlile Shale is 88 m (288 ft)
thick, as measured by drilling (Figure 2-13). In outcrop in the southwestern Ortiz Mountains,
the Carlile is commonly metamorphosed to a variegated brown, red, cream, and green hornfels.
In the lower part of the Carlile section, near the skarn bed in Lukas Canyon, the Carlile hornfels
commonly contains porphyroblasts of reddish brown garnet.
Juana López Member
In outcrop the Juana López Member is a fetid limestone about 1.5 m (5 ft) thick,overlying the Carlile Shale Member (Hook and Cobban, 1980). It crops out on the Ortiz Mine
Grant on a low ridge about 8,000 feet (2,440 meters) west of the Bull Mill camp, in thesoutheastern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant. In this exposure it is comparable to its originallydescribed exposure along Galisteo Creek west of Cerrillos (Rankin, 1944; Dane, 1960). In thesouthwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains, east of Lukas Canyon, it is strongly metamorphosed toa garnet porphyroblast-bearing hornfels. In core drilling in the southwestern Ortiz Mountains,
16.7 m (55 ft) of hornfels of the underlying Carlile member is included in the Juana López
28

Member (Figure 2-13). The Juana López is also present in poor exposures about 1.6 km (1 mi)east of Lone Mountain and in the northeastern portion of the Ortiz Mine Grant.
Niobrara Member
The Niobrara Member measures 245 m (804 ft) thick by drilling in the southern Ortiz
Mountains (Figure 2-14). It is composed of interbedded calcareous sandstone, siltstone, andshale. Calcareous concretions are common in the Bull Mill Camp area and in Cañamo Arroyo,
between Captain Davis Mountains and Lone Mountain. In the Ortiz Mountains the lower part of
the Niobrara likely includes strata equivalent to the D-Cross Shale Member.
Hosta-Dalton Sandstone (Mesa Verde Group)
The Hosta-Dalton sandstone is the turn-around of the Cretaceous shoreline during andafter Crevasse Canyon Formation deposition and therefore represents a regressive-transgressive
cycle (R-3 – T-4 of Molenaar, 1983). It corresponds to the Cano Sandstone Member of Stearns(1953). In the Ortiz Mountains, the Hosta-Dalton is shown by drilling to be 46 to 64 m (150 to
210 ft) thick (Figure 2-14). Exposures in the Ortiz Mountains on the ridge east of Monte delLargo Canyon are poor, but considerable float of fine-grained sandstone covers the surface inthis area. The Hosta-Dalton sandstone is not present in the eastern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant,
nor has it been mapped in the region of the Galisteo Reservoir. In the Cedar Crest area, the
Hosta and Dalton sandstones are separated by the coal-bearing Crevasse Canyon Formation(Molenaar, 1983). The Hosta-Dalton sandstone overlies the Niobrara Shale Member andunderlies marine shales of the Upper Mancos Shale Member. It may include part of the El Vado
Sandstone in its basal part.
Upper Mancos Shale Member
Marine shales ranging from 104 to 113 m (340 to 371 ft) thick overlie the Hosta-Daltonsandstone and underlie the Point Lookout Sandstone in the Ortiz Mountains (Figure 2-15). The
upper 15 m (50 ft) contain beds of bioturbated sandstone (Figure 2-16). These strata areequivalent to the Satan Tongue (Molenaar, 1983).

29

Figure 2-13. Stratigraphic column of the Carlile Shale – Juana López Member interval,
southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains.

30

Figure 2-14. Stratigraphic column of the Niobrara Shale – Hosta-Dalton interval,
southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains.

31Mesa Verde Group
Previous investigations in the Ortiz Mountains (Griswold, 1950; McRae, 1958; Peterson,
1958; Kay, 1986) assigned all sandstone-bearing units above the Mancos Shale to the Mesa
Verde Formation or Group. Medium- to coarse-grained to pebbly sandstone present in thesouthern part of the Ortiz Mountains and exposed at the Cunningham Hill Mine was identified aslower Tertiary (Maynard, 1995). The remaining Mesa Verde Group sediments are divided into
the Point Lookout Sandstone and Menefee Formation. Extensive core drilling in the Carache
Canyon area has shown the indicated ranges in thickness.
Point Lookout Sandstone
White to tan, fine-grained, medium-bedded sandstone overlying the upper Mancos Shalemember and underlying non-marine shale, sandstone, and coal of the Menefee Formation forms
the ridge dividing Carache Canyon and the unnamed canyon to the west in the southern part of
the Ortiz Mountains. The Point Lookout Sandstone can be traced northward in the Ortiz
Mountains to the upper reaches of Crooked Canyon, where its trace is interrupted by the large
augite-monzonite stock. The Point Lookout Sandstone resumes on the northwestern side of theaugite-monzonite stock and can be traced along the west flank of Cerro Chato and into thesouthern reaches of Miller Gulch, west of the village of Madrid. The Point Lookout Sandstonealso crops out in the eastern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant, southeast of the Tijeras-Cañoncito
Fault System’s trace, about 4 km (2.5 mi) east of Captain Davis Mountain.
The Point Lookout Sandstone on the Ortiz Mine Grant is best known at Carache Canyon,
where it serves as both a convenient stratigraphic marker for evaluation of, and a host for, gold
mineralization. At Carache Canyon, the Point Lookout Sandstone ranges from 25 to 31.4 m (82to 103 ft) thick, as determined by core drilling (Figure 2-15).
Menefee Formation
Menefee Formation shale and sandstone are widely exposed in the Madrid area, where
the formation hosts formerly exploited coal deposits. At Carache Canyon, the Menefee
Formation can be divided into three informally named members.

32

Figure 2-15. Stratigraphic column of the upper Mancos Shale – upper Menefee member interval,
southern part of the Ortiz Mountains.

33

Figure 2-16. Sawed core sample of bioturbated sandstone of the upper Mancos shale.

Lower Menefee Member
At Carache Canyon, the lower Menefee member is composed of 52.7 to 91.5 m (173 to
300 ft) of shale, carbonaceous shale, sandstone, and coal (Figure 2-15). Detailed drilling showsthat sandstone beds are not continuous over short distances.
“Harmon Sandstone” Member
A prominent, trough-crossbedded, laterally persistent sandstone in Carache Canyon
corresponds to the “Harmon sandstone” in the Hagan Basin (Black, 1979; Picha, 1982) and in
the Madrid coal field (Bachman, 1975; Maynard and others, 2001). At Carache Canyon, theHarmon sandstone is 22.7 m (75 ft) thick, on average (Figure 2-15).
Upper Menefee Member
Above the Harmon sandstone in Carache Canyon, up to 230 m (755 ft) of shale,carbonaceous shale, sandstone, and coal has been cut by drilling. The upper Menefee member isunconformably overlain by the Paleocene-Eocene Diamond Tail Formation.

34

CENOZOIC SEDIMENTARY ROCKSTERTIARY SYSTEM
Paleocene-Eocene Diamond Tail Formation
Approximately 457 m (1,500 ft) of medium-grained to coarse to pebbly sandstone(Figure 2-17) metamorphosed to quartzite, and lesser amounts of black hornfels derived frommudstone are preserved in a graben on the southeastern margin of the Ortiz Mountains. These
metasedimentary rocks and sandstones and mudstones overlying the Menefee Formation in thenorthern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant and in outcrops south of Peach Spring in the eastern part of
the Ortiz Mine Grant are correlated with the Diamond Tail Formation of Lucas and others(1997). Lucas and others (1997) separated the lower dominantly sandstone Tertiary sedimentsfrom the Galisteo Formation in the Hagan Basin and on the east side of the Cerrillos Hills. The
Diamond Tail Formation of Lucas and others (1997) is equivalent to the lower part of theGalisteo Formation as described by Gorham (1979) and Stearns (1953b). Earlier descriptions of
the geology of the Ortiz Mine Grant referred to these rocks as Galisteo Formation (eg. Coles,
1990; Maynard, 1995), or grouped them with the Mesa Verde Group (eg. Griswold, 1950;
Lindqvist, 1980; Kay, 1986). Bachman (1975) mapped a small part of the currently known
Diamond Tail Formation as Galisteo Formation in the Ortiz Mountains.
In the Ortiz Mountains, typical exposures of the Diamond Tail Formation are medium- tocoarse-grained, trough cross-bedded to massive, white to tan sandstone (Figure 2-18). Quartzite
pebbles and pebble to cobble-size silicified wood fragments (Figure 2-19) are rarely abundant,
though widely scattered. Mudstone beds, probably originally mudstone as described in the
Hagan Basin (Lucas and others, 1997), are metamorphosed to gray to black hornfels. Quartzite
breccia derived from Diamond Tail Formation sandstone hosts gold–tungsten mineralization at
the Cunningham Hill Mine.
At exposures south of Peach Spring, along the Ortiz Mine Grant’s eastern boundary,sandstone of the Diamond Tail Formation is well exposed without the effects of contact
metasomatism. The Diamond Tail Formation’s basal contact with the Menefee Formation can betraced for more than 760 m (2,500 ft). The base of the Diamond Tail here commonly has about
0.3 m (1 ft) of pebble conglomerate resting on Menefee Formation.

35

Figure 2-17. Stratigraphic section of the Diamond Tail Formation preserved in the Ortiz Graben in the southern partof the Ortiz Mountains.

36

Figure 2-18. Outcrop of Diamond Tail Formation sandstone in entrance to Carache Canyon, southeastern
margin of the Ortiz Mountains. The author (in his salad days) for scale.

Figure 2-19. Petrified wood fragment, Diamond Tail Formation.

37

Eocene – Oligocene Galisteo Formation
Following the usage proposed by Lucas and others (1997), the Galisteo Formation
comprises a lower mudstone and lesser sandstone member overlain by a dominantly sandstone
member. Red mudstone and sandstone of the Galisteo Formation crops out in the Ortiz Mine
Grant in the area around and north of Peach Spring and in the low hills south of the GalisteoRiver in the northeastern part of the Grant.
Oligocene Espinaso Formation
The Espinaso Formation consists of lavas, volcaniclastic sediments, and tuffs. In the
Ortiz Mine Grant, well bedded Espinaso Formation is exposed in the northeastern corner, northof the Galisteo River (Figure 2-20). A fault block containing steeply dipping agglomerate bedsof the Espinaso Formation lies in fault contact with Jurassic strata and Santa Fe Formation beds
along the La Bajada Fault, in the northwest part of the Ortiz Mine Grant. A volcanic ventbreccia lies in Dolores Gulch, north of the Cunningham Hill Mine, on the east side of the Ortiz
Mountains. This unit is described in the section on igneous rocks. The Dolores Gulch volcanic
vent is presumed to be a source of the Espinaso Formation volcanics. Other sources are possible,
but not positively identified, in the Cerrillos Hills (Stearns, 1953b; and Disbrow and Stoll, 1957)
and in the San Pedro Mountains.
Pliocene(?) gravel deposits
Light brown, pink, and buff-colored sandy gravel with a base that lies 20-30 m above thebase of Tuerto gravels and a tread that preserves a 3-4 m thick stage IV-V calcic soil. A similar
deposit consisting of boulders and cobbles of Ortiz Mountains-derived material caps Rich Hill,on the eastern side of the Ortiz Mountains, southeast of the Cunningham Hill Mine entrance gate.
Placer gold is contained in this deposit as indicated by numerous workings whose roofs aresupported by the thick calcic soil (F. Pazzaglia, written communication, 2001).

a
Figure 2-20. Espinaso Formation outcrops,
northeastern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant. a) cliffs
formed by bedded pyroclastics and volcaniclastic
sediments. b) Coarse bedded pyroclastic sediments,
partially reworked.
b)38

TERTIARY AND QUATERNARY(latest) Oligocene-Pleistocene Santa Fe GroupThe Santa Fe Group comprises the syntectonic sedimentary fill and associated volcanic
rocks of basins within the Rio Grande Rift (Bryan, 1938; Chapin and Cather, 1994). On the
Ortiz Mine Grant, the Santa Fe Group consists of two formations. The older formation consistsof piedmont-slope deposits on the eastern part of the Santo Domingo sub-basin, west of theunnamed north-northeast-striking fault in the northwestern corner of the Grant. This older unit
corresponds to the Blackshare Formation of Connell (2001). The younger unit, the Tuerto
Gravel, is an unconformably overlying piedmont-slope deposit that was laid down on erosion
surfaces outside the structural boundaries of the sub-basin.
Pliocene – Pleistocene Tuerto Gravel
The Tuerto Gravel is considered the uppermost member of the Santa Fe Group (Spiegel
and Baldwin, 1963) and was first described by Stearns (1953b) from exposures in Tuerto Arroyo,
about 3 km (2 mi) west of the western boundary of the Ortiz Mine Grant. Soil and rock material
derived from the Ortiz Mountains, the San Pedro Mountains, and adjacent hills, partiallycemented by caliche, deposited on the erosional Ortiz Surface constitute the Tuerto Gravel. The
Tuerto Gravel lies on an angular unconformity on all older units, including the lower Santa Fe
Group sediments. Tuerto Gravel may be distinguished from conglomerate of the Santa Fe Groupby the presence of hornfels clasts in the Tuerto (Connell, 2001). The Tuerto Gravel extends
several miles to the west of the Ortiz Mine Grant and ranges in thickness from 0 to 30 m (100 ft)
thick. Post-Pleistocene erosion has cut numerous arroyos into the Tuerto Gravel, resulting in thegravel-capped mesas prominent in the eastern and northern parts of the Ortiz Mine Grant.
The age of the Tuerto Gravel is deduced from field relations and isotopic dating
techniques. Spiegel and Baldwin (1963) suggested a correlation between the Ancha Formationand the Tuerto Gravel. Age dating of interfingering Cerros del Rio basalts (Bachman andMehnert, 1978) and overlying lower Bandelier pumice (J. Winick, 1999, unpublished NM
Geochronological Laboratory Internal Report, IR-78) indicates that the upper part of the Ancha
Formation is between 2.8 and 1.6 Ma old. Both units rest unconformably on older tilted Santa Fe
Group (Stearns, 1979).
QUATERNARY
Holocene alluvium, stream terraces, colluvium, fan deposits, and talus
Narrow bands of alluvium mark the area covered by water during seasonal runoff. Areas
downslope movement of sediment are underlain by colluvium. Terrace deposits flank important
drainages, such as Tuerto Arroyo, Arroyo de la Joya, Cunningham Gulch, and Cañamo Arroyo.
Small alluvial fans are present at the headwaters of small tributaries. Talus deposits are locallysignificant at higher elevations of the Ortiz Mountains.

39

3

IGNEOUS ROCKSINTRUSIVE ROCKS

Intrusive rocks on the Ortiz Mine Grant can be divided into an early group, consisting ofquartz-bearing laccoliths and related sills and dikes, and a later group, consisting of quartz-poorand generally nepheline-normative stocks and dikes. These groupings are typical of the entire
Ortiz Porphyry Belt (Stearns, 1953; Disbrow and Stoll, 1957; Atkinson, 1961). Isotopic dating,detailed in a later section of this report, shows that the first group ranges from 33.3 to 36.2
million years old (Ma). The second group cuts the laccolithic rocks; its oldest age is therefore
constrained by the ages given for the laccoliths. Volcanics and a subvolcanic stock of thesecond group yield dates of 31.3 to 31.9 Ma. Base- and precious-metal mineralization occurs
with the latest stages of the second group of intrusive rocks, at approximately 31 Ma.
Previous workers in the Ortiz Mountains have divided the intrusive rocks into aphaniticporphyritic types and phaneritic types (McRae, 1958; Peterson, 1958; and Coles, 1991). Coles(1991) further divided the intrusives into early and late groups.
The following descriptions of the intrusive rocks from the Ortiz Mine Grant are takenfrom Coles (1991), and listed in order of decreasing age based on cross-cutting relations. Twohundred and one thin sections representing the various igneous phases were examined
petrographically by Coles (1991). Classification of the rocks is based on a QAPF modal
classification scheme for phaneritic rocks (Figures 3-1a and 3-1b) and on alkali-silica plots ofwhole-rock analytical samples including phaneritic and aphanitic to micro-phaneritic intrusives,
and those containing very fine-grained isotropic material in the groundmass. Whole-rockanalyses taken from Coles (1991) and Ogilvie (1908) are listed in Appendix I. Alkali-silica
plots are presented for samples considered fresh on the basis of Coles’ (1991) petrographic study(Figure 3-2). Using the criteria of MacDonald and Katsura (1965), the early group of intrusives
falls into the subalkaline field and the later group mostly lies in the alkaline field (Figure 3-3).

EARLY INTRUSIVES – CALC-ALKALINE GROUP
Quartz andesite porphyry (Tap)Andesite porphyry laccoliths, sills, and dikes constitute the oldest igneous rocks in the
Ortiz Mountains area (Peterson, 1958; McRae, 1958; Kay, 1986, and Coles, 1991). Isotopic age
determinations (K-Ar and 40Ar/39Ar) cluster in the range from 33.3 +/- 0.09 to 36.2 +/- 0.8 Ma(Mehnert and Bachman, 1979; Sauer, 1999; this study). Ogilvie (1908) and Keyes (1909) firstregarded all the intrusive rocks of the Ortiz and San Pedro Mountains as parts of laccolithic
masses (Figure 3-4). On the Ortiz Mine Grant, andesite porphyry occurs in 9 principal known
laccolithic bodies, plus numerous smaller sills and dikes (Figure 3-5 and 3-6). Andesite
porphyry forms laccoliths throughout the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. Andesite also occurs as dikes
parallel to the Golden Fault, a part of the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System.

40

Figure 3-1a. QAPF plot of aphanitic intrusive rocks, including porphyries, of the Ortiz Mountains.

41

Figure 3-1b. QAPF plot of phaneritic intrusive rocks of the Ortiz Mountains.

42

Figure 3-2. Total alkali-silica grid plot of intrusive rocks of the Ortiz Mountains.

43

Figure 3-3. Total alkali-silica diagram showing the line dividing the alkaline and subalkaline fields (MacDonald and Katsura, 1965). Modified
from Coles (1991).
44

Figure 3-4. Cross sections showing Keyes’ (1909) models of laccoliths in the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. Keyes envisaged
the igneous rocks of the San Pedro and Ortiz Mountains as monolithic laccolith complexes. a) Ortiz Mountains –Cerro Pelon. Note that the Cerro Pelon laccolith is shown connected to the mass of the Ortiz Mountains and that the
Ortiz Mountains laccolith is shown extending into the Hagan Basin, offset by a basin-bounding fault. b) San Pedro
Mountains.

45

Figure 3--5. Exposed laccoliths (orange) of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. Red indicates younger stock exposures. The
Ortiz Mine Grant is outlined in blue.

46

Phenocrysts make up an average of 46% of the andesite porphyry with plagioclase
dominating. Subhedral plagioclase phenocrysts (32%) are medium grained (1.4 mm average),and range in An content from 35 to 50%. Hornblende (12%) phenocrysts are euhedral, range
from fine to medium grained (0.6-1.1 mm), and are black in fresh specimens. Quartz
phenocrysts\ microphenocrysts average only 2% of the rock, and occur as groundmass to finegrained (0.1-1.0 mm), clear, highly resorbed crystals. Augite, generally the least abundantphenocrystic phase, constitutes from 0 to 2% of the rock. It occurs as both distinct euhedral tosubhedral, black phenocrysts\micro-phenocrysts (0.1-1.5 mm) and locally as cores to hornblende
phenocrysts (Coles, 1991).
Andesite porphyry ranges from greenish gray to grayish green on fresh surfaces (Figure3-6). Weathering produces surfaces that are olive drab to brownish green. Fractures inweathered rock locally contain coatings of iron and manganese oxide.
The microcrystalline groundmass makes up approximately 54% of the rock, withgroundmass plagioclase averaging 29%, orthoclase 18%, and quartz 7%. The groundmass
phases are anhedral and average 0.02 mm in size. Trace minerals include apatite and sphene,
which locally make up more than 1% of the rock. They occur as euhedral microphenocrysts
averaging 0.8 mm in size and as inclusions in hornblende. Allanite, zircon, and rutile occur as
accessory minerals that make up less than 1% of the rock.

47

a
c

Figure 3-6. Andesite porphyry. a) Road-cut exposure of andesite porphyry
sill on NM-14 on western flank of the Ortiz Mountains. b) Close up of
lower sill contact. c) Hand specimen of andesite porphyry, note porphyritic
texture and mafic inclusion in lower part of photo.

b

48

Lomas de la Bolsa Laccolith (Tap)
The Lomas de la Bolsa Laccolith comprises andesite porphyry masses that make up thebulk of Las Lomas de la Bolsa, the sills exposed on the western and south-central parts of the
Ortiz Mountains, and in drilling at Lukas and Carache Canyons. In the western and south central
Ortiz Mountains, the sills intrude Jurassic through Cretaceous sediments. Andesite porphyry
sills and dikes in the Paleocene Diamond Tail Formation in the Ortiz Graben and near theCunningham Hill Mine may represent the highest levels of the Lomas de la Bolsa Laccolith. In
the vicinity of Las Lomas de la Bolsa and the adjacent part of the Ortiz Mountains (where NM14 crosses the range at Stagecoach Canyon), andesite porphyry appears in map pattern to form alarge irregular intrusive mass. Large sections of the Jurassic-Cretaceous stratigraphic
succession are missing. In contrast, to the north and south, the andesite porphyry forms discreteconcordant bodies and the stratigraphic section is complete, though “inflated” by the intrusive
bodies. It is therefore inferred that the Stagecoach Canyon area is the central feeder zone of theLomas de la Bolsa laccolith.
Captain Davis Mountain Laccolith (Tap)A large faulted mass of andesite porphyry invading Cretaceous Mancos Shale lies
adjacent to the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System (TCFS) at Captain Davis Mountain and Lone
Mountain, to the east of the main mass of the Ortiz Mountains (this study; Lisenbee andMaynard, 2001). Faulting and the later intrusion of a granodiorite stock on the eastern end of
Captain Davis Mountain and an augite monzonite plug on Lone Mountain obscure the original
configuration of the andesite porphyry body in map pattern. Contacts of individual sills arecommonly observed to be parallel to bedding, especially on the south and east sides of Lone
Mountain. A central feeder system is likewise obscure, but may be inferred to lie along theTCFS, because of the greatest abundance of andesite porphyry in this area.
Cerro Chato, Madrid, Cedar Mountain and Juana López Laccoliths (Tap)Three separate concordant andesite porphyry laccoliths intrude Mesa Verde Groupsedimentary rocks and form prominent ridges, from the north flank of the Ortiz Mountains to thetown of Madrid (Figure 3-5). A fourth laccolith, the Juana López Laccolith, intrudes the lower
part of the Mancos Shale. No dikes or other feeder structures connecting the individual bodies
have been observed. Such connecting structures may exist at depth, or they may have beeneroded away. Johnson (1903) hypothesized that the laccoliths propagated from the Ortiz
Mountains. However, the greatest thickness of each of these bodies appears to lie some distanceaway from the Ortiz Mountains, suggesting that the centers of the laccoliths (or feeding structureof a Christmas-Tree laccolith) lay away from the Ortiz Mountains.
San Pedro Laccolith (Tap)
The San Pedro laccolith, as mapped by Atkinson (1961), Ferguson and Osburn (2000),
and Maynard (2000) is comprised of two concordant bodies of andesite porphyry in the westernpart of the San Pedro Mountains (Figure 3-5). Only one of the intrusive bodies is exposed. A
lower sill is suggested by the high position of Pennsylvanian Madera Formation in the San Pedro
Mountains with respect to Permian and Triassic strata exposed in Tuerto Arroyo to the north.
Smaller, irregular masses of andesite porphyry also crop out in the eastern part of the range.
Poorly exposed andesite porphyry intrudes Triassic strata in the valley between the San Pedro
Mountains and the Ortiz Mountains. The two principal sills of the San Pedro laccolith intrude49

limestone and shale of the Pennsylvanian Madera Formation and range in thickness from 0 to 60
m (0 to 200 ft). Strata and sills in the San Pedro Mountains are tilted to the east, except along thewestern flank of the range, where they are near horizontal (Atkinson, 1961; Ferguson and
Osburn, 2000; Maynard, 2000). Connecting feeder dikes between the sills have not been
identified, though poor exposures of andesite porphyry southwest of the village of Golden, along
a major strand of the TCFS, suggest a feeder there, with a “Christmas Tree”, or half-“Christmas
Tree” laccolith centered adjacent to the fault. The down-dip extent of the sills is not known.
Cerro Pelon Laccolith (Tap)
The Cerro Pelon Laccolith is exposed in the eastern-most part of the Ortiz Mine Grant.
Mapping by Lisenbee (1967), Bachman (1975), Lisenbee (2000), and Lisenbee and Maynard(2001), show the Cerro Pelon laccolith as a body separated from the Ortiz Mountains by the
Tijeras Cañoncito Fault System. The Cerro Pelon laccolith is comprised of a single 150 m- (500ft-) thick concordant body invading Cretaceous Mesa Verde Group (Lisenbee, 1967; Lisenbee
and Maynard, 2001; Lisenbee, 2000).
Tuerto Laccolith (Tap)Andesite porphyry intrudes mudstone of the Chinle Group in the region between the
Ortiz Mountains and Tuerto Arroyo in the south-central part of the Ortiz Mine Grant. Exposures
are poor in this area, however it is postulated that a sizeable laccolith may have developed in the
Triassic strata in this area.
Quartz-hornblende monzodiorite (Tqmd)
Quartz-hornblende monzodiorite crops out at Candelaria Mountain, in the southwesternpart of the Ortiz Mountains. This rock is weather-resistant and forms steep slopes and cliffs with
0.2 to 5.0 meter diameter blocks at the base. The rock generally is medium to light gray, andhornblende crystals impart a black speckled appearance on fresh surfaces. Weathered surfaces
are usually chalky gray to tannish brown, depending on the intensity of iron oxide staining. A
similar intrusion is mapped on the eastern side of Captain Davis Mountain (Lisenbee andMaynard, 2001). K-feldspar from a single sample from Candelaria Mountain yielded a 40Ar/39Ar
age of 31.1 Ma (this study).
The quartz-hornblende monzodiorite is commonly hypidiomorphic granular and rarely
porphyritic. Plagioclase (An39-An43), the dominant constituent (51%), occurs as subhedral toeuhedral, 0.8 mm crystals. Orthoclase (19%) is interstitial to the plagioclase and ferromagnesianminerals, as anhedral crystals that average 0.7 mm in their longest dimension. Hornblendeconstitutes 15% of the rock, is subhedral, averages 0.8 mm on its longest axis, and exhibits minor
alteration to biotite chlorite, epidote, and quartz. Augite is rare and like hornblende, it exhibits
minor alteration to biotite. Primary biotite is present as a minor constituent in two samples,
where it occurs as subhedral, 0.1 mm crystals. Quartz (13%) occurs as anhedral, 0.4 mmcrystals, interstitial to plagioclase and hornblende.
Accessory minerals include magnetite, apatite, sphene and rutile. Magnetite locallyconstitutes from 1 to 2% of the rock where it occurs as subhedral, 0.15 mm crystals. Other
accessories make up less that 1% of the rock and are typically euhedral.
The quartz hornblende monzodiorite forms roughly cylindrical stocks at both Candelaria
Mountain and Captain Davis Mountain. Cross-cutting relations indicate that the quartz
hornblende monzodiorite is younger than the andesite-porphyry laccoliths. However its
50relationship to the Tijeras Cañoncito Fault System and to the augite monzonite stock is notknown. Late trachyte dikes cut it, however.
LATE INTRUSIVES – ALKALINE GROUP
Augite monzonite, hornblende-augite monzodiorite, and hornblende monzonite (Tam)Augite monzonite, hornblende-augite monzodiorite, and hornblende monzonite form thethe core of the Ortiz Mountains and underlie its highest peaks. These rock types are grouped
together for the sake of mapping as augite monzonite. K-Ar and 40Ar/39Ar age determinations
range from 29.6 +/- 1.5 to 35.36 Ma. The age of the augite monzonite may be more tightly
constrained by its cutting 33.3 +/- 0.09 to 36.2 +/- 0.8 34 Ma quartz andesite porphyry laccoliths
and its being cut by the 31.1 to 31.91 Ma latite porphyry subvolcanic stock in Cunningham
Gulch.
On fresh surfaces the rock ranges from light gray to deep gray or black (Figure 3-7).
Locally, potassium feldspar imparts a pinkish tint to the rock. Weathered surfaces appear chalkygray white to tannish brown, depending on the presence and thickness of iron oxide stains.
Plagioclase (An32-An48) is usually the dominant phase in the augite monzonite, making
up 43% of the rock. It occurs as subhedral crystals that average 0.6 mm in length. Orthoclase(37%) is found in subequal amounts to plagioclase and locally exceeds plagioclase in abundance.
Orthoclase occurs as anhedral to subhedral, 0.6 mm, crystals that locally enclose plagioclase,
augite, and hornblende giving the rock a poikilitic fabric. Quartz was observed in two samples
as a trace mineral.
The presence or absence of nepheline is a subject of disagreement among the various
investigators that have studied the Ortiz Mountains. Nepheline was identified in the augite
monzonite by Ogilvie (1908). McRae (1958) confirmed Ogilvie’s observation, stating that somesamples in his study area, in the northern portion of the Ortiz Mountains, contain as much as
10% nepheline, was not seen in any of the study samples but it may have been reported as
clouded orthoclase and counted accordingly in the modes. Kay (1986) was unable to positively
identify the presence of nepheline in his study area near the old Ortiz Mine. Coles (1991) also
failed to identify nepheline in his study. Normative mineral calculations reported by Kay (1986)
and Coles (1990) show that the augite monzonite contains between two and ten weight percent
normative nepheline. It may be that modal nepheline occurs in discrete portions, or phases, ofthe augite monzonite, hornblende-augite monzodiorite, and hornblende monzonite stock. Kay(1986) focused most of his attention in the area around the Cunningham Hill Mine and Coles’(1990) samples came mainly from the central and southern part of the Ortiz Mountains.
Augite (8%) and hornblende (8%) are present in the Coles’ (1991) study sample in subequal amounts, with augite usually dominating. Subhedral augite is mantled by hornblende. In
Ig-90, augite is successively rimmed by common hornblende and a green to emerald green
pleochroic amphibole that may be arfvedsonite, but is too fine grained for accurate determinationof its optical properties. Hornblende appears in part to have grown at the expense of augite andaverages half the size (0.4 mm) of the augite crystals. Biotite occurs as a trace mineral that, likehornblende, grew as a replacement of augite.

51

aFigure 3-7. Examples of augite monzonite. a)
Outcrop of augite monzonite on Placer Peak trail.
Note sheeted fracturing. b) Hand specimen of
augite monzonite.

b

Biotite crystals are subhedral and are very small, averaging only 0.25 mm on their longest
axis. McRae (1958) reports that biotite constitutes from 0 to 9% of this rock type.
Magnetite is the most abundant accessory mineral making up 3% of the rock on average
and ranging from 2 to 4%. The 0.15 mm average diameter magnetite crystals are usuallysubhedral and in part appear to replace ferromagnesian minerals and sphene. Apatite, sphene,
zircon, rutile, and allanite occur as accessory minerals that make up less than 1% of the rock.
Hornblende-augite monzodiorite is very resistant and tends to form steep slopes andcliffs, locally with large boulders strewn at the base. On fresh surfaces, the rock is generally
gray to pale pink, with conspicuous black spots imparted by hornblende and augite. Weathering
tends to produce a tannish brown to pinkish color caused by iron oxide stains. Texturally, thehornblende-augite monzodiorite is hypidiomorphic granular. In hand sample, it is very similar toaugite monzonite from which it usually cannot be distinguished due to fine grain size.
Hornblende-augite monzodiorite, therefore, was not mapped separately from the augite
monzonite.
Plagioclase (An30-An40) is the most abundant constituent (55%) of the hornblende-augite
monzodiorite. It occurs as subhedral, 0.9 mm length crystals. Anhedral orthoclase (26%) occurs
as interstitial filling between earlier formed plagioclase and ferromagnesian minerals. Quartz
constitutes 3% of the rock and, like orthoclase, is a late stage, anhedral, interstitial filling. The
quartz crystals average 0.1 mm in their longest dimension. Augite (7%) occurs as subhedral toeuhedral crystals that average 0.5 mm in length. Hornblende (4%) occurs as subhedral crystals
that average 0.6 mm on their longest axis. Both augite and hornblende show minor alteration tobiotite, chlorite, epidote, and magnetite, that represents late-stage deuteric effects.
Magnetite, sphene, apatite, zircon, and rutile constitute the accessory minerals in thisrock. Magnetite (3%), the most abundant accessory mineral, occurs as subhedral 0.15 mm52

crystals that in part appear to replace ferromagnesian minerals and sphene. Sphene, apatite,
zircon, and rutile make up less than 1% of the rock.
Hornblende monzonite apparently is a phase of the augite monzonite (Maynard et al.,1989). It occurs southeast of a latite stock (Kay, 1986) and within the Ortiz graben (Maynard etal., 1989). Plagioclase and hornblende make up 40% and 15% of the hornblende monzonite,
respectively. These early phases are enclosed by later interstitial cloudy orthoclase that makes
up 30 % of the rock. Other phases that occur in minor amounts include augite (5%), biotite(3%), apatite (1.5%), sphene (1.5%), magnetite (2%), and epidote (2%) (Kay, 1986).
Kay (1986) reported a K-Ar date of 29.6 +/- 1.5 Ma for the hornblende monzonite and a
K-Ar date of 30.3 +/- 1.2 Ma for the quartz latite/latite stock, which intrudes the hornblendemonzonite. The overlapping data suggest that the intrusions are closely related temporally, as
well as spatially.
Quartz latite and latite porphyry (Tlp)
The quartz latite and younger latite porphyries occur in the upper part of Cunningham
Gulch in an elongate stock to the southwest of the Ortiz volcanic vent breccia and intrude themain augite monzonite stock (McRae, 1958; Kay, 1986). The rock types are grouped together on
the geologic map. Isotopic dates range for the quartz latite and latite porphyry range from 29.9+/- 1.2 to 35.1 +/- 1.4 Ma (Kay, 1986; this study). 40Ar/39Ar ages cluster in the range from 31.56
to 31.91 Ma (this study). Quartz latite is restricted to the southwestern end of the stock andforms the summit of Porphyry Hill. A small plug of latite porphyry also is present immediately
to the northwest of Carache Canyon (geologic map). Weathering produces light gray to tannish
brown iron oxide coatings on outcrops of both latites. Orthoclase phenocrysts are resistant toweathering relative to the groundmass and other phenocrysts, and stand out in relief on
weathered surfaces (Figure 3-8).

Figure 3-8. Sawed drill core of latite porphyry, Porphyry Hill - upper Cunningham Gulch.
53

The quartz latite samples studied from the Porphyry Hill-Cunningham Gulch area contain
38% plagioclase (An30 to An44) phenocrysts. They are subhedral to euhedral, average 1.5 mm insize, and most are sodic-andesines. Orthoclase phenocrysts make up 10% of the rock on
average, are subhedral, and average 3.0 mm in size. Ferromagnesian minerals make up
approximately 6% of the rock and include hornblende, pyroxene, and biotite. Hornblende occurs
as subhedral to euhedral, 0.8 mm phenocrysts. Pyroxene in OCN-10, 431’ was identified by
optical means as aegirine-augite but is too altered in other quartz latite samples to positively
identify. Aegirine-augite occurs as euhedral to subhedral microphenocrysts that average 0.4 mm
on their long axis and appears to predominate over hornblende. Biotite microphenocrysts (<1%)
are subhedral to euhedral and average 0.2 mm on their longest axis.
The aphanitic microgranular groundmass (46%) consists of orthoclase, which isestimated, to make up 39% of the rock and quartz that makes up about 7%. The groundmass
phases average 0.02 mm in size and are anhedral. Apatite and sphene occur as accessory
minerals that make up less than 1% of the rock. Both minerals occur as euhedral crystals andaverage 0.08 mm on their longest axis.
The latite usually has smaller phenocrysts than the quartz latite; otherwise, they appear
identical in hand specimen. Plagioclase phenocrysts (36%) are euhedral to subhedral andaverage 0.8 mm along their c-axes. Euhedral to subhedral orthoclase phenocrysts (12%) average
1/0 mm on their long axis. Augite, at Porphyry Hill, and aegirine-augite, at Rattlesnake Hill, arethe only ferromagnesian phases in the latite. They occur as euhedral to subhedral phenocrysts
that make up 6% of the rock and average 0.5 mm along the c-axis.
The aphanitic microgranular groundmass (46%) consists of orthoclase, which isestimated, to make up 39% of the rock and quartz that makes up about 7%. The groundmass
phases average 0.02 mm in size and are anhedral. Apatite and sphene occur as accessory
minerals that make up less than 1% of the rock. Both minerals occur as euhedral crystals andaverage 0.08 mm on their longest axis.

POST-VOLCANIC INTRUSIVES IN THE ORTIZ MOUNTAINS
Dikes of latitic to trachytic composition cut the volcanic vent breccia of Dolores Gulch
and are therefore considered post-volcanic. Similar dikes cutting the Carache Canyon collapse
breccia and the quartz monzodiorite stock at Candelaria Mountain are grouped with the postvolcanic intrusives on the basis of their similarity of chemistry and appearance.
Hornblende latite/trachyte porphyry (Thltp)
Hornblende latite/trachyte porphyry occurs as dikes parallel to the Tijeras-Cañoncito fault
system within the Carache Canyon area, and to the southwest in upper Buckeye Canyon. This
unit is more altered and more susceptible to weathering than other dike rocks at Carache Canyon
and does not form extensive outcrops. Weathered samples of the latite/trachyte are grayish green
and characterized by distinct light gray plagioclase phenocrysts and brown to brownish green
altered hornblende phenocrysts.
Phenocrysts make up 45% of the average latite/trachyte with plagioclase dominating at
29%. Plagioclase phenocrysts are sericitized, subhedral and average 1.3 mm along the c-axis.
Ferromagnesian mineral phenocrysts are the second most abundant phenocrystic phase
constituting 16% of the rock. Pseudomorphic evidence indicates that both amphibole and54

pyroxene were present, the amphibole having been dominant. These replaced phenocrysts
average 1.3 mm and consist entirely of secondary minerals. Biotite phenocrysts are present inseveral specimens (OC-40, 314.5’ and OC-53, 465.5’) and may have been ubiquitous before
alteration. The biotite averages 0.4 mm on its long axis and is subhedral to euhedral.
The groundmass has a weakly- to well developed trachytic to pilotaxitic texture andconsists of sanidine, minor plagioclase, and trace amounts of biotite and apatite. Groundmass
sanidine makes up 53% of the average latite\trachyte. It measures 0.06 mm on its c-axis, and issubhedral. Plagioclase makes up about 1% of the groundmass and crystals are much larger(0.3mm) than those of groundmass alkali feldspar. It may be closely related to the phenocrystal
plagioclase. Apatite, and zircon are the only accessory minerals. Apatite occurs as subhedral,
0.09 mm crystals within the sanidine groundmass, and zircon occurs as 0.01 mm crystals.
Porphyritic alkali feldspar trachyte and trachyte/latite porphyry (Ttlp)
Porphyritic alkali feldspar trachyte occurs as dikes that crosscut hornblende latite/trachyte
and the Carache Canyon breccia pipe. Like the hornblende latite/trachyte porphyry, the trachyte
dikes lie parallel to the Tijeras-Cañoncito fault system. The trachyte dikes weather toconspicuous positive relief relative to host sediments and andesitic porphyry sills (Figure 3-9).
The trachyte is light tannish brown on weathered surfaces due to iron staining. Liesegang bands
are prominent at some locations on the surface and in near-surface drill core, and apparently
reflect a weathering phenomenon.
Phenocrysts make up 7% of the trachyte on average, although many samples contain no
phenocrysts. Plagioclase phenocrysts (3%) are subhedral to euhedral, and average 1.2 mm along
their c-axis. Commonly, thin sanidine rinds rim the plagioclase phenocrysts. Locallyplagioclase cores sanidine phenocrysts. Sanidine phenocrysts (4%) are more euhedral than theplagioclase phenocrysts, average 1.5 mm along the c-axis and generally occur as
glomeroporphyritic arrays.
Groundmass sanidine constitutes approximately 87% of the rock, is euhedral, averages
0.3 mm on its long axis, and displays well-developed pilotaxitic to trachytic texture. Anhedral
alkali feldspar (probably sanidine) occurs interstitially to sanidine laths and represents the lastphase to crystallize. Altered ferromagnesian minerals and/or filled vesicles also occur
interstitially to the sanidine laths. These sites make up 5% of the average sample, average 0.1
mm in diameter, and are now occupied by sericite and/or carbonates. Euhedral apatite andanhedral quartz are present in some samples as trace minerals interstitial to sanidine laths.
Trachyte/latite dikes crosscut the quartz latite/latite stock and thus clearly are younger.
Texturally, these rocks closely resemble latite/trachyte in the stock at Rattlesnake Hill.
Plagioclase (An34-An37) phenocrysts constitute 25% of the Carache trachyte/latite porphyry
samples, are subhedral to euhedral and average 0.8 mm in length. Orthoclase phenocrysts (11%)
are euhedral to subhedral, average 3.5 mm in length and locally occur as glomerophenocrysts.
Exsolutions of albite-producing patchwork perthites are common. A phenocrystal
ferromagnesian mineral made up 5% of the rock, but has been removed by hydrothermal
alteration and weathering in all of the samples observed.
The groundmass consists of fine grained to aphanitic (0.08 mm) alkali feldspar thatappears to by orthoclase based on its optical properties. Groundmass texture ranges frommicrogranular to weakly pilotaxitic. Apatite (1%), the only accessory mineral, occurs as 0.07mm, euhedral crystals.

55

b)
a)
Figure 3-9. Sawed examples of porphyritic alkali feldspar trachyte, Carache Canyon. a) Surface sample with welldeveloped liesegang banding. b) core sample of unoxidized porphyritic alkali feldspar trachyte. Dark spots areblebs of pyrrhotite.

Porphyritic foid-bearing alkali feldspar trachyte
Porphyritic foid-bearing alkali feldspar trachyte was observed only in drill core at
Carache Canyon; its temporal relationship to other intrusives is unclear. It is fresher
than the other trachytes and is not sericitized suggesting that the foid-bearing alkali
feldspar trachyte is younger than altered trachytes and latites in the area. Volumetrically thisappears to be the least important of the Carache intrusives.
Small (0.4 mm) subhedral altered plagioclase phenocrysts make up 1% of the rock on
average. Euhedral sanidine phenocrysts make up 11% of the rock, occur in glomeroporphyritic
arrays, and are locally cored by plagioclase. Pseudomorphic gieseckite (probably after
nepheline) indicates that nepheline once constituted 2% of this rock on average. The nepheline
had occurred as (0.2 mm), euhedral microphenocrysts.
The groundmass is dominated by fine-grained (0.1 mm) euhedral to subhedral sanidine laths(78%) that have a prominent trachytic texture. Magnetite makes up 2% of the rock and is
responsible for the black color of the less altered samples. The magnetite is at least in partsecondary and tends to be euhedral. A ferromagnesian mineral (6%) was present as agroundmass phase; however, hydrothermal alteration has resulted in the complete replacement of
this mineral without leaving pseudomorphs. Small vugs (1%) interstitial to the groundmass
sanidine laths may have been vesicles. These vugs commonly are filled with secondary clays,
calcite, and fluorite.
Porphyritic quartz-bearing trachyte (Tqt)
Porphyritic quartz-bearing trachyte crops out as dikes in the southwest and western Ortiz
Mountains (geologic map). Outcrops commonly have strong positive relief, are brownish-tan
and locally display liesegang iron oxide banding due to weathering. Although crosscutting
relationships are not clear, this unit is considered to be temporally close to the other latite andtrachyte dikes in the Ortiz Mountains.
Phenocrysts make up 8% of the rock on average, and range from 3 to 14%. Plagioclase,
the most abundant phenocrystal phase (5%) occurs as euhedral to subhedral 0.7 mm crystals.
Euhedral, 0.7 mm, sanidine phenocrysts constitute 3% of the rock.
Sanidine is the most abundant groundmass phase, making up 77% of the average sample.
Groundmass plagioclase makes up 8% of the rock. Both plagioclase and sanidine arepilotaxitically to trachytically aligned, are subhedral to euhedral, and average 0.1 mm in their56

longest dimension. A ferromagnesian mineral (2%) occurred interstitially to the feldspars, but
has been weathered to goethite in all samples except Ig-96 where biotite is present as 0.05 mm
subhedral crystals. Magnetite makes up 1% of the rock; it occurs as euhedral, 0.05 mm crystals
interstitial to feldspars. Quartz (4%), the last phase to crystallize, occurs interstitially to thefeldspars, is anhedral, and averages 0.05 mm in diameter.
Tephriphonolite porphyry (Ttp)
Tephriphonolite porphyry occurs as a dike on the hillside northeast of Buckeye Canyon.
This unit is unique among the latite and trachyte suite dikes in not being hydrothermally altered,indicating it may be younger than the other alkaline dike rocks. However, it may merely havebeen shielded from the alteration that affected nearby trachyte and hornblende latite/trachyte
dikes.
Light gray, medium grained (1.2 mm), subhedral plagioclase phenocrysts make up 25%of the rock. Euhedral nepheline phenocrysts (2%) average 0.4 mm in diameter. The nepheline iscompletely altered, leaving only pseudohexagonal outlines filled with gieseckite and traces ofanalcime. Black, medium grained (1.1 mm), euhedral augite phenocrysts make up 15% of therock.
A weakly pilotaxitic groundmass constitutes 60% of the rock. Sanidine (33%) is themost abundant groundmass phase and its euhedral to subhedral crystals average 0.1 mm along
the c-axis. Second in abundance is biotite (12%), which occurs as 0.1 mm subhedral crystals.
An amphibole, probably hornblende (3%) occurs as 0.1 mm, subhedral, crystals. Late stageanhedral 0.05 mm analcime (10%) crystals occur interstitially to the groundmass feldspar andferromagnesian minerals. Magnetite crystals (2%) are anhedral to subhedral and average 0.07
mm in diameter. The magnetite is at least in part secondary in origin and locally exhibits
replacement of all the other phases. Very fine grained (0.01-0.1 mm) euhedral crystals of
apatite, rutile, allanite, and zircon occur as accessory minerals that make up less than 1% of therock.

RADIAL DIKES
Phonotephrite porphyry (Tpp)
Phonotephrite porphyry occurs as a dike at the extreme northeast corner of the Ortiz Mine
Grant. On fresh surfaces the phonotephrite porphyry is black, but a brown iron oxide stain coats
weathered surfaces.
Phenocrysts make up 33% of the rock, with plagioclase (An45) dominating. Euhedral, 1.0
mm average length, calcic-andesine phenocrysts make up 30 % of the rock. Augite phenocrysts(3%) are subhedral, and average 1.0 mm in length. The groundmass displays weakly tomoderately developed pilotaxitic texture and makes up 64% of the rock. Subhedral plagioclase
crystals (32%) average 0.1 mm in length and represent the dominant groundmass phase.
Groundmass augite (10%)occurs as subhedral crystals that average 0.08 mm in length.
Subhedral magnetite averages 0.05 mm in diameter and constitutes 4% of the rock. Biotite (3%)
occurs as subhedral crystals that average 0.05 mm in length. Alkali feldspar occurs as anhedral
fillings between groundmass plagioclase, augite and biotite. This feldspar constitutes 12% of therock and averages 0.03 mm in diameter. Apatite and rutile make up less than 1% of the rock andare euhedral.
57

Hornblende-porphyry monzonite (Thpm)
Hornblende-porphyry monzonite occurs as dikes in the southeastern part of the Ortiz
Mine Grant. In hand specimen it is dark purple-brown and aphanitic, with phenocrysts ofpyroxene and feldspar. Dikes to 7 m (23 ft) width stand as bold walls along much of theirlengths.

EXTRUSIVE ROCKS
Espinaso Formation (Te)The Oligocene Espinaso Formation is composed of volcanic breccias, pyroclastic flows,
tuffs, and reworked volcaniclastic sediments. The Espinaso Formation is present in two
principal exposures in the Hagan Basin and east of the Cerrillos Hills. In the Hagan Basin andeast of the Cerrillos Hills, the Espinaso Formation overlies the Galisteo Formation with agradational contact. It is overlain in the Hagan Basin by the Tano Formation of Connell (2001)of the Santa Fe Group. The unit has been interpreted as the product of volcanism in the Ortiz
Porphyry Belt, particularly in the Ortiz Mountains and in the Cerrillos Hills. Kautz and others(1981) reports K-Ar dates from the base, middle, and top of the Espinaso Formation in the Hagan
Basin of 34.3 +/- 0.8, 34.6 +/- 0.7, and 26.9 +/- 0.6 Ma, respectively. The first two dates
correspond to isotopic dates of the laccolithic rocks of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt, suggesting thatthey are their extrusive equivalent. Kautz and others’ (1981) third K-Ar date is from an olivine
basalt flow in sedimentary rocks in the lowest part of the Santa Fe Group. Connell (2001), in
redefining the stratigraphy of the Santa Fe Group in the Hagan Basin area, places the olivine
basalt flow in the lowest part of the Tano Formation. The 26.0 +/- 0.6 Ma age therefore
constrains the younger limit of the Espinaso Formation.
On the Ortiz Mine Grant, pyroclastic flow deposits of the Espinaso Formation are
exposed in two small areas. A faulted block of moderately dipping block-and-ash deposits is
exposed on the western side of the La Bajada Fault in the extreme northwestern part of the Grant.
The Grant covers a small portion of Espinaso Formation pyroclastic flows and volcaniclastic
sediments in its extreme northeastern part (Figure 3-10).

58

Figure 3-10. Outcrop of partially reworked pyroclastic flow deposit of the Espinaso Formation. Northeastern partof the Ortiz Mine Grant.

Volcanic vent of Dolores Gulch (Tv)
In the Ortiz Mountains, vent-facies volcanic rocks are preserved at Dolores Gulch,attesting to volcanic activity associated with the latter part of the second group of intrusive rocks.
Various investigators (Stearns, 1953a, Disbrow and Stoll, 1957, Kautz and others, 1981, andErskine and Smith, 1993) have noted compositional variations in the Espinaso volcanics
suggesting that earlier intrusives may have contributed to the volcanic pile.
Volcanic rocks underlie a roughly elliptical area 1900 x 900 m (6200 x 3000 ft) in
Dolores Gulch, in the eastern part of the Ortiz Mountains, immediately north of the Cunningham
Hill Mine. Most exposures of the volcanic rocks, such as in the upper pit walls of the
Cunningham Hill Mine, are a matrix-supported breccia composed of clasts of igneous andsedimentary rock in a tuffaceous matrix (Figure 3-11). Lithic clasts vary in size andcomposition. In some exposures the vent breccia may be described as a lithic tuff. Fine-grained,
water-lain sediments occur in the southeastern part of the vent breccia, suggesting a subsiding
basin. Along the northwestern margin of the vent breccia, clasts are predominantly augite
59monzonite. Along the southeastern margin, quartzite and other clasts of sedimentary origin
dominate.
Core drilling shows that the volcanic rocks are at least 330 m (1000 ft) thick and that the
body’s contacts with the surrounding rocks are near vertical. This observation, coupled with theunsorted nature of much of the volcanic breccia, the intrusive contacts with sandstone of the
Diamond Tail Formation, and the subvolcanic latite stock, lead to the interpretation of the
Dolores Gulch volcanics being a vent facies.
Kay (1986) reports a K-Ar date on hornblende from the Dolores Gulch volcanic vent of
34.2 +/- 1.4 Ma. This date seems too old, given that the volcanic vent clearly is younger than theandesite porphyry and the augite monzonite. Two 40Ar/39Ar isochron dates on K feldspar fromthe volcanic vent (this study) yielded ages of 31.31 and 31.48 Ma. These dates are consistent
with ages reported above for the subvolcanic quartz latite and latite porphyry stock.

a)
Figure 3-11. Field exposures of the Dolores Gulch
volcanic vent. a) Lithic tuff-breccia, upper Dolores
Gulch. b) Lithic tuff-breccia in wall of Cunningham
Hill mine. Yellow color from oxidation of pyrite.

b)

60

a

c

Figure 3-12. Schematic diagrams of the igneous succession of the Ortiz
Mine Grant. 31.3 – 31.9 Ma. Explanation on page 63. a) Pre-intrusive
Galisteo Basin, about 36 Ma. Early Tertiary movement on the Tijeras –Cañoncito Fault System controlled basin subsidence. b) 33.3 to 36 Ma
intrusions of quartz andesite porphyry laccoliths. May correspond toearliest stage of Espinaso volcanism. c) Major mid-Tertiary movement of
the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System and formation of the Ortiz Graben.

b

61

d

f

Figure 3-12 (continued). d) Intrusion of augite monzonite stock andcorresponding volcanism. Augite monzonite cuts laccoliths and the TijerasCañoncito Fault System, but is cut by the volcanic complex of Cunningham
Gulch and Dolores Gulch. e) Cunningham Gulch - Dolores Gulch volcanic
complex dated at 31.3 – 31.9 Ma. f) Intrusion of trachyte/latite dikes, formationof ore-hosting breccia, and subsequent mineralization. Best mineralization dateappears to be about 31 Ma.
Explanation on page 63.

e62

Figure 3-12 (continued). g) Modern erosion levelsg63

4 STRUCTURAL GEOLOGYTIJERAS-CAÑONCITO FAULT SYSTEMThe Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System (TCFS) has been traced from the Manzanita
Mountains, south of Albuquerque, to the Cañoncito area, east of Santa Fe (Figure 4-1). It
appears to connect to the Pecos-Picuris Fault in the Sangre de Cristo Mountain Range. The
structure as a whole maintains a relatively consistent N40E strike from Tijeras Canyon to thevillage of Golden. From Tuerto Arroyo to Cañoncito, the TCFS average strike is about N50E,
though the fault system shows more variability in this zone. On the Ortiz Mine Grant, the TCFS
has a general strike of about N60 E.

Figure 4-1. Tectonic setting of the Ortiz Mine Grant, showing the relationship of the Tijeras-Cañoncito
Fault System to major structures of the Rio Grande Rift.

64

The TCFS links the southern boundary of the Hagan reentrant of the Rio Grande Riftwith the southern boundary of the Española Basin of the Rio Grande Rift. Between these twozones, the fault crosses a structural high formed by the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. This section of the
TCFS lies in the Ortiz Mine Grant.
On the Ortiz Mine Grant, the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System (TCFS) is traced from justsouthwest of the village of Golden, across the southeastern part of the Ortiz Mountains and thenorthern flank of Captain Davis Mountain, to the eastern boundary of the Grant, just east of
Peach Spring (Figure 4-2). Lisenbee and others (1979) identified the TCFS as a regionallyextensive, deep-seated structure with Precambrian to recent recurrent movement. Chapin andCather (1982) postulated Laramide right-lateral movement on the TCFS. Fulp and others (1982),
Woodward (1984; and 1987, unpub. report), and Maynard (1995) described the relationship of
the TCFS to mineral deposits.
A subsiding Laramide basin has been invoked to explain southeastward thickening of
Diamond Tail and Galisteo Formation sediments (Stearns, 1943 and 1953; Gorham, 1979; andGorham and Ingersoll, 1979). Ingersoll and others (1990) suggested the TCFS acted as thesoutheastern boundary of the basin and was a control on the pattern of Paleogene sedimentation.
Cather (1992) postulated that during the Paleogene, the TCFS acted as a releasing bend in theright-lateral strike-slip system and controlled extensional subsidence in a half-graben to thenorthwest of the fault system. Abbott and others (1995) showed that although the TCFS did not
act as a boundary to Paleogene sedimentation, it exerted a control on the subsidence of the basin.
Northeast and southwest paleoflow indicators suggest the fault system’s control on
sedimentation patterns. Paleogene dip-slip on the fault system is constrained to the stratigraphic
thickness of the Diamond Tail and Galisteo Formations, or about 1300 m (4,300 ft).
In a summary paper on the on the TCFS, Abbott and others (2004) showed that minor
fault patterns are identical in Precambrian and Phanerozoic rocks, indicating that their formation
post-dates the younger rocks and suggesting no Precambrian history for the TCFS. Abbott andothers (in press) further concluded that the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System was reactivated as aleft-lateral strike-slip system during the transition between Laramide and Rio Grande rift-related
tectonic settings, around 32 Ma and that left-lateral movement on the TCFS south of Golden
continued into the Quaternary.
The Dakota Sandstone appears to be offset by about 8 km (5 mi) in a left-lateral sense
across the Ortiz Graben in the Ortiz Mountains. The true nature of displacement is uncertain.
Much of the apparent left-lateral separation across the TCFS in the Ortiz Mountains may be theresult of net down-to-the north movement, followed by the Miocene eastward tilting that affects
most of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. Alternatively, significant pre-tilting left-lateral movement
could have occurred, though it would not have been recorded by horizontal beds.

65

Figure 4-2. Tectonic elements of the Ortiz Mine Grant.

66

FAULT SEGMENTS
On the Ortiz Mine Grant the TCFS can be divided into four discrete segments. The
segments have distinct amounts and sense of separation. In this report they are listed fromsouthwest to northeast.
Little Tuerto Horst
Southwest of the intersection of NM-14 and Tuerto Arroyo, in the Little Tuerto Hills, theTCFS is manifested by a horst 760 m (2500 ft) wide cored by Precambrian metamorphic rocks.
Emerick (1948) named the northwestern bounding fault the Aranta Fault and the southeastern
fault the Golden Fault. The Aranta Fault juxtaposes Permian and Triassic sedimentary rocks
against Precambrian metamorphic rocks and Mississippian(?) and Pennsylvanian sedimentaryrocks. Steeply inclined to overturned limestone beds of the Pennsylvanian Madera Formation
mark the Golden Fault to the southwest of the eponymous village. A north-northeast plunging
anticline of Pennsylvanian Madera Formation limestone is exposed at the north end of the Little
Tuerto Hills. Mapping to the southwest by Ferguson and Osborne (2000) indicates that the highangle faults that bound the Little Tuerto horst are flower structures and therefore record both dipslip and strike-slip motion.
Tuerto Arroyo Zone
Complex faulting is implied, but faults are poorly exposed, in the area northeast of theintersection of NM-14 and Tuerto Arroyo. Jurassic and Cretaceous sedimentary rocks on thenorthwestern side of the fault were faulted against Permian and Triassic rocks on thesoutheastern side, indicating an overall north-side-down stratigraphic separation of greater than
600 m (2000 ft).
Ortiz Graben
About 2150 m (7000 ft) south of Lukas Canyon, the TCFS splits into two principal
strands that form a graben composed of several fault blocks. The fault blocks contain sandstoneand quartzite of the Diamond Tail Formation and lesser exposures of the Menefee Formation.
Both formations have been intruded by sills of andesite porphyry. Rocks preserved in the Ortiz
Graben form a northeast-trending series of hills along the southeastern margin of the Ortiz
Mountains (Figure 4-2). From cross-cutting relations, development of the Ortiz Graben postdated the formation of andesite-porphyry laccoliths, and predated intrusion of the augite
monzonite stock.
The Ortiz Graben’s northwest bounding fault, the Golden Fault, is vertical to subvertical.
For the section of the Golden Fault from Lukas Canyon to East Carache Canyon, Mancos Shaleand Mesa Verde Group are juxtaposed with Diamond Tail Formation for a stratigraphic
separation estimated at 760 m (2500 ft). Northeast of East Carache Canyon, the Golden Fault’s
trace is occupied by the Ortiz volcanic complex. The Golden Fault has not been traced along
strike northeast of Dolores Gulch. A north- striking fault north of Dolores Gulch suggests thatthe pre-volcanic Golden Fault had a 50-degree curve near the center of the present volcanic
vent. Several important mineral occurrences, prospects, and mines occur along or near theGolden Fault, including Lukas Canyon, Carache Canyon, Cunningham Gulch, and Cunningham
Hill.

67

The Buckeye Hill fault forms the southeast margin of the Ortiz Graben. Its dip has notbeen measured directly, but must be near vertical because of its straight trace across rugged
topography. From south of Lukas Canyon to Captain Davis Mountain, the Buckeye Hill fault
juxtaposes Triassic to Cretaceous rocks on the south side with Cretaceous to Paleocene rocks on
the north side, yielding a stratigraphic separation of approximately 1200 m (4000 ft). The
northwestern flank of Captain Davis Mountain contains multiple strands of the Buckeye Hill
Fault. Tuerto Gravel cover hinders estimation of stratigraphic separation on the Buckeye Hill
Fault from Captain Davis Mountain to Peach Spring. In the vicinity of Peach Spring, on theeastern side of the Ortiz Mine Grant, a latite dike intruded the fault. In the Peach Spring area, thefault’s vertical separation appears to have diminished considerably, faulting lower Galisteo
Formation against Diamond Tail Formation. The Buckeye Hill Fault can be considered to be theprincipal strand of the TCFS in the Ortiz segment. It is also cut by the augite monzonite stock inthe southeastern part of the Ortiz Mountains. Age dating of andesite porphyry sills and laccoliths(34 Ma), which are cut by the Buckeye Hill Fault, and the augite monzonite stock (32 Ma),
which is cut by the Buckeye Hill Fault, constrain the age of major mid-Tertiary movement to theperiod 32 – 34 Ma. Mineralization at the Iron Vein prospect and the Red Outcrop prospectoccurs along or adjacent to the Buckeye Hill Fault.
Captain Davis Mountain segment
The Buckeye Hill Fault can be traced from the northern flank of Captain Davis Mountainto just southeast of Peach Spring. Although concealed by Plio-Pleistocene Tuerto Gravel for
most of the length of the Captain Davis Mountain segment, the fault juxtaposes Cretaceous
sedimentary rocks and the mid-Tertiary Captain Davis Mountain laccolith on the southern sideagainst the early Tertiary Diamond Tail(?) and Galisteo Formations. Proximity to the fault’s
trace is interpreted from isolated, arroyo-bottom exposures of vertical beds of sandstone, shale,
and mudstone between Captain Davis Mountain and Peach Spring.
GUTIERREZ FAULTThe Gutierrez Fault forms the southeastern boundary of the Tijeras Syncline and Monte
Largo Horst southwest of the Ortiz Mine Grant. It has been traced to the northeast, to thenorthern extremity of South Mountain (Ferguson and others, 1999). Bedrock exposures in thesouthern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant, north of the San Pedro Mountains, are poor. Airborne
magnetic studies indicate a discontinuity that may correspond to the Gutierrez Fault in thesouthern portion of the Grant. In the vicinity of Oro Quay Peak in the eastern part of the San
Pedro Mountains, Permian and Triassic sedimentary rocks, and an augite monzonite stock areoffset along lies on projection of the Gutierrez Fault (Maynard, 2000; Ferguson and others,1999).

LA BAJADA FAULT
The La Bajada Fault forms the eastern boundary of the Santo Domingo sub-basin of the
Albuquerque Basin of the Rio Grande Rift (Figure 4-1). Segments of the La Bajada Fault are
separated by junctions of the La Bajada Fault with northeast-striking faults that occur within the
Santo Domingo sub-basin (Maynard and others, 2001). Along the La Bajada Fault, sedimentaryrocks of Eocene Galisteo Formation and Miocene Santa Fe Group, and volcanic rocks of
Oligocene Espinaso Formation are faulted against Mesozoic rocks. Quaternary activity on thenortheast-trending Tano Fault is indicated by about 20 m (70 ft) of offset of the Tuerto Gravel
68

just north of the northwest corner of the Ortiz Mine Grant. In the southwestern part of the
Madrid 7.5-quadrangle, just north of northwestern-most portion of the Ortiz Mine Grant theTuerto Gravel is offset by about 12 m (40 ft) along the La Bajada Fault. This is the clearest
indication of Quaternary movement on the La Bajada Fault. In the extreme south part of thequadrangle and on the adjoining Golden 7.5-minute quadrangle, offset of the Tuerto Gravel is
not clear.
The La Bajada Fault appears to curve to the west and link with a northeast-trending fault
in Tuerto Arroyo in the eastern part of the Hagan quadrangle. Steeply dipping Espinaso
Formation volcaniclastic sediments and Galisteo Formation sediments lie between strands of the
La Bajada Fault in the northwestern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant (Figure 4A).
In Tuerto Arroyo, continuous bedrock exposure between the Little Tuerto Horst and the
La Bajada Fault shows occasional minor faults and a broad flexure of the exposed Triassic
sedimentary rocks. The structural continuity of the Tuerto Arroyo section with Triassic rocks
along the western flank of the Ortiz Mountains indicates that there is no major fault connecting
the La Bajada Fault of the northwestern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant with the TCFS.

QUATERNARY SEISMIC ACTIVITY
Quaternary movement on the TCFS has been identified in Tijeras Canyon (Connolly,
1979; Lisenbee and others, 1979) and south of Golden (Abbott and Goodwin, 1995; and Kelson
and others (1998, 1999). No Quaternary movement has been demonstrated along the TCFS
north of Golden on the Ortiz Mine Grant (Koehler and Kelson, 2000). The La Bajada Fault andthe Tano Fault both show post-Tuerto Gravel movement in the northwestern part of the Ortiz
Mine Grant. Studies of stream terraces along Galisteo Creek suggest mid- to late-Pleistocene
offset by the La Bajada Fault (Maynard and others, 2001). Quaternary movement on the TCFS
south of Golden and on the La Bajada Fault indicates continued deformation of the Santo
Domingo Basin – Hagan Reentrant.

69

5

ECONOMIC GEOLOGYMETALLOGENIC ASSOCIATIONNorth and McLemore (1986 and 1988) categorized the precious-metal deposits of New
Mexico using criteria of age, tectonic setting, deposit type, and major metals. According to theirscheme, the Old Placers, New Placers, and Cerrillos mining districts fall into the Great Plains
Margin type, along with the Red River and Elizabethtown-Baldy districts of northeastern New
Mexico, and the Gallinas, Jicarilla, White Oaks, Nogal, Orogrande, Chupadera, and Capitan
Mountain districts of Torrance, Lincoln, and Otero Counties (Figure 5-1). All of these districts
lie east of the Rio Grande Rift, near the margins of the Rocky Mountains or Basin and Range
provinces and the Great Plains. Mid-tertiary alkalic rocks are found in each of the districts,
except for those of Eocene age at Orogrande. Compared to other deposit types in New Mexico,
precious metals are abundant relative to base metals in the Great Plains Margin types. North andMcLemore (1988) note that Great Plains Margin type deposits account for about 1 million
ounces of gold statewide (including placer production).

Figure 5-1. Great Plains Margin precious-metal districts of New Mexico, modified after North and McLemore(1988).

70

Mutschler and others (1988) reviewed precious-metal deposits related to alkaline rocks in
the North American Cordillera. In the southern Rocky Mountains, these deposits typically occur
east of the Rio Grande Rift and in some cases are concentrated along ancient linear crustal flaws
such as the Colorado Mineral Belt. Precious-metal mineralization associated with alkaline rocks
is found in the Front Range, Cripple Creek, and Rosita Hills districts of Colorado; Ortiz and
Lincoln County Porphyry Belts of New Mexico; and the Trans-Pecos igneous province of west
Texas.

MINERALIZATION IN THE ORTIZ PORPHYRY BELT
Metallic mineralization in the Ortiz Porphyry Belt occurs in the San Pedro Mountains, theOrtiz Mountains, and the Cerrillos Hills. In all three areas, metallic mineralization is spatiallyand genetically related to alkaline intrusive rocks that post-date the calc-alkaline laccoliths.
In the San Pedro Mountains, the most important mines and prospects are associated withbase-metal skarn developed in limestone of the Pennsylvanian Madera Formation at the San
Pedro, Carnahan, and Old Timer Mines (Yung and McCaffrey, 1903; Atkinson, 1961; Elston,1967). A skarn prospect is also found in limestone of the San Andres limestone in the easternpart of the San Pedro Mountains. The skarns have a spatial association with latite-porphyry
dikes and stocks that cross-cut the San Pedro andesite-porphyry laccolith. Skarns in the Madera
Formation lie 1,820 to 2,425 m (6,000 to 8,000 ft) southeast of the Golden Fault. Skarn in the
San Andres limestone is adjacent to the Gutierrez Fault strand of the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault
system (Atkinson, 1961; Maynard, 2000).
In the Cerrillos Hills, north-northeast- and northeast-striking lead-zinc-silver veins occur
in two clusters and post-date porphyry copper-gold mineralization (Stearns, 1953; Disbrow andStoll, 1956; Wargo, 1962; Bachman, 1975; Giles, 1991; Maynard and others, 2001). The
preferred direction of faults and veins in the Cerrillos Hills, like the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault
System, may be inherited from zones of basement weakness.

MINES AND PROSPECTS OF THE ORTIZ MINE GRANT
Gold, tungsten, and base-metal mineralization on the Ortiz Mine Grant falls into fivegroups: breccias, skarns, veins, porphyry-related stockworks, and placers (Tables 5-1, 5–2, 5–3,
5-4). Field relations, isotopic dating, and fluid inclusion studies indicate that the different lodemineralization types share a common origin. With the exception of the Lone Mountain copper
skarn prospect and Crooked Canyon porphyry copper-gold prospect, all known metallic
mineralization on the Ortiz Mine Grant lies in close proximity to strands of the Tijeras-Cañoncito
Fault System (TCFS) (Figure 5-2). Alkaline intrusive rocks associated with the Ortiz volcanic
complex were emplaced along the Golden Fault. Breccias, fractures, and stockworks associatedwith the volcanic and intrusive activity served as important hosts of mineralization. Skarns
developed in calcareous units, in proximity to granodiorite bodies also intruded along the TCFS.
Lode mineralization in the Ortiz Mountains was emplaced about 30 Ma. Placer gold deposits arefound in the Plio-Pleistocene Tuerto gravel and in Quaternary stream alluvium.

71

Table 5-1. Ortiz Mine Grant breccia-associated prospects and mines.
Name

Cunningham Hill

Carache Canyon

Florencio

Type/
OriginBreccia formed along
contact of latite porphry
dike in quartzite andvolcanic breccia

Collapse breccia pipe, openspace fillings.
Adularia-sericite epithermal.

Breccia formed along contactof latite porphry dike inquartzite and volcanic breccia

MetalsAu (W)Au (Pb, Zn)

Au

Ore
Minerals

Native gold, scheelite

Native gold, sphalerite,
galena, chalcopyrite.

Native gold?

GangueMinerals

Pyrite, specular hematite

Arsenopyrite, pyrrhotite,
pyrite, calcite, manganosiderite, adularia, sericite.

Pyrite, hematite

Host rock(s)Eocene Diamond Tail
Formation,
Oligocene volcanic ventbreccia.

Oligocene andesite-porphyry
sills, Cretaceous Pt. Lookout
Sandstone, Menefee
Formation, and Mancos
Shale.

Quartzite derived from
Diamond Tail Formation

Structural
Setting

On margin of Dolores
volcanic vent, in Ortiz
Graben, hanging wall ofGolden Fault

Footwall of Golden Fault,
faults parallel to Golden Fault
control breccia pipe andmineralization

Northwest side of Dolores
volcanic vent, footwall ofGolden Fault

Resource

Production/
years

References

Mined reserves were
330,000 tr oz Au in
6 million st @0.055 oz/st.
With ~75% Au recovery,
250,000 tr. oz. of Au were
produced during 19791987. Ore graded about
0.05% WO3, thoughtungsten was not produced.
Kay (1985),
Maynard (1995)

1,169,000 tr. oz. gold in 16.7
million st @ 0.07 oz/st

60,000 tr. oz. Au in 3 million
st @ 0.02 oz/st Au

None

Minor

Coles (1990),
Schutz (1995)

Maynard (1995)

72

Table 5- 2. Ortiz Mine Grant skarn prospects.
Name

Lukas Canyon

Iron “Vein”

Lone MountainType/
OriginSkarn produced inlimestone adjacent to
intrusion of monzodiorite

Skarn developed in Todilto
Formation

Skarn produced in limestone
near intrusion of monzodiorite

MetalsAu, CuAu, FeAu, CuOre
Minerals

Native gold, chalcopyrite,
chalcocite, digenite,
covellite.

?

?

GangueMineralsAndradite garnet, diopside,
scapolite, chlorite,
actinolite, epidote, pyrite,
biotite, calcite.

Magnetite, hematite, garnet,
calcite, clay, gypsum, pyrite.

Pyroxene, epidote

Limestone and gypsum
lithotypes of the Todilto
Formation

Cretaceous Greenhorn
Limestone

Complex faulting and fracturing
in footwall of Buckeye Hill
Fault.

Northeast-trending faults,
parallel to TCFS in Lone
Mountain area.

Not determined

Not determined, small

Hostrock(s)

Structural
SettingResource

Cretaceous Greenhorn
Limestone, Graneros Shale,
and Carlile Shale Membersof the Mancos Shale; andOligocene andesiteporphyry sills and dikes
Footwall of Golden Fault,
mineralization occurs inmetamorphic halo of
granodiorite stock
180,000 tr oz Au in
6 million st @0.03 oz/st
0.13% Cu

Production/
years

Minor in 1930’s

Minor in 1930’s

None

References

Schroer (1994)
Martin (1991)
Griswold (1950)

Maynard (1995)
Maynard (1988)

Griswold (1950). Lisenbee andMaynard (2001)

73

Table 5-3. Ortiz Mine Grant vein mines and prospects.
Name

(old)
Ortiz Mine

EnglishShoshone

Benton Mine/
New Live Oak

Red Outcrop

Candelaria
Vein

Type/
OriginEpithermal
fissure vein

Epithermal
fissure vein

Fissure vein in
breccia

Hematite bodies
and veins in
Mancos Shale

Gold-bearing
calcite vein

MetalsAu

Au

Au

Au, FeAu

Ore
Minerals

Native gold

?

?

?

Native gold

GangueMinerals

Magnetite,
hematite?

?

hematite

CalciteHostrock(s)Augitemonzonite stock

Volcanic ventbreccia

Diamond Tail
Formation

Mancos Shale,
andesite
porphyry

Structural
Setting

North side of
Dolores
volcanic vent,footwall ofGolden Fault

North side of
Dolores
volcanic vent,footwall ofGolden Fault

On margin of
Dolores
volcanic vent, in
Ortiz Graben,hanging wall ofGolden Fault

Footwall of
Buckeye Hill
Fault

Carlile Shale
Member of
Mancos Shale
Footwall ofGolden Fault,
close to its
junction with
Buckeye Hill
Fault.

Resource

Not determined

Not determined,small

Not determined

Not determined,small

Not determined

Production/
years

Approx 20,000
oz Au
intermittently
from 1832 to
1940.

Small

Minor

None

Minor
production in
1930s

References

Griswold (1950)
Shorey (1935)

Griswold (1950)

Griswold (1950)

Gold Fields
Mining Corp
files (unpub)

Griswold (1950)
Griswold(1951a,b)

Table 5-4. Ortiz Mine Grant porphyry-related stockwork prospects.
Name
Crooked Canyon
Cunningham Gulch
Porphyry-copper and gold mineralization
Type/
Porphyry Au-Cu mineralization
around barren latite porphyry stock.
OriginStockwork veinlets.
Au, CuAu, Cu, Mo
Metals
Chalcopyrite
Tenorite,chalcopyrite
Ore Minerals
GangueMagnetite, pyrite
Magnetite, fluorite, molybdenite
Minerals
Augite monzonite, hornfels derived from Augite monzonite stock surrounding latite
Host rock(s)Carlile Shaleporphyry plug.
Embayment in augite monzonite stock,
Peripheral to barren latite-porphyry stock,
Structural
far removed from TCFS
footwall of Golden Fault
SettingResource

Not determined, low grade< 100,000 tr oz Au

Production/
years

None

None

References

Unpublished reports to LAC Minerals

Maynard (1995)
Coles (1990)
74

Figure 5-2. Map of the Ortiz Mine Grant, showing mines and prospects described in this report in relation
to major tectonic elements. For simplicity, laccoliths and sills are not shown.

75

BRECCIA-RELATED MINERALIZATIONCUNNINGHAM HILL MINE
Cunningham Hill lies on the eastern side of the Ortiz Mountains, between Cunningham
and Dolores Gulches. The Cunningham Hill Mine is referred to as the Ortiz Mine by authors
associated with the Gold Fields effort, e.g.: Lindqvist (1980), Wright, (1980), Springett (1980),
and Hickson (1981). In this report, the Cunningham Hill Mine refers to the Gold Fields
operation and the Ortiz Mine refers to the smaller underground vein deposit that was the original
lode discovery on the Grant.
Gold mineralization was known at Cunningham Hill in the mid-19th century (Raymond,
1870 and 1872). Raymond’s comments (Raymond, 1870) on Cunningham Hill illustrate thedifficulty early investigators had in describing what are now referred to a low-grade, bulkmineable deposits:
The difficulty in working the Cunningham as a quartz mine arises from its great size, andthe manner in which the rich rock is scattered through it, in bunches and seams which it requires
the eye of a Mexican to detect, and which cannot be extracted on a large scale by a regular system.
The huge, irregular excavation or quarry, known as the Cunningham mine, has resulted from the‘coyoting’ of the Mexicans to find and follow the rich rock. The width of the Cunningham
outcrop is 600 feet; and its course can be traced for several miles. That it is a true fissure, one canscarcely doubt after examining the nature of the vein-matter, which is in many places, of the‘country’, inclosed in a matrix of quartz. But the great dimensions of the fissure have prevented
the formation, near the surface, of a defined ‘pay-streak’ of rich rock. By sinking along thefootwall of the vein (which is a porphyry dike, while the hanging-wall is syenite) a narrower, moreconcentrated, and more regular vein-formation will doubtless be reached in depth. This is, atleast, in accordance with experience acquired in similar instances, in West-American practice.

Lindgren and others (1910) make no mention of mineralization in the breccia at
Cunningham Hill. Crane (1937), Perry and Moehlman (1938), and McKinnis (1938) described
potentially economic resources at Cunningham Hill. On the basis of churn drilling and fromsurface and underground sampling, C.T. Griswold (1950) calculated a resource at Cunningham
Hill of 2,450,824 tons grading 0.077 troy ounces of gold per short ton. During the early 1950’s
US government concerns over strategic metal resources focused attention on the Cunningham
Hill deposit for its tungsten content. Dale and McKinney (1959) quote a reserve calculation
made by G.R. Griswold in 1955 as 2,901,616 tons containing 0.0711 ounces/ton Au and 0.0683% WO3 (Table 5-5). Consolidated Gold Fields’ operation commenced during an historic run-up
in the price of gold (exceeding US$800 per ounce in February 1980). Gold Fields mined a totalof 6 million tons grading 0.055 ounces of gold per ton from 1979-1986 and recovered about 75% of the contained gold, or 250,000 troy ounces (G. Griswold, personal communication, 1995).
Gold Fields did not recover tungsten. Kay (1986) studied the geology of Cunningham Hill andthe surrounding area. Descriptions of mineralization, petrography, and fluid inclusions aretaken from Kay (1986). In this report, Cunningham Hill is re-evaluated in the light of new
interpretations of its stratigraphic and structural settings.

76

Table 5- 5. Summary of ore reserves at Cunningham Hill from G.R. Griswold report of 1955. Modified from Daleand McKinney (1959).
WeightCategory………………………….units
Oxide
SulfideTotal
average
grade
Overburden………….……………..short tons
165,777
Ore…………………………………short tons
1,024,629
1,876,987
2,901,616
Gold………………..…..ounces per short ton
0.07240.07040.0711
WO3………………………………….percent
0.05660.0746
0.0683
Gold………………………….…..troy ounces
74,180.71
132,211.89
206,392.6
WO3………………………………….pounds
1,159,880
2,949,665
4,109,545-

Geologic setting
Cunningham Hill lies in the Ortiz Graben, on the southeast margin of the Dolores Gulch
volcanic center. Diamond Tail Formation sedimentary rocks exposed at Cunningham Hill andin hills to the northeast of Cunningham Hill dip into the volcanic vent (diatreme), suggesting asagging of the sedimentary rocks into the volcanic center (geologic map and Figure 5-3). The
Golden fault, the northwestern bounding structure of the Ortiz Graben, is occupied by thefeldspar-porphyry latite of Porphyry Hill and Magnetic Hill, and the volcanic vent that they
intrude.

Figure 5-3. Panoramic view of the Cunningham Hill, looking northeast. Note beds dipping to the left (northwest).
Photo taken in fall of 1986.

A north-south striking, vertical fault crosses the open pit and juxtaposes volcanic ventbreccia on the west from quartzite on the east side (Cunningham Hill mine geologic map).
This fault appears to have been an important constraint on the distribution of mineralization andmay postdate mineralization.
Breccia developed in quartzite of the Paleocene Diamond Tail Formation forms theprincipal host of economic mineralization at the Cunningham Hill Mine. The quartzite is the77result of metamorphism of sandstone by fluids circulating from the adjacent volcanic andsubvolcanic complex. Previous workers, e.g.: Griswold (1950), Lindqvist (1980), and Kay(1986) assigned the quartzite (sandstone) to the Mesa Verde Group. Comparing the mine
exposures to descriptions from the Hagan Basin by Stearns (1943 and 1953c) and Picha (1982),
and to exposures and drill core at Carache Canyon, Maynard and others (1990) and Maynard(1995) assigned the quartzite (sandstone) of Cunningham Hill to the lower part of the Galisteo
Formation. The sandstone is now assigned to the Diamond Tail Formation, following theredefinition of Paleocene and Eocene rocks in the Hagan Basin by Lucas and others (1997).
Exposed in the open pit of the Cunningham Hill Mine is a section of quartzite and darkgray hornfels intruded locally by sills of andesite porphyry. The quartzite is medium to coarse
grained, with rare quartzite pebbles. On the northeast end of Cunningham Hill, black silicified
wood fragments occur as float. These wood fragments are typical of Diamond Tail exposuresthroughout the Ortiz Graben. The Diamond Tail Formation dips gently to the northwest,
possibly in response to collapse into the Dolores Gulch volcanic vent.
Mesa Verde Group rocks do not crop out in the immediate area of the Cunningham Hill
Mine. Because drill core samples from the Gold Fields program were destroyed, no reexamination was done. However, Gold Fields drill logs report coal (characteristic of theMenefee Formation) in deep drilling below the Cunningham Hill Mine. Menefee Formation
crops out 1500 m (5000 ft) to the northeast of the Cunningham Hill Mine. No economic
mineralization is reported in the Mesa Verde Group.
Andesite porphyry occurs as sills intruding the Diamond Tail Formation in the northeast
high wall of the Cunningham Hill Mine and on the southeast side of Cunningham Hill, as well as
in sills in the Diamond Tail Formation further removed from the open pit. The andesite
porphyry is not an important ore host, though it displays the effects of sericitization associatedwith mineralization.
Northeast-trending dikes of latite porphyry intrude the Diamond Tail Formation and thequartzite breccia. The principal dike presently exposed in the open pit ranges from 24 to 50 m
(80 ft to 160 ft) thick at the 6790’ to 6900’ levels, where it intrudes the remnants of themineralized breccia. The dike maintains a width of about 30 m (100 ft) thick to the top of thenortheast pit high wall. Latite porphyry dikes can be traced along the crest and flank ofCunningham Hill 450 m (1500 ft) to the northeast.

ab
Figure 5-4. Quartzite breccia, Cunningham Hill Mine. a) Note dark sulfide filling of open spaces between
quartzite clasts. b) Close up. Pale yellow mineral at blade tip is scheelite (CaWO 3).

78

The Cunningham Hill Mine lies on the southeast side of the volcanic vent breccia of
Dolores Gulch. The vent breccia is a body 1500 m by 900 m (5000 ft by 3000 ft) in plan of lithic
tuff, crystal tuff, volcaniclastic sediments, and volcanic breccia. Drilling near its eastern margins
indicate its thickness to be greater than 1000 feet. The contacts of the vent breccia with the
Diamond Tail Formation are mostly intrusive and fragments of Diamond Tail quartzite arecommonly found in the vent breccia near its contacts. Likewise, contacts of the vent brecciawith the augite monzonite are intrusive and fragments of augite monzonite are common in thearea of the contact within the vent breccia. The latite porphyry stock at Magnetic Hill, 1200 m(4000 ft) to the southwest of Cunningham Hill, appears to intrude the vent breccia.
Mineralization
Gold-tungsten mineralization at Cunnningham Hill is hosted by open-space breccia
mainly developed in quartzite and, to a lesser extent, in the Dolores Gulch vent breccia. The
breccia at Cunningham Hill contains clasts of quartzite, hornfels, latite porphyry, andesite
porphyry, and vent breccia. Clasts are subrounded to angular, and range from silt size to boulder
size. The breccia is clast supported. Fine rock flour, alteration clay, sulfide and oxide gangueminerals, and open space constitute the breccia matrix. Vugs constitute up to 20% of the rock.
Crystals of pyrite, magnetite, calcite, siderite, quartz, chalcopyrite, and scheelite commonly line
the vugs. Vuggy zones contain the highest concentrations of gold, up to 0.3 ounces per short ton.
Vugs are best developed in quartzite and are poorly developed in the volcanic vent breccia.
Open-space mineralized breccia remains exposed in the bottom of the Cunningham Hill pit,
intruded by a latite porphyry dike.
Prior to mining, the quartzite breccia at Cunningham Hill had a rounded triangular shapein plan view, and a steep southeasterly plunge. Its southern boundary followed a northeasterly
trend (Figures 5-5, 5-6, and 5-7).

Ore minerals
GoldGold occurs in fractures or small voids in pyrite and siderite in the breccia matrix. Goldgrains are usually less than 50 microns. The pyrite association dominates. In pyrite, the gold
commonly shares the fractures with tetradymite, gold (silver) tellurides and chalcopyrite. Goldin siderite commonly occurs near the host mineral’s boundaries with microcline or magnetite.
Small amounts of gold are occasionally found as inclusions or pore fillings inchalcopyrite as well (Gasparrini, 1984). The chalcopyrite-hosted gold is accompanied bybornite, gold telluride, or sulfosalt of copper, lead, and bismuth. Tiny amounts of gold occur as
inclusions in hematite, magnetite, and clay.
Telluride minerals
Gasparrini (1984) showed that gold-silver tellurides occur in small quantities at
Cunningham Hill. Studies of polished sections show calaverite (AuTe2) and petzite (Ag3AuTe2)
occurring in fractures in pyrite in association with chalcopyrite. Scanning electron microscopyshows tetradymite (Bi2Te2S) and tellurbismuth (Bi2Te3) also in pyrite fractures.

79Sphalerite, galena, chalcopyrite, bornite, and sulfosalts
At Cunningham Hill, sphalerite and galena occur always as inclusions in pyrite.
Chalcopyrite occurs as grains up to 2 mm in breccia cavities, as veinlet fillings with sphalerite,
and as fine fracture fillings within pyrite. Bornite replaces chalcopyrite to varying degrees.
Bornite is sometimes associated with a sulfosalt, tentatively identified as benjaminite(CuPbBi2S4).
Scheelite
Scheelite (CaWO3) occurs as light tan subhedral to euhedral crystals averaging 0.5 mm inopen spaces in the Cunningham Hill breccia. It usually is found on the margins of pyrite,
hematite, or magnetite. Tungsten was not recovered from the Cunningham Hill ore, though
resource calculations were made in the 1950’s (Table 6.3.1A; Dale and McKinney, 1959).
PyriteCoarse- and fine-grained pyrite commonly occurs at the Cunningham Hill Mine. The
coarse-grained pyrite dominates and forms aggregates of homogeneous grains that occupy open
spaces in the mineralized breccia. Fine-grained pyrite, which apparently predates mineralization,
occurs as disseminations in rocks within and outside of the mineralized breccia.

Figure 5-5. Geologic plans of 7000’, 6900’, and 6850’ levels, Cunningham Hill
Mine, showing gold grades in ounces per short ton.

80Figure 5-6. North-south cross section of Cunningham Hill ore body, prior to mining, showing
distribution of gold grade. Modified after Kay (1986).

81

Figure 5-7. Tungsten oxide (WO3) and copper distribution on the 6900’ level, Cunningham Hill Mine. (Note that“W” in upper figure should read “WO3”.) Modified after Kay (1986).
82

Gangue minerals
Magnetite – hematite
Magnetite and hematite occur as open-space fillings in the mineralized breccia. Hematite
forms bladed crystals up to 5 mm long. Magnetite commonly replaces the hematite and isintergrown with siderite.
RutilePrismatic to needle-like rutile crystals formed in open spaces on earlier-formed hematiteand magnetite and constitutes 1-2% of most of the samples in Kay’s study.
Carbonates
Siderite and calcite are the most common gangue minerals in the Cunningham Hill
breccia. Siderite dominates and is closely associated with scheelite, occurring as masses andsubhedral grains in the breccia matrix and as large euhedral crystals in veins. Small euhedral
crystals of calcite line vugs in the breccia.
QuartzQuartz as a gangue mineral is associated with calcite and sericite.
Sericite, kaolinite, and chlorite
Sericite is widespread at Cunningham Hill and is an alteration product mainly ofplagioclase and, to a lesser extent, of sanidine and orthoclase. Sericite commonly occurs withkaolinite and quartz. Kaolinite is concentrated at the northeastern end of the breccia body and ispresent in north-striking shear zones. Chlorite is very minor, and occurs in gouge zones outsideof the breccia body and in latite dikes.
Potassic feldspar
Fine-grained potassic feldspar occurs as filling of the breccia matrix.

Mineral Paragenesis
Kay (1986) proposed a tentative six-stage paragenetic sequence for mineralization at theCunningham Hill Mine and the surrounding area (Table 5-6, Figure 5-8). Late supergene
oxidation may be considered to be a seventh stage.

Fluid Inclusion Study
Kay (1986) studied fluid inclusions in fifteen samples from the Cunningham Hill Mine.
Table 5-7 contains a summary of Kay’s findings with regard to temperatures and salinities ofhydrothermal fluids.

83

Table 5-6. Paragenetic stages of mineralization at the Cunningham Hill Mine. After Kay (1986).
MineralsComments
Stage
I
Pyrite, magnetite
Barren pyrite in veins and disseminations
Sphalerite - chalcopyrite
Veinlets or infillings of microfractures in vein pyrite.
II+/-galena +/- pyrite
Unrelated to Cunningham Hill breccia.
+/-molybdenite
Fills open spaces of Cunningham Hill breccia andIIISpecular hematite
therefore post-dates it.
Magnetite – magnetite-siderite Replaces hematite at Cunningham Hill; forms matrix ofIVsiderite
intrusion breccias at Magnetic Hill
Coarse-grained pyrite
Early stage of gold deposition; accounts for about 10%
V+/- gold inclusionsof the gold at Cunningham Hill.
Deposition in fractures and voids. Principal stage ofGold +/- scheeliteVIgold and tungsten deposition. Voids filled with siderite,+/- chalcopyrite +/- tellurides
calcite, and rutile late in Stage VI. Sericitic alteration.
Partial oxidation of Cunningham Hill orebody. Minor
VII
Supergene oxidation
remobilization of gold.

Table 5-7. Summary of results of fluid inclusion study of Cunningham Hill Mine by Kay (1986).
Rock
Homogenization
Freezing
Mineral% NaClRemarkstype
T (oC)T (oC)
Quartzite

Quartz>40%

360 to 420-

Breccia
void fill

Siderite

10.9%

219 to 262; avg.:
240+/-15-5.7 to –8.2;
avg.:-7.4 +/-1.0

Breccia
void fill

Scheelite

Very high

324 to 445-50

Breccia
void fill

Calcite

<1%

225

?

Stage I or Stage II inparagenetic sequence.
No separate CO2 bubbles
observed. Stages V and VI inparagenetic sequence.
Stage VI in paragenetic
sequence. May have high CaClcontent.
Late in Stage VI.

84

Figure 5-8. Paragenetic diagram, Cunningham Hill Mine. From Kay (1986). Note association of gold withscheelite, coarse grained pyrite, and carbonates late in paragenetic sequence.

85

CUNNINGHAM HILL MINE AND PLANT OPERATIONThe Cunningham Hill mine produced 250,000 troy ounces of gold during the period
1979-1987. Mined reserves totaled 6 million short tons grading 0.055 oz/st. The cost of mine
construction was $12 - $13 million. The per-ounce operating cost in 1980 was about $116. With
the average price of gold of over $600 in that year, it was a highly profitable operation.
The Cunningham Hill Mine was Gold Fields Mining Corporation’s first mining operationin the United States. Although prospectors had recognized the mineralization at Cunningham
Hill more than a century earlier, the combination of low gold prices and inadequate technology
prevented its being exploited. Cyanide heap leaching had been used to extract gold from ores as
an auxiliary recovery method to milling in many gold-mining operations; however, theCunningham Hill operation was one of the first in the world to use cyanide heap leaching as its
sole method of recovering gold. Design and operation of the mine was considered state-of –theart at the time of its construction and initial years of operation. The traveling gantry method ofplacing ore on the leach pad and the on-off loading of ore were unique (McQuiston andShoemaker, 1981). During 1980, production from the Cunningham Hill Mine represented 4% of
the total gold produced that year in the United States, and it tripled New Mexico’s gold
production (Hickson, 1981). Since that time, numerous, much larger gold mines that operate
exclusively by means of heap leaching have been constructed. Although technology has
advanced considerably since 1980, the operation at the Cunningham Hill Mine represents amilestone in the development of cyanide heap-leaching of low-grade gold ores.
The following descriptions of the Cunningham Hill Mine are taken from McQuiston andShoemaker (1981), Rubio (1984), Springett (1980) and Hickson (1981). Figures 5-9 and 5-10
present flow sheets of the ore-processing operation.
Ore Estimation
Gold Fields utilized data from 74 core, churn, and hammer drill holes totaling 7,950.9 m(26,238 ft). About half of the drilling was represented by Gold Fields’ own core drilling. In
addition, 408 m (1,346 ft) of blasted tunnel rounds, as well as 210.6 m (695 ft) of slabbed tunnel
walls, were sampled and used for ore estimation. Variogram analysis of the different sample
types showed that the most representative (lowest nugget variances and relative standard
deviations) samples were the bulk tunnel round samples, whereas grab samples of tunnel rounds
and split-core samples were the least representative (with relative standard deviations greaterthan 50%). Open-hole drilling methods yielded dependable results, with variography indicatinga lack of down-hole contamination of samples (Springett, 1980).
Reserve estimates were initially made in 1976 using a plan-polygon method, a cross-sectional
method, and a rolling-mean method through a range of cut-off grades. The methods agreed
within 10% for tonnage and grade, though the rolling mean was consistently lower. In 1979 a
Kriging method was used to recalculate reserves on the basis of blocks corresponding toproposed benches (50 ft x 50 ft x 25 ft vertically, or about 5,000 short tons per block). Blockgrade estimation standard deviations for individual blocks ranged from 16.7% to greater than 50%. Blocks exceeding 50% standard deviation were not included in the reserve. Overall relative
standard deviation for the deposit grade estimate was 2% and overall relative standard deviation
for the deposit tonnage estimate was 3% (Springett, 1980). The Kriging study estimated about
6.8 million tonnes (7.5 million short tons) of ore at an average grade of 1.82 g/t Au (0.053 oz/st),with a strip ratio of 2:1.
86

Figure 5-9. Flowsheet of crushing procedure, Cunningham Hill Mine. Modified after McQuiston andShoemaker (1981).
87Figure 5-10. Flowsheet of leaching and gold recovery process, Cunningham Hill Mine. Modified after
McQuiston and Shoemaker (1981).
88Mining and Grade Control
Six million short tons grading 0.055 troy ounces of gold per short ton was removed fromthe Cunningham Hill open-pit mine from 1979 to 1986. Overburden, or waste rock, totaled
about 12 million short tons. The diameter of the final pit is 366 m (1200 ft) and its depth fromthe level of the primary crusher and main access road is approximately 190 m (625 ft). Waste
rock was removed to a dump area on the north and northwest sides of the pit. Ore was blasted
and taken to the primary crusher approximately 150 m (500 ft) east of the pit. Mine benches
were 7.6 m (25 ft) high. A daily average of 2,722 tonnes (3,000 short tons) of ore was taken fromthe pit to the primary crusher (Hickson, 1981; Rubio, 1984).
Crushing
Crushing was accomplished in two independent stages. The first stage consisted offeeding the run-of-mine material to a primary jaw crusher, which reduced the ore to a size of
approximately 140 mm (5 1/2 in). A conveyor carried this material to a 29,000 tonne (31,900
short ton) fine ore-storage pile. Ore was drawn as needed from the stockpile via feeders at thepile’s bottom and carried by conveyors to secondary and tertiary cone crushers (Figure 5-12).
The secondary cone crusher yielded 60% of the material passing 9.5 mm (3/8 in), which was sent
directly to the leach pad. Oversize of the secondary crusher was sent to a tertiary cone crusher,which finished the job of reducing the ore to the 9.5 mm (3/8 in) size required for leaching.
Crushed material was then conveyed to a traveling gantry, which loaded the ore onto the leachpad (Figures 5-11, 5-12). The entire crushing operation occupied an area 300 m x 45 m (1000 ft
x 150 ft), between the open pit and the leach pad (Hickson, 1981; Rubio, 1984).

Figure 5-11. Secondary crusher and gantry, Cunningham Hill Mine. Coarsely crushed ore was fed to the secondarycrusher from the primary crusher to the left of the photograph. Crushed ore was conveyed to the traveling gantry atright. Photograph taken in fall of 1986 by D. Irving.

Leaching and recovery of gold began in March 1980 and continued to 1987. In late 1986,
the last ore from Cunningham Hill was placed on the leach pad. A small amount of ore from theold Ortiz Mine that was stockpiled near its shaft was trucked to the crushing facility and spreadon the leach pad. The following description of the leaching and recovery of gold at theCunningham Hill Mine is taken from Hickson (1981), unless otherwise noted.

89

Figure 5-12. Oblique aerial view of the Gold Fields Cunningham Hill mine and plant in the early 1980s.
Photography and flying by Paul Logsdon. Photo from 1995 NM Geological Society Guidebook No 46.

Leaching
The leach slab was constructed of a lower 51 mm (2 in)-thick layer of impervious
hydraulic asphalt and an upper 127 mm (5 in)-thick layer of asphalt with an impervious rubber
membrane sandwiched in its middle. The slab was divided by 230 mm (9 in) curbs into eight 61
m (200 ft) by 49 m (160 ft) sections. Each section held a pile of 17,000 tonnes (18,750 shorttons) of ore. The pad was loaded so that the tops of the piles were contiguous, even though theirbases were separated by the curbs. The leach pad was constructed with a 4% slope.
Ore was loaded onto the sections by the traveling gantry. This eliminated the compaction(and reduced permeability) caused in some leaching operations by the use of heavy track- or
rubber tire-mounted equipment to spread ore. This use of a gantry to spread ore for leaching was
unique in the world in the early 1980s (McQuiston and Shoemaker, 1981).
Leaching was accomplished by the spraying a solution of sodium cyanide (NaCN) over
the top of the crushed ore piles. Concentration of NaCN ranged from 0.05 to 1.5 mg/l dependingon the sulfide content of the ore. Average NaCN content was 0.07%. pH was maintained at
10.2 +/- 1 by the use of lime additions to the solution. The solution was applied at a rate of
0.0018 l/m2 (0.005 gallons/ft2) by sprinklers similar to ordinary lawn sprinklers. As the solution
percolated through the pile, gold was leached from the ore as per the chemical equation 4Au +8NaCN + O2 + H2O = 4NaAu(CN)2 + 4NaOH. The gold-laden, or “pregnant” solution, thenflowed by gravity along the surface of the pad to a system of ditches built into the pad, which inturn carried the solution to a lined holding pond.

90Ore was subjected to cyanide leaching for an average of ten weeks, after which the piles
were washed with water for three days to rinse out remaining cyanide. The piles were drained
for another four-day period, then loaded onto trucks and taken to a tailings pile.

Gold Recovery
Adsorption - The pregnant solution was pumped into a series of five tower adsorption
tanks. Each tank measured 2.44 m (8 ft) in diameter by 1.83 m (6 ft) high and contained 1,360
kg (3,000 lbs) of activated carbon granules (burnt coconut shells). The pregnant solution flowed
upward through the carbon in each tank at a rate of 692 l/min per m2. As the solution passed
through the activated carbon, NaAu(CN)2 was adsorbed to its surface, and the concentration ofgold in the solution progressively dropped on its journey through the tanks. Solutions passed
through the adsorption tanks in 7 minutes. Pregnant solutions typically contained about 1.0 g/t(0.03 oz/st) Au as it entered the first tank. The “barren” solution, exiting the last tank, had a gold
concentration ranging from 0.14 to 0.34 g/t (0.004 to 0.010 oz/st). Thus, about 75% of the goldin the pregnant solution was adsorbed by the carbon. The barren solution was reused.
Desorption or “stripping” - Every two days the gold-laden carbon of the first tank wasremoved and the carbon of the each of the other tanks was advanced to the preceding tank.
Reactivated carbon was placed in the last tank. The removed carbon was placed in a 1.52 m (5ft)-diameter, 2.74 m (9 ft)-high desorption vessel. The laden carbon contained a minimum of
6850 g/tonne (200 oz/st) Au. In the desorption vessel, a caustic-cyanide “stripping solution”
containing 1% sodium hydroxide and 5% ethanol was filtered up through the carbon at about
87oC. This solution reversed the adsorption process and put the gold, and any silver present,
back into a cyanide solution. The desorption process took less than 24 hours. Heating thecarbon it in a kiln at 600oC reactivated it. After reactivation, the carbon was placed in the fifthadsorption tank.
Electroplating - The gold-laden solution produced in the desorption process was passed
through 316 stainless steel electrolytic cells. In these cells the gold was plated onto stainlesssteel wool cathodes measuring 685 mm x 585 mm x 76 mm (27 in x 23 in x 3 in). The loaded
cathodes loaded 600 to 2000 g Au (20 to 65 troy ounces).
Gold Fields did not melt the steel wool cathodes to produce dore bullion. Instead, theloaded steel wool cathodes became anodes in a second tank and gold and silver were
electroplated onto polished steel plate cathodes. The electroplated product was a foil generally
containing about 83% gold and 14% silver. The foil was scraped by hand from the platecathodes and shipped by armored courier to a precious metals refinery.

91

CARACHE CANYON
The Carache Canyon prospect lies in Carache Canyon, in the southern part of the Ortiz
Mountains (geologic map in pocket).
Exploration history
Gold mineralization at Carache Canyon has been the subject of exploration during several
phases in the 20th century. The earliest recorded exploration of lode mineralization at Carache
Canyon occurred during the 1930’s. Charles McGinnis sank a 30 to 40 foot-deep inclined shaft
during that time, with no recorded gold production (G. Griswold, personal communication,1986). Griswold (1950) suggested that a small monzonite stock in Carache Canyon (Tia Bonita
Canyon in his report) may be the source of gold for the Korache (Carache) placers. During the1970s, Conoco, Inc. drilled at Carache Canyon and identified gold mineralization associated witha breccia pipe.
LAC Minerals, U.S.A., Inc. and the Ortiz Project Joint Venture focused on Carache
Canyon and during the period 1983 – 1991. The key insight into gold mineralization at Carache
Canyon was made in 1986, when it was realized that gold mineralization was concentrated in
mid-Tertiary sills intruding the Cretaceous sedimentary rocks. The gently-dipping, tabular formof the mineralized hosts allowed for a significantly greater tonnage potential than the previously
conceived high-angle vein interpretation.
Drilling at Carache Canyon totaled 85,254.3 m (281,339 ft) in 376 holes and issummarized in Table 5- 8. An exploration decline was begun in 1990 for the purpose of gaining
underground access to mineralized rock for bulk sampling. The decline was halted at a total
length of 515 m (1700 ft), about 215 m (700 ft) short of mineralization in the #3 sill. LAC
Minerals and the Ortiz J.V. carried out detailed geologic investigations, including resource andreserve estimates and a prefeasibility mining study. The Ortiz Joint Venture announced a total
resource of 1,169,000 troy ounces of gold in 16.7 million short tons of mineralized rock at an
average grade of 0.07 troy ounces per short ton at Carache Canyon (Pegasus Mining
Corporation, Annual Report, 1991).
A decline in gold prices led to the decision to halt exploration and development activities
in 1993. LAC Minerals reclaimed all of the disturbed ground in the Carache Canyon project areaand sealed off the decline portal.

Geologic setting
Upper Cretaceous Mancos Shale and Mesa Verde Group sandstone and shale dip 25o to
35 northeast at Carache Canyon (Figure 5-13). Deep drilling in two holes at Carache Canyon
intersected lower parts of the Mancos Shale and possibly the Dakota and Jurassic Morrison
Formations at depths exceeding 600 m (2000 ft). However, detailed information is available
only for the upper parts of the Mancos Shale and Mesa Verde Group.
o92Figure 5-13. Carache Canyon geology. a) geologic map. Bold solid lines are cross section traces. The bold dashedline is the breccias pipe contact.

b) Geologic cross section 103E, facing northeast.
93c) Geologic cross section 112N, facing northwest (top); d) Geologic cross section 106N, facing northwest (bottom).
In cross sections, dashed lines represent brecciated, collapsed relict stratigraphy within the Carache Canyon breccia
pipe. Drill holes are labeled with “OC” prefixes at collars. Green represents Point Lookout Sandstoe. From Schutz(1995).
94

Quartzite and minor hornfels of the Paleocene Diamond Tail Formation are preserved in
the Ortiz Graben southeast of the Golden Fault.
Table 5-8. Summary of drilling in Carache Canyon. Includes drilling by Conoco, LAC Minerals, USA, Inc., andOrtiz Joint Venture. After Schutz (1991).
Exploration
Type of drillingNumber of holes
MetersFeet
Campaign
Pre 1989
Core
128
39,903.9
131,683
Conoco and LAC
Core
123,890.6
12,8391989
Ortiz JV
Reverse circulation
25
4,675.8
15,430
Core
21
5,373
17,731
1990
Reverse circulation
117
21,35370,465
Ortiz JV
Condemnation73
10,05833,193reverse circulation
TOTALS376
85,254.3
281,339

Seven andesite-porphyry sills intrude the Cretaceous sedimentary rocks at Carache
Canyon. The upper four sills’ relatively constant position in the mineralized area is depicted ina stratigraphic column in Figure 5-14. Although the sills are laterally continuous, they aremodified by local pinch-outs, structural dams, bifurcations, and dike-like advances acrossbedding planes. Andesite porphyry dikes, volumetrically less important than the sills, invaded
the Golden Fault and subsidiary structures (Figure 5-13). These dikes may originally have been
feeders for the sills. Andesite porphyry sills constitute the major host of gold mineralization
where they are fractured adjacent to the collapse breccia pipe. The andesite porphyry dike in theGolden Fault is also host to fracture-controlled mineralization.
Augite monzonite crops out in upper Cunningham Gulch 420 m (1,400 ft) northeast of
the center of the Carache Canyon breccia pipe. Sedimentary rocks converted to hornfels
produced by the augite monzonite have been intersected in deep parts of the breccia pipe.
Latite porphyry dikes with coarse euhedral feldspar phenocrysts are present along thenorthwest pipe margin. On the basis of compositional and textural similarities, the dikes
apparently emanated from the Cunningham Gulch porphyrytic quartz latite stock 2000 ft
northeast of the breccia pipe (Maynard, 1995). Latite porphyry dikes cut the breccia pipe and are
locally mineralized. Drill core evidence indicates the quartz latite plug is cut by trachyte dikes.
Trachyte dikes intruded fractures parallel to the Golden fault zone and locally cross-cut
the breccia pipe margin. The most prominent of these, informally termed the Great Wall dike,has a strike length of more than 1600 m (5300 ft) and ranges from 5 to 12 m (15 and 40 ft) wide.
It separates extensive sill-hosted gold mineralization southeast of the dike from limited sillhosted mineralization to the northwest. Drill core evidence indicates that trachyte dikes locallytruncate mineralization. However, the presence of mineralized trachyte dike breccias implies
that Carache Canyon gold deposition closely followed brecciation and is bracketed within thelate alkaline igneous episode.
The Golden Fault strand of the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System is the dominant structuralfeature of the Carache Canyon area and the Ortiz Mountains as a whole. Vertical stratigraphic
separation across the fault at Carache Canyon measures about 600 m (1000 ft). The Carache
Canyon breccia pipe is localized on a group of faults with lesser displacement that run parallel to95the Golden Fault. Fluids thought to be responsible for the development of the pipe are likely tohave exploited these faults, as discussed in the following section.

Figure 5-14. Stratigraphic section of the Carache Canyon prospect. Kmu = Upper Mancos shale is composed of
calcareous marine shale, Kpl = Point Lookout sandstone. Kmfl = lower Menefee Fm carbonaceous shale, siltstone,sandstone, and minor coal. Tap #1 - #4 = andesite porphyry sills.

96

Carache Canyon Breccia Pipe
As noted above and depicted in Figure 5-13, the Carache Canyon breccia pipe’s longaxis lies along a fault parallel to the Golden Fault. The following description of theconfiguration, composition, and internal structure of the pipe is quoted from Schutz (1995):
The Carache Canyon breccia pipe possesses textural characteristics similar to hypabyssal
breccia pipes defined by Baker et al(1986). It is tear-drop shaped in plan view, measuring 1900 ft
by 1000 ft, with the long dimension parallel to the Golden Fault. The pipe plunges 70 o to 80o SW,
has a distorted cylindrical cross-section shape and is present at drill depths greater than 3,255 ft.
An exceptionally large breccia megablock measuring 1,800 ft vertical by 600 ft horizontal
separated from the pipe margin and subsided 400 ft without significantly changing bedding
attitude. The megablock proved instrumental in identifying collapsed relict stratigraphy
throughout the pipe. Relict stratigraphy forms a “nested” series of attenuated andesite porphyry
sill and sedimentary rock breccias that collapsed 400-800 ft (Schutz and Nelsen, 1990).
The breccia pipe is typically clast-supported, consisting of angular to subangularfragments with gray to black rock flour matrix derived from comminuted sedimentary rocks. A
second clast-supported breccia event resulted in open-space fractures and matrix voids that crosscut primary black matrix breccia. Average matrix volume is 2-5% with a maximum of 10%.
Clast size is poorly to moderately sorted near the pipe and megablock margins, grading tomoderately sorted near the pipe center. Breccia clasts near the pipe margin average 0.5-5.0 ft andthose near the pipe center average 0.5 to 2.0 ft in diameter. Large blocks measuring 30 to 100 ft
long were commonly drilled near the pipe and megablock margins. Although mixed lithology
breccias are located along relict contacts and near the pipe center, they are relatively minor andappear dominated by downward transport.

Although the bulk of identified mineralization lies in fractured sills and sandstone on thepipe’s margins, significant mineralization was encountered in the pipe, especially in the area
between the “megablock” and the southwestern margin of the pipe, northwest of the Great Walldike (Schutz and Nelsen, 1990; Schutz, 1995).
An explanation of the origin of the breccia pipe must take into account the characteristics
described by Schutz as cited above. Most importantly, the removal of material and creation of avoid at the pipe’s bottom that would allow for as much as 250 to 300 m (800 to 1000 ft) of
collapse of a large volume of overlying rock must be considered. Schutz (1995) proposed thatcollapse was caused by the withdrawal of magma from a chamber underlying the pipe. Thispostulated withdrawal would have occurred during Dolores Gulch volcanism and emplacementof the latite porphyry and quartz-latite porphyry Cunningham Gulch stock. Coles (1990), citing
McCallum (1985), Sillitoe (1985), and Burnham, (1979, 1985), considered three models(dissolution, phreatic, and magmatic hydrothermal) to explain the collapse.
Coles’ (1990) dissolution model depends on dissolution of the gypsum (Tonque Arroyo)member of the Todilto Formation, and/or limestone of the San Andres and Madera Formations.
The Todilto gypsum is easily dissolved and dissolution breccias are noted in Todilto exposures inand near the Ortiz Mountains. However, the Todilto gypsum’s maximum thickness in the region
is about 34 m (110 ft); its removal would not be sufficient to account for the collapse observed.
The San Andres and Madera Formations are much lower in the stratigraphic section and are notknown to develop major caverns in the area. Moreover, the stratigraphic section below the
Dakota Formation is likely to be absent. Magnetic data suggest that the augite monzonite mayunderlie the Carache Canyon area at depths greater than 1000 m (3300 ft).

97

Coles (1990) considered that a phreatic model, in which magma encountering
groundwater, with a subsequent steam explosion, could have fluidized and ejected enoughmaterial through a surface vent to allow for the collapse observed. However, phreatic eruptions
are usually described in shallower environments.
The magmatic hydrothermal model proposed by Burnham (1979, 1985), and reviewed by
Sillitoe (1985), is favored by Coles (1990):
Burnham’s (1979, 1985) model is based on the release of energy during exsolution of anaqueous phase during second boiling, and subsequent decompression during the crystallization ofa hydrous magma at hypabyssal to shallow plutonic depths. Energy released during second
boiling fractures the overlying rocks, resulting in decompression of the magma. With
decompression, the fluids that have been exsolved expand and pressure quenching of a portion of
the magma results. With pressure quenching the magma’s remaining water is released. The
release of energy is concentrated along fractures producing breccia bodies. In the center of the
Carache prospect, fractures produced by second boiling may have reached a TCFS structure
occupied by andesite and latite/trachyte dikes. Following second boiling the decompressionalenergy released could be concentrated on this structurally weak zone to produce the pipe. This
structure could also explain the tear-drop shape in the upper portion of the pipe, as well as theorientation of dikes southwest of the pipe.
In order to account for the tremendous volume expansion required by interstitial voids(now filled with hydrothermal minerals) and the down-dropped brecciated relic stratigraphic
sequence, a large volume of material must have been removed from the pipe. Doming seems
unlikely to explain this volume increase, since sill-like bodies of breccia leading off the pipe are
not present and the host rocks do not dip away from the pipe. Probably, the interstitial space wascreated when the pipe reached the surface and much of the fine grained material was fluidized anderupted out the top. Exhaustion of the fluids responsible for the pipe formation would result incollapse, producing the down-dropped brecciated relic stratigraphic sequence.

The fluidizing event appears to have milled much of the sedimentary rock, mostly
Mancos Shale, to rock flour and injected it into the spaces created between larger clasts (Figure5-15). In addition, the black rock flour is injected into fractures in the pipes’ margins.

Figure 5-15. Black-matrix breccia in drill core. Clasts of altered andesite
porphyry and matrix of rock flour derived from Cretaceous black shale.

98The nearby movement of magma along shared, deep-seated structures is implied by the
Dolores Gulch volcanic vent breccia and the subvolcanic intrusion of Cunningham Gulch.
Withdrawal of magma during final stages of intrusion cannot be ruled out as a contributing
factor in the formation of the collapse breccia. Magmatic hydrothermal fluids known fromfluid inclusion studies were also present. Given the relatively small volume of hydrothermal
minerals in the pipe and the pipe’s size, it seems likely that mechanisms of magma withdrawal(Schutz, 1995) and hydrothermal activity (Coles, 1990) acted in concert to produce the collapse
breccia.
Open-space breccia (see preceding excerpt from Schutz (1995)) is found in the pipe’swall rocks and cross cuts the black matrix breccia. Further hydrothermal activity is likely to be
responsible for the second brecciation event, though secondary, small-scale collapse or settlingof the pipe may have played a role as well. Open-spaces are best developed in the morecompetent rock types, andesite porphyry sills, and sandstone. Open-space is poorly developed
in intervening shales of the Mancos Shale and Menefee Formation. Ore minerals are mostabundant and gold grades are highest in areas of well-developed open-space breccia.
Mineralization
Continuing hydrothermal activity resulted in the subsequent deposition of gangue andore minerals, and accompanying alteration of wall rocks. Minerals include native gold,
sphalerite, galena, pyrrhotite, arsenopyrite, pyrite, cassiterite, scheelite, and wolframite.
Native gold is the only mineral of economic importance at Carache Canyon. These minerals
fill open spaces or crackle breccia in the walls of the breccia pipe, particularly on its west andsouthwest sides, and open-space breccia within the pipe itself.
Paragenesis
On the basis of petrographic examination of polished and thin sections, and detailed corelogging, Coles (1990) described a five-stage mineral paragenesis for Carache Canyon (Figure 516). Schutz (1995) summarized Coles’s findings as follows:
Petrographic studies of Carache Canyon breccia and sill mineralization support apreliminary hypogene paragenetic interpretation, including an early gangue event (stage I)
followed by tungsten minerals (stage II), base metal sulfides (stage III), and native gold-carbonate
gangue-sulfide-iron oxides (stage IV) (Coles, 1990). Stage I gangue minerals coated open-spaced
fractures and voids with a thin veneer of quartz, adularia, tourmaline, and minor barite, chlorite,
sericite, and cassiterite. Deep breccia also contains abundant Stage I calcite and mariposite. StageII scheelite and wolframite veins are rare. Their paragenetic position is based on limited crosscutting mineral boundary relationships. Stage III minerals form the majority of open-spacefillings and consist largely of pyrrhotite with minor chalcopyrite, sphalerite and galena. Stage IV
minerals consist of marcasite, pyrite, magnetite, arsenopyrite, hematite, gold and gangue siderite,
ankerite, dolomite, and calcite. Mineralized fractures outside the pipe are typified by distinctly
zoned orange and green iron oxide selvages extending outward as much as three times the fracturevein width. Colorful oxide selvages are uncommon in the breccia pipe. Stage V supergene
minerals include hematite, goethite, digenite, covellite, malachite, and jarosite (Coles, 1990).

Hydrothermal alteration
Schutz (1995) summarized Carache Canyon alteration as follows:
Wall rock alteration is distributed in a broad zonal pattern relative to depth and openspace fracture and void frequency. Deep breccia (+1000 ft depth) igneous rock clasts weresilicified, sericitized and locally potassic altered. Sedimentary rock clasts were decarbonized and99

intensely silicified to pale brown and green hornfels. Deep breccia also contains a considerable
amount of matrix-infill calcite, siderite, mariposite, pyrrhotite, and chalcopyrite, compared toshallow breccia. Deep level alteration probably reflects contact metamorphism near the augite
monzonite stock, superimposed by hydrothermal alteration related to mineralization.
Shallow breccia alteration primarily developed in andesite porphyry and trachyte dikeclasts as intense sericitic replacement of plagioclase phenocrysts and groundmass. Sedimentaryrock fragments were not appreciably altered. Similar alteration occurred in sills outside the pipe,
where sericitic alteration intensity is directly correlated with fracture frequency. As fracture
frequency decreases outward from the pipe margin, alteration intensity in andesite porphyry sills
decreases from strong sericitic alteration to pervasive propylitic and local biotitic alteration (Coles,
1990). Cross-cutting relationships imply several sericitic alteration events occurred.
Coles (1990) concluded that pervasive propylitic and biotitic alteration was the firstalteration event, occurring within calc-alkaline sills and alkaline dikes. Intense pervasive sericitic
alteration closely linked to breccia pipe formation followed as the main alteration event. Lastly,minor silicic, sericitic, K-feldspar, clays, and carbonate alteration developed during gold
mineralization.

Fluid inclusions
Coles (1990) derived preliminary conclusions about the relationships of fluid chemistry
to alteration and mineral paragenesis from fluid inclusions from hypogene mineral stages I, II,
and IV. These conclusions are summarized by Schutz (1995):
Homogenization temperatures, trapping pressures, trapping temperatures, and salinity
data suggest early gangue mineral fluids were relatively hot (275->400oC), saline (25-46 wt%
eNaCl), and CO2-rich and show evidence of boiling with variable fluid inclusion liquid:vapor
ratios. Stage I and II fluids were interpreted as magmatic, occurring after breccia pipe formation
and after intense sericitic alteration.
The gold-bearing stage IV fluids were considerably cooler (160-250oC), less saline (10.412.1 wt% eNaCl), CO2-rich and also may have boiled. Stage IV fluids were of meteoric and/or
magmatic origin and evolved to lower pH and higher oxygen activity coincident with gold
deposition. These data imply that overall fluid conditions ranged between slightly acidic andslightly basic.

Coles (1990) classified Carache Canyon as an adularia-sericite epithermal gold deposit
and compared Carache Canyon and Cunningham Hill (Kay, 1986) fluid inclusion data (Table 59) concluding that gold-bearing fluids at both breccia pipes were chemically and thermallysimilar.
Gold Distribution
As previously stated, mineralization lies in open-space breccia around the southwestern
margin of the breccia pipe in relatively competent andesite porphyry sills and the Point Lookout
Sandstone, as well as in the adjacent southwestern portion of the pipe. Less competent Menefee
and Mancos shales did not allow well-developed open-space fractures and are therefore poorly
mineralized. Two geometrically different gold distributions correspond to mineralization outsideof and within the pipe.
Outside of the pipe, mineralization occurs in gently dipping, tabular, fractured,permeable sills and sandstone separated by impermeable barren Menefee Formation and Mancos
Formation shales (Figure 5-17). This type of mineralization constitutes the bulk of the known
and measured resource at Carache Canyon. The mineralized open-space breccia is often referred
to as crackle breccia because of its apparently random orientation. However, a superimposed
N35o-45oE fracture pattern is suggested by drilling in the extensively mineralized region100southeast of the Great Wall dike. Concentric fractures around the southwest pipe margin may
also control gold distribution (Schutz and Nelsen, 1990; Schutz, 1995).

Figure 5-16. Mineral paragenetic diagram of Carache Canyon, from Coles (1990).

101

Table 5- 9. Comparison of fluids from inclusions in various minerals of similar paragenesis from the Cunningham
Hill Mine and the Carache Canyon prospect. Th = degrees C, salinity = wt.% eNaCl; Para = paragenesis; Other =salts other than NaCl; VE = very early; E = early; L = late; VL = very late; H = high. From Kay (1986) and Coles(1990).
Cunningham Hill Mine
Carache Canyon
MineralPara
Th
Salinity
Other
Para
Th
SalinityOther
H CaCl2
Quartz
VE
>500
>40
VE
270>400
25-46
H MgCl2
H KCl
H CaCl2
H MgCl2,
SideriteL
219-262
10.9
L160-250
11CaCl2
H MgCl2
Calcite

VL

225

<1

ScheeliteVL

324-445>56

H CaCl2
H MgCl2

VL

175-220<1E

303-370

31-40

H

Mineralization within shallow portions of the pipe is distributed in collapsed, nearvertical, sill and sandstone, relict-stratigraphy breccias separated by weakly mineralized or
barren Menefee and Mancos shale breccia. Gold and sulfide mineralization is distributed
between the megablock and pipe margin and locally within megablock sills (Figure 5R) (Schutz,
1995).
A third style of mineralization occurs in andesite porphyry and hornfels breccia below the#4 sill breccia. Although details of deep breccia mineralization are scant due to limited drill
data, it is known that at increasing drill depths below 300 m (1000 ft), Mancos shale and siltstone
were progressively thermally metamorphosed to brittle hornfels, which gave the breccia matrix
greater competency. Open-space fractures were better developed and gold was distributed
among igneous- and sedimentary-fragment breccia matrix voids divergent from the relict
stratigraphy control seen in shallow breccia Schutz, 1995).
Nugget effect
At Carache Canyon, native gold commonly occurs as equant grains up to 5 mm (0.2 in).
The coarseness of the gold grains induced a significant nugget effect as quantified by metallicscreen fire-assay checks (Table 5-10). Large gold grains produce most of the assay variability,
compared with small (drill hole) sample sizes (Pitard, 1988, unpub. report for LAC Minerals,
USA, Inc.). Larger drill samples, taken in the reverse-circulation drilling campaign of 19901991, also failed to provide adequate sample size. Pitard’s (1988) study indicated that bulk
samples of mineralized rock were required to give adequate reproducibility to assays. A decline
was driven to collect statistically accurate bulk samples and evaluate fracture pattern
predictability. The decline advanced 515 m (1,700 ft) before it was idled in 1991.

102

Figure 5-17. Schematic cross section of mineralization at Carache Canyon. Red represents area favorable tomineralization. Kpl=Point Lookout sandstone, which is roughly 30 m (100ft) thick. Mineralization is concentrated
along margin of collapse breccia pipe, and in preferentially located in brittle lithologies such as sills and sandstone.
Note down-dropped “mega block” with preserved stratigraphy.

103

Table 5- 10. Gold assay variability in metallic screen fire assay checks (Met 1-5) of drill hole OC-11 intersection of#4 sill. Five separate homogeneous splits of each sample interval were analyzed. Results imply a nugget effectindicated by erratic check assay values. Values are troy ounces of gold per short ton. After Schutz (1995).
Sample
Met 1
Met 2
Met 3
Met 4
Met 5
Wt AvgInterval (ft)745-750
0.037
0.007
0.031
0.424
0.051
0.143
750-755
0.671
0.741
0.158
0.066
0.364
0.322
755-760
0.135
0.042
0.188
0.106
0.640
0.191
760-765
0.035
0.021
0.030
0.034
0.035
0.031
765-770
0.013
0.031
0.283
0.008
0.135
0.101
770-775
0.071
0.145
1.052
0.021
0.137
0.332
775-780
2.473
0.071
1.169
0.457
0.168
0.844
780-785
0.151
1.236
0.364
0.202
0.189
0.377
785-790
0.127
0.096
0.073
0.195
0.074
0.120
790-795
0.031
0.004
0.004
0.058
0.006
0.024
795-800
0.008
0.004
0.005
0.030
0.333
0.057
800-805
0.063
0.003
0.007
0.032
0.009
0.023
805-809
0.004
0.183
0.002
0.004
0.007
0.043
average
0.294
0.199
0.259
0.126
0.165
0.204

Resource Estimation
Mineral inventory totals 16.7 million short tons grading 0.070 oz/st at a cutoff grade of
0.020 oz/st, or 1.17 million ounces of gold (15.15 million tonnes grading 2.40 g/tonne gold or
36.34 tonnes of gold) for Carache Canyon (Pegasus Gold Corporation 1991 Annual Report).
Different methods used for resource calculation can be described as follows.
Plan Polygon Method
Mineralization was measured separately by the plan polygon method in sills #1, #2a, #2b,#3, and #4, and the Point Lookout sandstone. This method was used only on the mineralized
portions of the bodies that have a tabular and gently dipping geometry. Plan views of each body
were constructed on separate maps. Structural geologic boundaries, including the breccia pipe
margin, the edge of the megablock, the Great Wall trachyte dike, and major faults were plottedon the map. Midpoints of each drill intercept were plotted on the map. Polygons wereconstructed using perpendicular bisectors of lines between adjacent drill intercepts, with a 100 ft
maximum radius of influence for each drill intercept. Polygons did not overlap structural
boundaries.
Composite grade values for each polygon were derived from the arithmetic mean of all
one-assay-ton fire assays, duplicate check assays, and metallic screen assays for each sample. A
0.020 oz/ton Au cutoff was applied to composited samples. Composite grade was thencalculated as the sum of the products of sample thickness and grade divided by the intercept
thickness.
The product of the sine of the drilling angle and intercept thickness gave the vertical
thickness of the intercept. Vertical thickness multiplied by the polygonal area multiplied by the
tonnage factor (ranged from 12.36 ft3/ton to 13.75 ft3/ton) gave the polygon’s tonnage. Ounces
per polygon were computed by multiplying tons by grade. Total ounces are computed as thesum of ounces for all polygons.

104

Cross Sectional Method
The resource contained in the breccia pipe examined mineralization in 27 separate rockunits. Geologic boundaries, other than the boundary of the pipe itself, were not so easily defined
as in the plan polygon method. Polygon boundaries were constructed equidistant from adjacentmineralized intercepts or projected 100 ft on either side of the midpoint intercept.
Compositing was carried out in a fashion identical to that used in the plan polygon
method. Tonnage is the product of polygon area and section spacing (50 ft) divided by the
tonnage factor. Ounces per polygon were computed by multiplying tons by grade. Total ounces
are calculated as the sum of ounces for all polygons.

FLORENCIO PROSPECT
The Florencio Prospect lies on the northwestern side of the Dolores volcanic vent, about1200 m (4000 ft) north-northwest of the Cunningham Hill Mine. Florencio lies on the northeast
trend defined by the alignment of the old Ortiz Mine, and the English and Shoshone prospects.
The contact of the augite monzonite stock and the Dolores volcanic vent follows this contact.
Dikes of trachytic latite parallel this trend as well.
The Florencio mineralized breccia was determined by mapping and drilling to be anortheast-trending, tabular body of quartzite breccia (Figure 5-18). In outcrop, the breccia bodyextends 450 m (1500 ft) and is typically 30 to 60 m (100 to 200 ft) wide. Drilling indicates thatthe breccia dips steeply to the northwest in its southwestern portion and steeply to the southeast
in its northeastern part. In the northeastern part the breccia forms two separate bodies at thesurface. The breccia is a rotated-clast quartzite breccia developed at the contact of the Diamond
Tail Formation and underlying Mesa Verde Group with the volcanic vent breccia. Gas
explosions following magma crystallization are thought to have formed the breccia at Florencio,
as at Cunningham Hill (Kay, 1986).
There are no records of production or other activity at the Florencio prospect. Surface
assays rarely exceeded a value of $2 per short ton (0.06 oz Au/st) at $35/tr oz Au, but irregular
workings and an inclined shaft more than 100 ft deep suggested the presence of higher-grade
zones (Griswold, 1950). In the 1970s Gold Fields Mining Corporation cut a series of trenches
and drilled 3,630.4 m (11,980.2 ft) in 20 core holes at Florencio and determined the generalconfiguration of the mineralized body. In 1981 the company conducted an evaluation of nearsurface mineralization by drilling 2,757.6 m (9,100 ft) in ninety-one 33 m (110 ft) air-track
holes. Gold Fields’ preliminary estimate of the Florencio resource was 60,000 contained ouncesof gold in 2.7 million tonnes (3 million short tons) grading 0.02 ounces per short ton.

105

Figure 5-18. Geologic map of the Florencio prospect.

106

SKARNSLUKAS CANYON
The Lukas Canyon prospect lies in Lukas Canyon (Alpine Gulch) and the lower part ofMonte del Largo Canyon (Gold Leaf Gulch) in the southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains(geologic map in pocket). The prospect has been also known as Old Reliable or Pat Collins.
The Lukas Canyon prospect includes all gold-copper mineralization hosted by contactmetamorphic rocks developed in the Greenhorn limestone member of the Mancos Shale andadjacent rocks in the southwestern part of the Ortiz Mountains.
Gold and copper mineralization have been known from Lukas Canyon since at least
1900. (Keyes, 1909). Although no mention is made of the gold and copper mineralization in
Lukas Canyon by Townley (1968), it seems likely that prospecting activity took place at the timeof early mining at the Candelaria Mine, in the 1850s. Lindgren and others (1910) mention thatore from Lukas Canyon was treated at a 5-stamp mill in Tuerto Arroyo.
Lukas Canyon was known by the names of various small mines and prospects: Pat
Collins, Old Reliable, Gold Leaf, Lime Area, and Alpine. Three mining claims had been
excepted from the Ortiz Mine Grant in Lukas Canyon. These are known as the Black Prince, theIllinois, and the Ohio claims.
Investigation of the Lukas Canyon prospect in the late 1940s and early 1950s included
detailed sampling and churn drilling. Griswold (1950) reported that there might exist 2 million
tons of ore grading 0.08 ounces per ton gold and 0.3% copper.
Drilling conducted at Lukas Canyon from 1968 through 1990 is summarized on Table 511. As part of LAC and the Ortiz Joint Venture’s study, Schroer (1994) performed a master’s
thesis study of the Lukas Canyon mineralization. The following description of the geology ofLukas Canyon, particularly the sections on mineralogy and geochemistry, are summarized from
Schroer’s work.
Table 5-11. Summary of drilling at Lukas Canyon. From Martin (1991).
Number ofYears and company
Type of drilling
Metersholes
1968 Molycorp
Core
1
214.0
1972-73 Conoco
Core
14
1,278.9
1984-85 LAC MineralsCore32
1,701.7
Reverse circulation
60
3,478.8
1988 LAC Minerals
Core
2
361.5
Reverse circulation
415
24,191.7
1989-90 Ortiz JV
Core
23
872.3
Total Reverse Circulation
475
27,690.8
Total Core72
4,428.4
GRAND TOTAL DRILLING
547
32,119.2

Feet
702
4,196
5,583
11,4801,186
79,3692,862
90,84914,529105,378

Geologic setting
The Lukas Canyon prospect is hosted principally by skarn developed in the Greenhorn
Limestone Member of the Upper Cretaceous Mancos Shale (Figure 5-19). The underlying
Graneros Shale Member and the overlying Carlile Shale Member, as well as intrusive andesite
porphyry sills and dikes, also host skarn mineralization. At Lukas Canyon, the sedimentary107

rocks strike typically north to northeast and dip 25o to 35o to the east. The metamorphosed
Greenhorn Limestone forms a dip slope on the western side of Lukas Canyon.
Sills and dikes of andesite porphyry intruded the Mancos Shale in discontinuous bodies
of limited extent in the area of Lukas Canyon. The thick andesite porphyry sills of the Lomas dela Bolsa laccolith lie 1,500 to 2,000 meters to the north of Lukas Canyon.
A quartz-monzodiorite stock forms Candelaria Mountain, the prominent hill rising to anelevation of 7,912 feet (2412 m) on the east side of Lukas Canyon. The monzodiorite commonly
contains zones of magnetite veining and magnetite-matrix breccia and is ringed by an aureole ofstrongly metamorphosed rocks of the Mancos Shale.
With metamorphism, the Graneros Shale Member’s normal medium gray shale isconverted to a blue gray hornfels. The Greenhorn Limestone Member, composed of interbedded
limestones and calcareous shales, is metamorphosed to pyroxene-scapolite skarn interbeddedwith garnet tactite (Figure 5-20). The upper and lower portions of the skarn contain pyroxenescapolite with orbicule garnets and garnet seams. The Carlile shale is commonly
metamorphosed to a reddish-brown, green, and tan banded hornfels with garnet porphyroblasts(Figure 5-21).
Skarn at Lukas Canyon is exposed over 1.6 km of strike length of the outcrop of theGreenhorn limestone. The skarn grades into marble zones at its north and south ends. Strike isnortheast and it dips 7o-35o to the southeast in the southern two-thirds of its exposure. In thenorthern third it strikes northwest and dips 11o to the northeast. The two zones are separated by
the Gold Leaf fault. On the western side of Lukas Canyon the skarn forms a dip slope; on theeastern side of Lukas Canyon it is overlain by the hornfelsed Carlile shale member. Drill
information indicates that skarn of the Greenhorn limestone extends at least 2000 ft (610 m)
down dip to the east. Garnet tactite and pyroxene-scapolite skarn mimic the original
interbedding of limestone and shale, respectively, in the Greenhorn limestone. Thickness of theskarn averages 50 ft (15.3 m) and ranges from 23 to 60 ft (7.0 to 18.3 m), reflecting variation in
the original thickness of the Greenhorn limestone.
Skarn mineralogy and paragenesis
Prograde Alteration
The prograde exoskarn assemblage consists of garnet skarn (tactite) and pyroxenescapolite skarn. Garnet skarn (tactite) replaces limestone beds of the Greenhorn limestone andforms interbeds with pyroxene-scapolite skarn. By definition, garnet skarn contains at least 50%
garnet before retrograde alteration. Garnet dominates the assemblage, ranging from 50% to 99%
of the rock and averages 79%, with subordinate pyroxene and scapolite. Pyroxene is foundinterstitial to and as inclusions within garnet. Retrograde alteration attacked garnet skarn more
readily than it attacked pyroxene-scapolite skarn.
Pyroxene-scapolite skarn contains less than 50% garnet and replaces shale beds of theGreenhorn limestone. Pyroxene makes up from 1% to 50% of the rock and averages 19%.
Scapolite makes up 0% to 85% and averages 32%. Garnet ranges from 0 to 45% and averages
23% of the rock. The pyroxene-scapolite skarn is commonly granoblastic and displays bands ofpyroxene, scapolite and garnet. Garnet in particular forms bands and orbicular clots.

108

Figure 5-19. Geologic map of Lukas Canyon, showing outcrop distribution of Greenhorn Limestone member (brickpattern) and projection of gold values from 0.02 to 0.03 ounces/short ton (yellow) and more than 0.03 ounces/shortton (red).
109

Figure 5-20. Garnet skarn developed in Greenhorn limestone.

Garnet ranges from grossularite (Ca3Al2Si3O12) to andradite (Ca3(Fe+3,Ti)2Si3O12) and iszoned with isotropic cores; and iso- to anisotropic Fe3+ and Al3+ rims. Garnet replaces and hosts
inclusions of scapolite and pyroxene, though deep red garnet occurring in late prograde stages
overgrew earlier garnet and contains no inclusions of pyroxene or scapolite. Pyroxenes range
from diopside (CaMgSi2O6) to ferroan diopside and occur as equant grains ranging from 0.05
mm to 2.0 mm. Pyroxene replaces scapolite to a minor degree. Scapolites are usually the Narich variety dipyre and form prismatic sub- to euhedral interlocking crystals with a granoblastic
texture. In the prograde phase, scapolite and pyroxene precede garnet in the replacement of theGreenhorn limestone. Sphene and apatite are found as trace minerals but may comprise as much
as 1% of the rock each.
Prograde endoskarn is minor at Lukas Canyon and is found in andesite porphyry incontact with the Greenhorn skarn. Garnet, pyroxene, epidote, and chlorite are alteration productsof the endoskarn.
Retrograde Alteration
Retrograde alteration of skarn is associated with the cooling of the causative intrusive
body and the resulting influx of meteoric water. Meteoric water mixes with magmatic fluids
and temperatures drop below 460oC. Identified retrograde alteration minerals are actinolite,
plagioclase, quartz, adularia, allanite, epidote, prehnite, biotite, paragonite, chlorite, calcite,hematite, magnetite, pyrrhotite, marcasite, pyrite, chalcopyrite, sphalerite, and molybdenite.
Actinolite is common in the Lukas Canyon skarn and typically replaces pyroxene. It is
commonly replaced by supergene clay and limonite. Plagioclase is found in most of the skarn
body and replaces scapolite and garnet cores. Epidote replaces garnet, scapolite, and plagioclase
and forms halos around opaque minerals.

110

Supergene Alteration
Clay formed from skarn silicate minerals, formation of limonite, and secondary copper
sulfides, carbonates, and silicates constitute the suite of supergene minerals at Lukas Canyon.
Clay minerals include smectite and kaolinite. Copper sulfides chalcocite, digenite, and covellite
form replacements around hypogene sulfides, especially chalcopyrite and marcasite. Copper
carbonates and oxides, chrysocolla, malachite, and azurite occur with secondary copper sulfides
filling interstitial vugs. All visible gold studied occurs with supergene alteration. Although it
seems most likely that gold originally entered the system during the retrograde event with sulfide
minerals, no hypogene gold has been definitely identified. Copper and gold were redeposited at
the paleo-water table during supergene alteration.
Geochemistry
Apart from the increases in base metals and gold, the conversion of limestone to skarn
was accompanied by increases in Fe2O3, SiO2, TiO2, MnO, and P2O5 and a decrease in CaO(Schroer, 1994).
Resource estimation
Details of the resource estimate for Lukas Canyon are confidential but the methods used
are here described. The geologic resource was calculated using a plan polygon method similar tothat used for the mineralized sills at Carache Canyon. Resources were calculated for four rockunits: Graneros shale, Greenhorn limestone, Carlile shale, and andesite porphyry. The
Greenhorn limestone was found to contain nearly 90% of the contained gold.
The Ortiz Joint Venture calculated resources totaling 5.44 mt @ 1 g/t for 5.44 t Au
(million short tons grading 0.03 oz/st gold (180,000 oz gold) and 0.25% copper (15,000 shorttons copper)) with a strip ratio of 2.2:1 for Lukas Canyon.

IRON VEIN
A series of short adits and small prospect pits (Iron Vein, Italian workings, “O” workings,
and the Lost workings) lies along the outcrop of the Jurassic Todilto Formation on the southeast
side of the Ortiz Graben (geologic map in pocket). In this report, these workings are treatedunder the heading of the Iron Vein. The term “vein” is misapplied; mineralization is dominantlyof the skarn/replacement type. Since the Iron Vein prospect has a history of usage in reports on
the Ortiz Mountains, the use of the name is continued here. Although the earliest mention of theIron Vein is in Raymond’s 1860 report (Raymond refers to it as the Mammoth prospect), it
seems likely that Spanish and Mexican prospectors investigated the area prior to the American
occupation of New Mexico.
Investigation of the Iron Vein prospect consists of pits, trenches, and short adits that were
dug prior to 1950 (most likely during the 1930s), plane-table mapping and sampling of theworkings by Griswold in the early 1950s, and LAC’s mapping, drilling, and sampling during the
1980s. LAC drilled 1,316 ft (401.1m) in eleven core holes and 8,059 ft (2456.4m) in seventeen
reverse-circulation holes at the Iron Vein.

111

Geology
The geologic units present at the Iron Vein prospect include Triassic, Jurassic,
Cretaceous, and Paleocene sedimentary rocks, plus andesite porphyry and a latite stock. The
rocks are strongly deformed by faulting along the Buckeye Hill Fault and subsidiary structures(geologic map in pocket).
Triassic and Jurassic rocks lie in the footwall (south side) of the Buckeye Hill Fault.
Maroon mudstone of the Triassic Chinle Group, probably correlative with the Petrified Forest
Member, is commonly metamorphosed to a dark green hornfels in the area of the Iron Vein
prospect. Jurassic Entrada Formation sandstone is thin (less than 50 ft thick) in the Iron Veinarea, and is metamorphosed to quartzite. The Jurassic Todilto Formation is the most readily
identified formation in the Iron Vein area. The upper member, the Tonque Arroyo gypsum
member, is commonly brecciated and dissolved, and is probably tectonically thinned. Breccia in
the Tonque Arroyo member contains clasts of sandstone and mudstone probably derived fromthe overlying Morrison Formation, as well as clasts of andesite porphyry (Figure 5-21). The
Luciano Mesa limestone member is unaltered in some exposures, and converted to magnetitehematite-garnet skarn in others. Most mineralization at the Iron Vein is associated with the
Todilto Formation. Sandstone presumed to be of the Morrison Formation overlies the Todilto
Formation gypsum member.
Cretaceous and Paleocene rocks prevail in the Ortiz Graben, on the hanging- wall (northside) of the Buckeye Hill fault. Float of coal and carbonaceous shale, as well as carbonaceous
shale and sandstone intersected in drilling at the Iron Vein, are part of the Menefee Formation.
Coarse to locally pebbly quartzite forming the hills immediately north of the Iron Vein prospect
constitute the Diamond Tail Formation.

Figure 5-21. Breccia developed in Tonque Arroyo gypsum Mbr of Todilto Fm, Iron Vein prospect.

112

Mineralization
The Iron Vein prospect extends approximately 3040 m (10,000 ft) along the southern
margin of the Ortiz Graben. Mineralization is contained in three environments in the Iron Vein
prospect: 1) along the Buckeye Hill fault zone, 2) in massive pyrite veining in the contact zoneof a subsurface granodiorite body, and 3) in replacement and skarn of the gypsum and limestoneof the Todilto Formation.
Fractures that form the Buckeye Hill fault zone host gold mineralization, generally at
grades less than 0.01 opt, though one 5.0-ft drill intercept intersected 0.08 opt gold. The
Buckeye Hill fault zone may represent a substantial low-grade resource.
Massive pyrite occurs at the contact of a subsurface granodiorite body at its contact withthe gypsum member of the Todilto Formation. The granodiorite is probably responsible for anortheast-trending magnetic high detected in the airborne geophysical study and the thermal
metamorphism of most of the rocks in the Iron Vein area. Two drill intersections of the massive
pyrite were 45.0 ft of 0.055 opt gold and 20.0 ft of 0.076 opt gold (Figure 5-22)
Gold mineralization is developed intermittently in the gypsum and limestone of the
Todilto Formation. The highest grades come from hematite-magnetite skarn in the limestone
member.

Figure 5-22. Drill intercept map of central part of Iron Vein prospect.

113

LONE MOUNTAIN
Pyroxene-epidote skarn developed in the Greenhorn limestone member of the Mancos
Shale crops out on the south and west sides of Lone Mountain, about 45 m (150 ft) below its
summit, (Griswold, 1950; Lisenbee and others, 2001). Short tunnels were driven on themineralization, probably in the 1930s. Griswold (1950) reported that a single sample across 46
cm (18 in) of metamorphosed limestone assayed 0.04 oz/st Au.

114

VEIN MINERALIZATIONOLD ORTIZ (SANTO NIÑO) MINE
Location, history, and development
The Old Ortiz, or Santo Niño, Mine lies on the northwest side of the Dolores Gulch
volcanic vent, about 4300 ft (1300 m) west of the Cunningham Hill Mine. The Ortiz Mine is thesite of the first lode gold discovery in the Ortiz Mountains in 1828. The deposit was worked on asmall scale during the 1830s and again more intensively during the 1850s and 1860s, and 1890s.
Shorey (1948) stated that underground workings extended 400 ft (122m) along strike and 350
feet in depth. Although Gold Fields did not mine any new ore at the Ortiz Mine, the company
hauled a small tonnage of dump material to the leach pad for cyanide leaching, thus recovering asmall amount of gold from the Ortiz Mine.
Gold production records for the Ortiz Mine do not exist, though it can be estimated thatabout 20,000 troy ounces of gold was produced from the Ortiz Mine during the 19th century.
Geologic setting
The Ortiz vein strikes N28oE and dips 76o to the northwest and lies within the augite
monzonite, near and parallel to its contact with the Dolores Gulch volcanic vent breccia and thefeldspar-porphyry latite stock that intrudes it (geologic map in pocket, Figure 5-23). The vein
is oxidized to a depth of about 250 ft (76m) from the surface. Oxidized ore contained limonite,
calcite, quartz, and specular hematite. Unoxidized ore consisted of pyrite, quartz, lesser calcite,
minor chalcopyrite, minor galena, and magnetite. Underground sampling (Table 5-12) indicatesan average gold grade of the vein at the 350 ft level to be 0.53 ounce per ton (Shorey, 1948).
Assuming constant grade to the surface (no enrichment in the oxide zone) and leaving about 50%of the vein material as pillars, it can be estimated that about 20,000 troy ounce of gold was
produced prior to Shorey’s study.

115

Table 5-12. Gold values of samples from 350’ level, Old Ortiz Mine. Locations of samples shown in Figure 5Ya.
From Shorey, 1936.
Sample Widthoz/stLocationNo.
(inches)
1
27
0.02
North breast
2
30
0.01
In back 10 ft south of no. breast
3
41
0.04
“
20 ft
“
4
46
0.03
In bottom 38 ft south of no. breast
5
29
0.01
“
49 ft
“
6
42
0.01
In back of raise above No. 5
7
42
0.02
“ 59 ft so. of no. breast
8
24
0.18
“ 68 ft so. of no. breast
9
46
0.01
“ 79 ft so. of no. breast
10
30
1.20
11 ft. above back 92 ft south of no. breast
11
35
0.11
In back 5 ft south from br. northeast split
12
37
0.22
In back 19 ft south from br. northeast split
13
41
3.92
In bottom 107 ft. south of no. breast
14
46
2.91
In bottom 121 ft. south of no. breast
15
26
0.29
In back 143 ft. south of north breast
16
38
0.01
In back 151 ft. south of north breast
17
62
0.02
In back 162 ft. south of north breast
18
28
0.11
In back 177 ft. south of north breast
19
67
0.02
In back 186 ft. south of north breast
20
53
0.07
In back 201 ft. south of north breast
21
54
3.29
In back 213 ft. south of north breast
22
33
0.12
In back 221 ft. south of north breast
23
30
0.02
4 ft above back 233 ft south of north breast
24
52
0.10
In back 243 ft so. of no. breast
25
55
0.20
In bottom 254 ft so. of no. breast
26
40
0.13
In bottom 270 ft so. of no. breast
27
92
1.03
In back 292 ft so. of no. breast
28
53
0.10
In back 305 ft. so. of no. breast
29
61
0.08
In back 320 ft. so. of no. breast
30
58
0.03
In back 332 ft. so. of no. breast
31
67
0.12
In back 342 ft. so. of no. breast
32
54
0.02
In south breast
33
10 ft
0.01
Along hanging wall between #14 and #15
34
85
0.01
Along back10 ft so of shaft
35
29
0.04
Along back 20 ft so. of shaft on west split
Along back 20 ft so. of shaft on east split
36
48
0.02
Note: 31 in of dead rock between #35 and #36
37
44
0.16
In back 26 ft. so. of shaft
38
104
0.05
In back 40 ft. so. of shaft
39
54
0.02
In back 51 ft. so. of shaft
40
29
0.02
Across small split breast 4 ft. so. of #38
41
39
0.08
In back midway between #9 and #10
42
48
1.32
In bottom midway between #10 and #13
43
70
1.67
In bottom midway between #13 and #14
44
42
0.06
In back midway between #15 and #16
45
48
0.78
In back midway between #21 and #22
46
33
0.15
In bottom midway between #26 and #27
47
72
0.07
In back midway between #27 and #28

116

a

b
Figure 5-23. Old Ortiz (Santo Niño Mine) plan and section drawings, modified after Shorey(1936). a) Longitudinal section. b) Section and plan of 350’ level. Assays presented in Table 512.

117

Figure 5-23. Old Ortiz (Santo Niño Mine) plan and section drawings, modified
after Shorey (1936). c) Cross section through shaft.

118

CANDELARIA MINE
The Candelaria Mine lies on the southern end of the Ortiz Mountains, about 670 m (2200ft) southwest of the Iron Vein prospect. Calcite veins cutting striped hornfels derived from theCarlile Member of the Mancos Shale were probably first prospected in the early 1800s.
Raymond (1870) describes activity at the Candelaria Mine in 1869:
The principal mines worked during the last year at Rio Del Tuerto are the Candelaria andHutchinson, on the south side of the Old Placer Mountains,…..A stamp mill (10 stamps of 525
pounds each, dropping 10 inches and 36 times per minute, driven by a 20 horse-power engine) has
been erected lately, which has crushed ore from the Ramirez and Candelaria lodes withsatisfactory results. The mill was sold a short time ago to parties who work the Candelaria. On
this lode they have started two tunnels, one 12 feet below the other. The vein strikes in thislocality N7o east, and dips west; at the breast of the upper tunnel, 30 feet in, the vein is faulted by across vein of kaoline, 1 foot wide, which courses N33 o east. Further north, toward the top of thehill, the lode has formerly been worked by an open cut, bearing north 23 o east. It is 150 feet long,
and at the deepest part of the excavation is 64 feet in depth. From this locality rich ore has been
extracted, which yielded good results by mill process. In its southwest part the lode bears north18o east, and dips 80o west. The tunnels are started about 150 feet below the old workings.

Raymond reported again in 1872 on activity at the Candelaria Mine in 1870:
The Candelaria Company at Real Del Tuerto has worked eight men for ten months, and1200 tons of quartz were mined by them. I am not informed of the yield of this ore; but as thecompany bought a ten-stamp mill last year, it may be expected that the business of the company
was a paying one, though wages have been much higher in this part of New Mexico thanelsewhere. The Candelaria has paid $83 per month to its hands, without board; and the New
Mexico Mining Company about $60 with board.

A wooden headframe constructed in 1936 stood over the shaft until the early 1990s(Figure 5-24), when it collapsed. The following description of the Candelaria Mine is excerpted
from Griswold (1950):
The Candelaria Mine was the best mine on the south side of the mountains. It is on thesoutheast slope of Candelaria Peak at an elevation of 7128’. Here are two fissure veins in striped
shale; the main vein, 30” wide, is vertical and bears 25 oE. It has been stoped from the surface
down to the level of the new shaft, (i.e.) about 120’. The 12” vertical vein appearing at thenorthwest corner of the hoist house bears N3oE and was drifted on for 70’ with very little stoping.
Mr. Charles McKinnis sank a shaft between these two veins in 1936 to a depth of 320’ and didsome exploratory diamond drilling before his money gave out. It is probable that he intended tosink the shaft to an intersection with the garnetized bed which Mr. Lucas had found profitable in
Alpine gulch to the west. At I 1/8 x 3 ½) there is a strong vein. On the north side of the arroyo ashort cross-cut and an 80’ drift bearing N30oE explored a brecciated contact of dacite porphyry on
the north with hornfels on the south. Across the arroyo a drift goes S27 oW on the vein in hornfels
for 33’ and a cross-cut bearing S67oW finds the dacite at 49’. There is a shaft at least 50’ deep on
the vein at the junction of the vein and cross-cut. There workings were sampled and showed very
low values.

119Figure 5-24. 1930s-era Candelaria Mine headframe. The
headframe collapsed in the early 1990s.

The underground and surface workings were mapped in detail by G.R. Griswold in1951 (Figures 5-25 and 5-26). Griswold’s (1951a and b) mapping shows important workings
on four veins. The Candelaria shaft was sunk on the East vein. A drift runs along the east veinat the level (7128’) of the shaft collar. A second level runs along the vein at the 6850’ level.
The West vein has no shafts and four adits at elevations ranging from 7128’ to 7243’. The 50 ft(15.2m-) deep Calcite Shaft and the 47 ft- (14.3 m-) deep Igneous Shaft were sunk on veins tothe southwest of the Candelaria Mine Main shaft. Griswold collected samples during the
mapping and analyzed them for tungsten and gold (Tables 5-13 and 5-14). Undergroundmapping showed that the east vein ranged from 10 to 127 cm (4 to 50 in) wide, with typical
thickness between 50 and 75 cm (20 and 30 in). Gold values were only locally above 0.10 oz/st.
Following up on McKinnis’ idea of intersecting the garnetized bed of Alpine Gulch (themetamorphosed Greenhorn Limestone of the Mancos Shale in Lukas Canyon) at depth,
Molycorp, Inc. drilled a single core hole (MCA-5) at a site north of the Candelaria Mine in 1968.
MCA-5 failed to intersect the Greenhorn Limestone. On the southeast flank of Candelaria
Mountain, north of the Candelaria Mine, beds of the Carlile Shale Member dip steeply into the120Golden Fault, thus causing an increase in the Carlile Member’s apparent thickness. The hole
was abandoned on 24 December, 1968, probably because the drillers wanted to head home for
Christmas.
LAC Minerals, USA, Inc., drilled 3 core holes at the Candelaria Mine in the late 1980s,
in the hopes of encountering higher-grade or thicker vein material at depth, but failed toencounter significant mineralization.
Table 5-13. Tungsten values from samples at the Candelaria Mine. Data from Griswold (1951a).
%
No
Description and Location
WO3
278-A
0.39
Calcite shaft dump
279-A
0.38
Igneous shaft dump, coarse & fines
280-A
1.28
High grade from Calcite shaft dump
281
0.18
3’ vein NE bottom Calcite shaft
282
0.33
3’ vein SW bottom Calcite shaft
283
0.22
2’ vein SW bottom Igneous shaft
284
0.36
18” vein NE bottom Igneous shaft
285
0.20
40” vein NE bottom of 16’ shaft, 100’ SW of Calcite shaft
286
0.24
33” calcite vein, 85’ SW of Calcite Shaft
287
0.10
70” gouge or caliche just N of #286
288
0.50
19” vein, 44’ SW of Calcite Shaft289
0.29
16” vein, 35’ SW of Calcite Shaft
290
0.42
13” vein, 26’ SW of Calcite Shaft
291
0.20
17” vein, 19’ SW of Calcite Shaft
292
0.24
20” vein, 29’ SW of Calcite Shaft
Table 5-14. Gold values from underground samples at the Candelaria Mine. Data from Griswold (1951b).
Nooz/st Au
Description and Location
294
0.02
W vein, 7128’ level, 31” vein
295
0.42
W vein, 7128’ level, high grade
296
trace
E vein, 6850’ level, 50” vein
297
trace
E vein, “ , 29” vein298
0.16
E vein, “ , 18” vein299
0.38
E vein, “ , 34” vein
300?
E vein, “ , 26” vein
301
nil
E vein, “ , 28” vein
302
nil
E vein, “ , 30” shear
303
nil
E vein, “ , 22” vein
304
nil
E vein, “ , 22” vein
305
trace
E vein, “ , 18” vein
306
nil
E vein, “ , 36” vein
307
trace
E vein, “ , 6” vein308
0.18
E vein, “ , 31” vein309
0.08
E vein, “ , 27” vein
310
0.20
E vein, “ , 21” vein
311
0.07
E vein, “ , ? “ vein
312
0.08
E vein, “ , 18” vein
313
0.06
E vein, “ , 18” vein
314
0.09
E vein, “ , 4” vein
315
0.92
E vein, “ , 4” vein
316
0.43
E vein, “ , 4” vein

121

Figure 5-25. Candelaria Mine workings. Modified after Griswold (1950).

122

Figure 5-26. Level plans and longitudinal sections, Candelaria Mine. Shaded areas represent stopes. Three-digit
numbers are sample identifiers; values are given in Table 5-14. Modified after Griswold (1951b).

BENTON MINE and OLD LIVE OAK MINE
The Benton Mine and the Old Live Oak Mine lie 600 m (2000 ft) southwest of the Cunningham
Hill Mine. Griswold (1950) states that the Benton and Old Live Oak Mines were developed ona N73E-striking, 68oW-dipping fissure with a strike length of 250m (850 ft). The vein at the
Benton Mine maintained a width of 76 cm (30 in) to a depth of 39 m (130 ft). Host rocks arevent-breccia volcanics in the eastern part (Benton) and latite porphyry in the western part (Oldlive Oak). Quartzite breccia similar to that encountered at Cunningham Hill is exposed in
outcrop and float 60 m (200 ft) south of the Benton Mine. Sulfide ore was encountered at 250 ft
below the surface. At the time of Griswold’s investigation, only the upper 60 ft of workings
were accessible. Two dump samples of sulfide material from the Benton Mine assayed anaverage $6.12 gold, or 0.17 opt gold (Figure 5-27, Table 5-15). No production records remain
for the Benton-Old Live Oak workings. Griswold (1950) considered the Benton-Old Live Oak
to be a good prospect.

123Table 5-15. Assays of 5-ft channel samples shown on Figure 5ZB, Benton – Old Live Oak.
AuAg
Pb
Remarks / vein width
No.
Ounce per ton
%
B-1
0.69
0.15
tr
5” to 8”
B-2
0.29
0.10
5” to 6”
B-3
0.40
0.20
1” to 4”
B-4
2.13
0.50
tr
5” to 8”
B-5
2.62
0.60
4” to 8”
B-6
1.45
0.35
4” to 6”
B-7
0.32
0.30
tr
4” to 6”
B-8
0.11
0.30
tr
2” to 6”
B-9
0.46
0.10
6” to 7”
B-10
0.58
0.20
6” to 7”
B-11
0.43
0.35
tr
6” to 7”
B-12
0.29
0.20
at fault
B-13
0.01
trace
18”
B-14
0.06
0.10
22”
B-15
0.06
0.10
28”
B-16
0.01
trace
8”
B-17
0.41
0.50
6” to 7”
B-18
0.04
trace
6” to 7”
B-19
0.015
0.20
18” hanging wall
B-20
0.02
0.30
18” foot wall
B-21
0.98
0.45
16’ level-shaft
B-22
2.42
0.60
16’ level-shaft
B-A
0.26
trace
Benton dump

124

Figure 5-27. Map of Benton-Old Live Oak vein and sample locations. Gold values in samples presented inTable 5-15. Modified after Griswold (1950).

125

ENGLISH AND SHOSHONE MINESThe English and Shoshone Mines are two prospects on the northwest side of the Dolores
volcanic vent. The English Mine consists of three shafts located 515 m (1700 ft) northeast of
the Ortiz Mine shaft. Citing uncertainty in its location, Griswold (1950) identified a shaft 379 m(1250 ft) northeast of the English Mine main shaft as the Shoshone Mine. There are no data on
the mineral composition of the English and Shoshone veins. Griswold considered the veins tohave considerable potential.
The English Mine workings were sunk on N25E-striking, 80oNW-dipping veins runningparallel to a trachytic latite dike in volcanic vent breccia. The vein was traced for 76 m (250 ft)
along strike and 21 m (70 ft) down dip and ranged from 0.6 to 1.2 m (2 to 4 ft) thick. Goldvalues ranged from 0.11 oz/ton to 0.61 oz/ton ($4 to $22 per short ton) in samples from thesurface to 21 m (70 ft).
The 1.2 m- (4 ft-) wide Shoshone Mine vein was visible to a depth of 9 m (30 ft) in theshaft at the time of Griswold’s (1950) report. Like the English vein, the Shoshone vein strikes
N25E, but it dips 70o to the SE. A sample taken from a dump assayed 0.27 oz/short ton ($9.80
per short ton).

RED OUTCROP OR CAPTAIN DAVIS PROSPECTThe Red Outcrop prospect is a group of hematitic veinlets in rafts or xenoliths ofsandstone and shale of the Mancos Shale surrounded by andesite porphyry in the southern part of
the Ortiz Mountains. The prospect lies 60 to 240 m (200 to 800 ft) south of the Buckeye Hill
Fault. Griswold (1950) described 15 cm (6 in) stringers striking N74W and dipping 68oS.
Production of an unknown quantity of material from the prospect is indicated by a small caved
stope reported by Griswold (1950). Gold Fields drilled 10 core holes at the Red Outcrop during
the early 1980s.

126

PORPHYRY-RELATED STOCKWORK MINERALIZATIONCUNNINGHAM GULCHThe Cunningham Gulch prospect lies in the upper part of Cunningham Gulch, about 2550
m (8,400 ft) west-southwest of the Cunningham Hill open pit, and about 600 m (2000 ft)
northeast of the center of the Carache Canyon breccia pipe. A soil-sampling campaign begun by
LAC Minerals in 1986 led to the discovery of gold and copper mineralization in upper
Cunningham Gulch. Detailed geologic mapping, sampling of road-cut exposures, and coredrilling defined porphyry-type mineralization hosted by augite monzonite distributed around thewestern and southwestern margin of a barren feldspar-porphyry latite stock. Anomalous gold
values from soil samples taken over the barren latite stock remain unexplained.
Augite monzonite intrudes shale and sandstone of the Menefee Formation in the upper
reaches of Cunningham Gulch, baking and metamorphosing them to hornfels and quartzite,
respectively. A coarse orthoclase-porphyry latite stock intrudes the augite monzonite on thenorthwest side of the Golden Fault. The Golden Fault and related fractures along withsubsequent fracturing associated with the intrusion of the orthoclase-porphyry latite appear tohave provided the plumbing for mineralizing fluids.
Near-surface mineralization consists of stockwork tenorite + magnetite +/- fluorite +/molybdenite veinlets invading crackle breccia. Below the level of oxidation, mineralizedmaterial contains chalcopyrite rather than tenorite.

CROOKED CANYON
The Crooked Canyon prospect consists of pyrite – chalcopyrite stockwork veinlets anddisseminations hosted by andesite-porphyry sills, Mancos Shale and augite monzonite in theupper part of Crooked Canyon, in the western part of the Ortiz Mountains.

127

PLACER DEPOSITS
Placer gold was probably known in the Ortiz Mountains by 1821 (Baxter, 2004),
certainly by 1828. The largest known placer gold deposits on the Ortiz Mine Grant areconcentrated on the eastern side of the range, at the mouths of Cunningham Gulch and Dolores
Gulch, and along its southern boundary, east of the village of Golden. In both cases, most of theplacer gold is contained in the Plio-Pleistocene Tuerto Gravel, though some may be reworked inrecent stream alluvium. At Rich Hill, in the eastern part of the Ortiz Mountains, a coarse gravel
deposit lies 30 to 40 ft above the Tuerto Gravel on nearby mesas and exhibits strong calcic soil
development. The Rich Hill gravel is pocked with numerous placer workings. Smaller placer
gold workings are known in several areas along the fronts of the Ortiz Mountains and the San
Pedro Mountains, notably at Carache Canyon, near the Iron Vein prospect, and at Lukas Canyon.
Griswold (1950) summarized the known placer gold potential of the Ortiz Mine Grant:
In the early records reference is made to the Old Placer and the New Placers. These areclassed as hill-side placers. The gold in the Cunningham Mesa placer, (Old Placer) was brought toits present location by flash floods from lodes in the Ortiz Basin. Due to the method of deposition
the gold is erratically distributed both laterally and vertically within the outwash materials. Somere-concentration has resulted in especially rich gravel at the head of Las Viejo arroyo at thenorthwest corner of Cunningham Mesa. Here the original discovery was made in 1828, and here
Thomas Edison tried his dry screening and electrostatic process of gold recovery in 1900. The
Universal Placer Company operated here in 1937-38 with a dry process which was unsuccessful.
Placer sampling to date on Cunningham Mesa and vicinity has proven some 17 million
cubic yards of 30 cent gravel* and indicates an additional 17 million cubic yards of commercial
gravel of somewhat lower value. A detailed report of the placer sampling in this area has been
compiled by G.R. Griswold titled “Cunningham Mesa Placer”, dated December 1949.
In 1839 the New Placers east of Golden and along the south side of the Grant werediscovered. The gold came from the weathering of many narrow veins on the north slope of the
San Pedro Mountains. The Golden Placer at the mouth of Old Timer gulch covers 39 acrescontaining 1,800,000 cubic yards of 20 cent gravel. A dry land dredge using water from the Kelly
well failed to show a profit here in 1935. Half a mile to the east, the Bonanza Placer covers 37
acres containing 1,855,000 cubic yards of 35 cent gravel. The ground has been intensively worked
by dry washers. The gradient of this placer is about 15%.
The Korache placer on the south side of the Ortiz Mountains is in a very narrow arroyo.
The source of this gold has not been located. No systematic prospecting has been done in thisarea. It appears probable that there is a high-grade vein not far away which feeds this placer, or
the gold might have come from the small monzonite stock near the head of Tia Bonita canyon.
*Value of recoverable gold at $35/tr oz.

No effort has been made since the 1930s to mine placer gold in the area of the Ortiz Mine
Grant, except on an artisanal or hobby scale. The chief function of the gold placers has been to
point to the lode sources of gold in the Ortiz Mountains. Gold of the Cunningham Mesa Placers
and smaller placers near the mouth of Dolores Gulch comes from Cunningham Hill, the Ortiz
Mine, and other prospects in the eastern part of the Ortiz Mountains. Griswold’s (1950)
discussion of the source of the “Korache” placer is prophetic: the outcrop of the Carache Canyon
breccia pipe was identified at that time as the Tia Bonita Canyon monzonite.

128

NON-METALLIC RESOURCES
COAL
The Cerrillos coal field, which includes the Miller Gulch, Waldo Gulch, and Madrid area
mines, saw coal mining begin about 1835 and continue to 1953. The town of Madrid and thecoal mines to the south lay in the original Ortiz Mine Grant. Total production of coal from theMadrid area is summarized in Table 1.
Table 5-16. Coal production from Cerrillos Coal Field. Data from Lee (1913) and Read and others (1950), as
quoted by Beaumont (1979) and Elston (1967); and Beaumont (1979). Anthracite and bituminous are notdistinguished in available production figures.
Years ofPart of field
Production
production
Unknown but small. Coal sent to Dolores to run gold mill in
1835 - 1882
Madrid area
1835. Civil War–era production from Government Mine.
1882 - 1890
Entire Cerrillos field
408,568 short tons
1892 - 1897

Miller Gulch

15,000 short tons, bituminous coking coal

1897 – 1931

Entire Cerrillos field> 3,000,000 short tons

1931 - 1940

Entire Cerrillos field

1,325,315 short tons

1940 - 1948

Entire Cerrillos field

577,700 short tons

1948 - 1953

Madrid area

150,000 short tons

Total production

Approximately 5,500,000 short tons

Bituminous and anthracite coal of the Cerrillos coal field occurs in the Cretaceous
Menefee Formation (Mesa Verde Group). The more valuable anthracite coal was produced byheat given off by the adjacent Madrid sill. Read and others (1950) estimated original reserves tohave been 46.5 million short tons of bituminous coal and 11.4 million short tons of anthracite
coal for a total of 57.9 million short tons. Beaumont (1979)
The Menefee Formation is exposed in the south-central Ortiz Mountains and has been
drilled extensively at Carache Canyon. At Carache Canyon, drilling intersected seams of coal
generally measuring less than 30 cm (1 ft) at various intervals in the lower and upper Menefee
members. Coal quality at Carache Canyon was not tested; the complexities of faulting,brecciation, and intrusive activity, make it unlikely that economic quantities exist. Menefee
Formation shales crop out on the eastern margin of the Ortiz Mine Grant, but coal has not been
observed there.

AGGREGATE
Aggregate resources appear in the igneous rocks of the Ortiz Mountains and in the Tuerto
Gravel. In particular, andesite porphyry laccoliths of the northwestern part of the Ortiz Mine
Grant and the equigranular, medium-grained augite monzonite stock in the central part of the
Ortiz Mountains represent potentially large resources of construction-grade material. The
Tuerto Gravel contains detritus shed from the Ortiz Mountains, much of it being cobble- toboulder-size andesite porphyry and augite monzonite clasts. Though the Tuerto Gravel is rarely
greater than 30 m (100 ft) thick, it is extensive, and thus represents a large resource.
129

GYPSUM
The Tonque Arroyo Member of the Todilto Formation is composed principally of
gypsum. The gypsum is a near-surface alteration (by hydration) of anhydrite. Regionally the
Tonque Arroyo Member is an important source of commercially exploitable gypsum. On the
Ortiz Mine Grant, most exposures and drill intersections of the Tonque Arroyo Member show
considerable dissolution and brecciation. In the southern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant, about 1
mi (1.5 km) east of the Lone Mountain Ranch headquarters, outcrops of fresh Tonque Arroyo
Member suggest the possibility of commercial quantities of gypsum.

130

6

GEOPHYSICS

Geophysical exploration techniques have been applied to the search for mineralized rockon the Ortiz Mine Grant since 1949 (Table 6-1). These surveys were employed to detect
contrasts in electrical, magnetic, and radiometric properties of the underlying rock. Rock bodies
containing disseminated sulfides could be expected to yield induced polarization and /orresistivity anomalies. Magnetite-bearing bodies, such as the vein at the old Ortiz Mine would
produce anomalies in the strength of the magnetic field. The most commonly used methods wereground-based induced polarization/ resistivity and ground-based magnetometry. In 1987 LAC
Minerals, USA, Inc. conducted a high-resolution airborne combination magnetic,
electromagnetic, and very low frequency (VLF) survey of most of the Ortiz Mine Grant andadjacent parts of the San Pedro Mountains to complement its geologic study of the area.

GROUND-BASED STUDIESMAGNETICS
The ground-magnetics survey conducted in 1949 in the Dolores Gulch-Cunningham Hillarea was used to distinguish altered and unaltered intrusive rocks, dikes from sills, and to locate
buried and potentially auriferous channels in the Tuerto Gravel (Stewart, 1949). LAC Minerals
conducted a ground magnetic survey in the area of the Iron Vein prospect in 1985. A northeasttrending elongate magnetic high underlies the prospect area, probably corresponding to the
granodiorite intrusion intersected in drilling. The magnetic high was confirmed by the airborne
survey of 1987.
RADIOMETRICS
Griswold (1950) reported several Geiger counter traverses on the Ortiz Mine Grant. One
dike, in the northeastern part of the Grant, gave anomalous readings, though it was notdetermined whether the anomaly was related to uranium or thorium minerals. The magnitude of
the anomaly was not reported.
INDUCED POLARIZATION / RESISTIVITY
Several induced polarization (IP) / resistivity surveys have been conducted on the Ortiz
Mine Grant. Most studies concentrated on areas of known mineralization and were used todetermine locations of specific structures, or bodies of sulfide-bearing rock. Interpretations ofresults from these studies have been made difficult by the influence of complex geometries of
intrusive bodies, and local-scale variations in compositions of sedimentary rocks.
In 1969, Molycorp ran an induced polarization line across the breccia outcrop at Carache
Canyon and concluded that the anomalous response was due to carbonaceous and graphitic
material and not worth drilling. Anomalies at Cunningham Hill that might have represented
mineralization beyond what was then identified were drilled without success. The anomalies
were explained as being related to gouge zones in faults or as carbonaceous material in
sedimentary rocks (Cook, 1970). Conoco conducted a reconnaissance IP/resistivity study withlarge dipole spacing across the Ortiz Mountains during the 1970s, with inconclusive results.
More detailed IP/resistivity studies done by LAC Minerals at Carache Canyon (Figure 61) and Cunningham Gulch were also complicated by shale and coal of the Menefee Formation,131

and by the high magnetite content of the augite monzonite (Figure 6-2). Other IP/resistivity
surveys were done in the Iron Vein-Candelaria area, in Lukas Canyon, Crooked Canyon, and in
the Dolores Gulch - Cunningham Hill Mine area.
Table 6-1. Geophysical surveys conducted on the Ortiz Mine Grant. Sources: Stewart (1948), Griswold (1950),
Gay (1969), Hallof and Bell (1969), Cook (1970), Sadowski (1974, 1975), Wieduwilt (1980), Knox (1981),
Anzman (1985, 1986), Bell (1987), Hallof (1986), de Carle (1987, 1988), and Smith and Nelsen (1988)
Year(s)Type

Client1948

Magnetic
Resistivity – Wenner
array

1950

Radiometric with Geiger
counter

1967 &
1969

IP/Resistivity,
dipole-dipole
variable frequency system

19741975

1975?

1981

1986

Contractor

Location

Potter andSims

Stewart

Magnetics on Dolores GulchCunningham Hill, Cunningham
Mesa
Resistivity on Cunningham Mesa

Potter andSims

C.T. Griswold

Many traverses on Grant

Molycorp

McPharGeophysics
andMineralSystems

Candelaria Mine-Lukas Can.,
Dolores Gulch-Cunningham Hill,
and Carache Canyon

ConocoIn house

Crooked Canyon, Buckeye
Canyon, and Carache Canyon

ConocoIn house?

Western ½ of Ortiz Mountains

Gold
Fields?

Dolores Gulch – Cunningham Hill
area

MagneticGold
FieldsIn house

Magnetic

LAC

IP/Resistivity

LAC

IP/Resistivity
Frequency and time
domain
Dipole-dipole,
Dipole length 1000 ft
Airborne magnetic survey
Fixed-wing aircraft
Average altitude 500 ft
above ground
IP/Resistivity,
dipole-dipole
dipole length 100 - 200 ft

1985

1989

Phase IP/Resistivity
Dipole-dipole
Dipole length 200 ft

LAC

IP/Resistivity
1987

Airborne magnetics,
electromagnetics,
very low frequency

LAC

Western Geo
Surveys
Phoenix
Geophysics,
Inc.

Aerodat, Ltd.

Dolores Gulch – Cunningham
Hill-Cunningham Mesa, Captain
Davis Mtn.
Iron Vein area
Lukas Canyon
Carache Canyon
Crooked Canyon
Cunningham Gulch
Iron Vein – Candelaria
Entire Ortiz Mine Grant and San
Pedro Mountains

132

Figure 6-1. Pseudosection of time-domain IP/resistivity study of Carache Canyon, line 102E. View to northeast. Time domain measurement, dipole-dipole
array. Resistivity low / chargeability high in 101 - 103 N area probably corresponds to carbonaceous shale and coal of the Menefee Formation and northeasttrending faults. Location of survey line is plotted on Figure 5Na. Modified after Anzman (1986).

133

Figure 6-2. Pseudosection of phase IP/resistivity study of Cunningham Gulch prospect, line 3W. View to west. Dipole-dipole array. Resistivity low /chargeability high in 36S - 22S. Response of mineralized augite monzonite may be masked by contrast between conductive shales and resistive latite porphyrystock. Modified after Phoenix Geophysics (1987).

134

AIRBORNE GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS
In the mid 1970s Conoco, Inc., conducted a fixed-wing airborne magnetic survey over thewestern part of the Ortiz Mountains. Airborne surveys resumed in 1987 when LAC Minerals
contracted Aerodat, Ltd. to carry out a high-resolution helicopter-borne geophysical survey ofthe entire Ortiz Mine Grant area. The surveyed area included the land of the Mesita de Juana
López Grant that overlaps the Ortiz Mine Grant, and the San Pedro Mountains. The helicopter
towed on a cable an electromagnetic (EM) system, a magnetometer, and a very low frequency(VLF) receiver. The helicopter maintained a nominal height of 61 m (200 ft) above the terrain
and readings were taken at intervals of 0.1 to 0.2 seconds. Flight lines were spaced at a nominal
100 m (330 ft). The following descriptions of the Aerodat airborne survey are taken from Smith
and Nelsen (1989) and de Carle (1987) (Table 6-2).
The helicopter-borne survey was a considerable aid to geologic mapping, especially withregard to identification of buried intrusive bodies, the nature of subsurface contacts of stocks
versus laccoliths, distribution of conductive sedimentary rocks, and locations of faults.
Magnetics
The cesium magnetometer measured the strength of the total magnetic field at any given
sample point. Readings, measured in nanoteslas, from a continuously recording base-station
magnetometer, timed with the airborne system, were used to eliminate diurnal and secularvariations from the data. Results were rendered as line plots and contour maps. Magnetic data
was further reduced to the magnetic pole, a process by which the effects of the inclination of theearth’s magnetic field were eliminated (maps in pocket).
Magnetic field strength values over the surveyed area ranged from 51,890 to 54,955
nanoteslas. The survey detected magnetic anomalies in excess of 54,000 nanoteslas
corresponding to the augite monzonite, latite porphyry, and quartz monzodiorite stocks.
Andesite-porphyry laccoliths produce weaker anomalies, rarely exceeding magnetic fieldstrength values of 52,400 nanteslas. Areas underlain by Mesozoic and Cenozoic sedimentaryrocks north and west of the Ortiz Mountains yielded magnetic field strengths of 51,890 to 53,000
nanoteslas. Much of the southeastern part of the Ortiz Mine Grant shows magnetic fieldstrengths of 52,300 to 52,400 nanoteslas, suggesting the presence of a large, unexposed intrusive
body or bodies. A ridge of high magnetic field strength values extends 4500 m (15,000 ft) eastnortheastward from the eastern end of the San Pedro Mountains. The Precambrian basement
high contained within the Little Tuerto Horst gives magnetic field strength values of 52,350
nanoteslas.
The main traces of the Tijeras-Cañoncito fault system are manifested by the strong
magnetic field contrasts of adjacent bodies. In the region of the Iron Vein prospect, and northand east of Captain Davis Mountain, magnetic highs are elongate parallel to the fault trends,
suggesting a primary structural control on the geometry of the intrusive bodies.
Electromagnetics (EM)Electromagnetic fields were generated by coil pairs (vertical coaxial at 935 and 4600 Hz,
and horizontal coplanar at 4175 Hz). A receiver measured the strengths of the electromagnetic
fields and recorded the data. High-frequency (4175 Hz and 4600Hz) electromagnetic fields areuseful for analysis of surficial deposits and near-surface bedrock. The low-frequency field (935Hz) penetrates more deeply and indicates resistivity of bedrock formations. Results are
expressed as apparent resistivity, in ohm-meters. Line plots of variation in field strength were135

produced, as well as contour maps of apparent resistivity for high- and low-frequency fields.
The EM study served to identify resistivity anomalies, such as low-resistivity shale, mudstone, orcoal, and fault and fracture systems with clay and/or water. (map in pocket).
Apparent resistivity was calculated by assuming a 200-meter thick conductive layer overresistive bedrock. Using nomograms for the modeled layer, the computer generated resistivity
consistent with the sensor’s elevation and recorded amplitude for the coaxial 4600 Hz channels.
Very Low Frequency (VLF)
Powerful military radio transmitters that operate at 15 to 25 kHz are termed very low
frequency (VLF) transmitters. These radio signals induce electric currents in conductive rocks
thousands of miles away from their source. The secondary magnetic fields produced by theelectric currents in turn produce deviations in the primary VLF field. VLF surveys are typicallyused to identify buried faults in exploration programs. Transmitters are usually selected to lie
roughly on strike with suspected faults (Klein and Lajoie, 1988). In the Aerodat survey of the
Ortiz Mine Grant, readings were taken from two VLF transmitting stations: NAA at Cutler,
Maine (24.0 kHz), and NPG at Jim Creek, Washington (24.8 kHz). Because the dominant
structural grain in the survey area is northeasterly, the Cutler transmitter functioned as the line
station. The Jim Creek transmitter served as the orthogonal station. For the purposes of data
presentation, Cutler data were used. Results were given as line plots, and as contour maps. Datais expressed as percentage of the strength of the total VLF field.

136

Table 6 - 2. Aerodat geophysical survey specifications.
AIRCRAFT
Aerospatiale 315B Lama helicopter
Aircraft nominal height above terrain: 61 m (200 ft)
GEOPHYSICAL EQUIPMENT
Aerodat 3-frequency system:
Two vertical coaxial pairs at 935 Hz and 4600 Hz
Electromagnetic System (EM)One horizontal coplanar coil pair at 4175 Hz
Transmitter-receiver separation: 7 m (23 ft)
Sensor container towed 30 m (100 ft) below helicopter
Very low frequency Herz Totem 2A, receiving two transmitters, towed 8 m (25 ft) below(VLF) Receiver
helicopter
Scintrex Model VIW-2321 H8 cesium, with 0.1 nanoTeslas sensitivity
Magnetometerat a 0.2 second sample rate; towed 15 m (50 ft) below
helicopter.
Magnetic Base Station IFG-2, clock synchronized with airborne system.
DATA RECORDING
RMS dot-matrix real time recording of 14 traces, plus manual and time
Analog Recorderfiducial markers
DGR 33 recording on magnetic tape
Recording intervals:
EquipmentInterval in seconds
EM system
0.1
Digital Recorder
VLF
0.2
Magnetometer
0.2
Altimeter
0.2
Navigation
1.0
NAVIGATION AND LOCATION EQUIPMENT
Navigation Equipment Motorola Mini-Ranger
Radar Altimeter Hoffman HRA-100, measuring height of helicopter.
Flight Path Tracking By video camera.

137

7

ISOTOPIC AGE DETERMINATIONS

Based on field relations, igneous rocks of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt are younger than the
Eocene Galisteo Formation, which they intrude in the Ortiz Mountains and in the Cerrillos Hills.
Because the Galisteo Formation grades upward into the Espinaso Formation, which is assumed
to be age equivalent of rocks of the Ortiz Porphyry Belt, an Oligocene age has been inferred for
the Ortiz Porphyry Belt igneous activity. However, a younger limit on the age of intrusive
activity or on mineralization is imposed only by the Plio-Pleistocene Tuerto Gravel.
Timing of movement on Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault System is constrained by the prioremplacement of calc-alkaline andesite porphyry laccoliths and sills, and by subsequent intrusionof alkaline augite monzonite stocks. Movement on the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault thus represents amagmatic break, as well a tectonic one. Dating of the suite of igneous rocks of the Ortiz
Mountains was designed to determine the absolute ages of the rocks and their related
mineralization, and to constrain major mid-Tertiary movement on the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault
System.
K-Ar Age Determinations
Several workers have made age determinations on rocks from the Ortiz Mountains andnearby areas using the potassium-argon method (Table 7-1). Armstrong (1976) collected two
samples from the augite-monzonite stock that forms the core of the Ortiz Mountains.
Hornblende and feldspar were dated from one sample, 113-55-59, which yielded ages of 55.7 +/2.0 Ma and 44.7 +/- 1.6 Ma, respectively. Both of these Eocene ages seemed too old, since theGalisteo Formation was being deposited at the same time. Sample 1222155-61 yielded a date of
33.9 +/- 1.2 Ma on hornblende.
Bachman and Mehnert (1978) reported two hornblende dates from andesite porphyry
from the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. A sample taken from the Cerrillos Hills yielded a date of 47.1 +/3.2 Ma. Another sample, taken from a road cut on highway NM-14 on the western side of the
Ortiz Mountains, gave an age of 34.0 +/- 2.2 Ma.
Kautz and others (1981) reported three dates from samples from the base, middle, and topof the Espinaso Formation outcrop in the Hagan Basin. Clasts from the base and middle gaveages of 34.3 +/- 0.8 Ma and 34.6 +/- 0.7 Ma, respectively. The nepheline latite flow reported tobe from the top of the Espinaso Fm. yielded an age of 26.9 +/- 0.6 Ma. Field inspection of thenepheline latite flow shows that it is in the lowest part of the Santa Fe Group sediments (S.
Connell, personal communication, 2001). Texturally it resembles limburgite dikes of thewestern part of the Cerrillos Hills.
Kay (1986) collected 13 samples from his study area around the Cunningham Hill minein the eastern part of the Ortiz Mountains. Hornblende from an andesite porphyry sample takenfrom a mine dump (OR-6) gave an age of 43.2 +/- 2.3 Ma. Sample OR-3, taken from drill hole
NM-010 at 600 feet depth, was of hornblende monzonite, part of the central stock of the Ortiz
Mountains. Hornblende from OR-3 yielded an age of 29.6 +/- 1.5 Ma. Feldspar and biotite
taken from the subvolcanic latite plug and (trachytic) latite dikes in Cunningham Gulch yielded
seven ages ranging from 29.9 to 35.1 Ma (Table 7-1). Kay dated feldspar in two samples of the
volcanic rocks of Dolores Gulch. Sample OR-4 gave an age of 52.1 +/ 1.5 Ma and sample OR-5
gave an age of 34.2 +/- 1.4 Ma. Kay also dated alteration sericite from the mineralized quartzite
breccias at Cunningham Hill and the Florencio prospect. Sample OR-1 (Cunningham Hill) gave
an age of 39.6 +/- 1.5 Ma, and sample OR-2 (Florencio) gave an age of 32.0 +/- 1.2 Ma. The K138

Ar dates determined by previous workers showed considerable scatter and included several dates
that were clearly too old (Eocene). Discarding the dates greater than 40 Ma, the andesite
porphyry laccoliths dated at about 34 Ma and the augite (hornblende) monzonite stock in therange of 29.6 to 33.9 Ma. The latite porphyry and trachytic latite dikes range from 29.9 to 35.1
Ma, and the volcanic rocks of Dolores Gulch gave a range from 26.9 to 34.2 Ma. Mineralization
dates were 32.0 and 39.6 Ma.
While the K-Ar dates allow for a general confirmation of the observed field relations,they do not establish with sufficient precision the ages of magmatism, major movement on the
Tijeras Fault System, and mineralization. In order to more finely tune understanding of thechronology of the tectonic and magmatic development of the Ortiz Mountains, a suite of samples
was submitted to the 40Ar/39Ar lab at New Mexico Tech for this study.
40

Ar/39Ar Age Determinations
Age determinations and analytical data for fifteen samples submitted to the 40Ar/39Ar
laboratory at New Mexico Tech are listed on Table 7-1. Included in Table are 40Ar/39Ar dates
determined by the U.S. Geological Survey Denver lab (Sauer, 2000).
Andesite Porphyry
Ages of three samples of andesite porphyry sills were determined from step-heating of
hornblende and yielded fair to poor isochrons. Sample Ig-30, with a fair isochron, gave an ageof 34.29 Ma. Sample Wg-1, with a poor isochron, gave an age of 35.79 Ma. Sample Ig-29, alsowith a poor isochron, gave an age of 39.22 Ma.
Augite monzonite stock
Two samples of the augite monzonite stock were analyzed by the hornblende step-heating
method. Sample Eg-62, with an irregular spectrum, gave an age of 33.27 Ma. Sample Ig-26,
with a poor isochron, gave an age of 35.26 Ma.
Subvolcanic latite stock
Feldspar crystals from two samples were analyzed by step heating and yielded fair togood isochrons and ages of 31.68 Ma (Eg-68) and 31.91 Ma (Eg-70). Sanidine from a similar
plug located NW of Carache Canyon (sample Wg-12) yielded a well-behaved SCLF age of 31.83
Ma.
Volcanics of Dolores Gulch
Feldspar crystals from two samples were analyzed by step heating and yielded fair togood isochrons and ages of 31.31 Ma (Eg-13) and 31.48 Ma (Eg-27).
Granodiorite stock of Candelaria Mountain
A feldspar crystal from sample Ig-68, analyzed by step heating, gave an age of 31.10 Ma.
Adularia associated with gold mineralization at Carache Canyon
Two adularia specimens from drilling in Carache Canyon (OC-43, 564’ and 554’) wereanalyzed by the plateau method and yielded ages of 32.2 Ma and 31.56 Ma, respectively. A
third specimen (OCC-200, 566’) turned out not to be adularia on the basis of its K/Ca ratio. Itsdate of 36.21 Ma therefore cannot be trusted.
139

DISCUSSION
Previous reviews of K/Ar data (Maynard and others, 1990; Maynard, 1995) indicated a
gap between calc-alkaline magmatism occurring between 36 Ma and 34 Ma and alkaline
magmatism occurring between 30 Ma and 26 Ma. New 40Ar/39Ar dates suggest tighter
constraints on Ortiz magmatism and mineralization, and on major movement on the TijerasCañoncito Fault System (Figure 3-15).
Taking the 40Ar/39Ar age determinations of displaying fair or better quality, the following
ages can be assigned:

Laccoliths, sills, and dikes of andesite porphyry, dated at 34.29 Ma.

Augite (hornblende) monzonite, dated at 33.27 Ma.

Volcanic rocks of Dolores Gulch, dated at 31.31 Ma to 31.48 Ma.



Subvolcanic latite plugs and trachytic latite dikes dated at 31.56 Ma to 31.91 Ma.

Granodiorite stock of Candelaria Mountain dated at 31.1 Ma.

Gold mineralization-associated adularia from Carache Canyon dated at 31.56 Ma to 32.2
Ma.

34.29 Ma andesite porphyry laccoliths, sills, and dikes are widespread in the Ortiz Porphyry
Belt. They intruded at all stratigraphic levels (Pennsylvanian to Eocene), they are dominantly
concordant with respect to bedding, and they are quartz bearing. Because the andesite porphyrylaccolithic bodies preferred to intrude as concordant bodies, it is likely that they were intruded
into relatively undisturbed layered rocks. The distribution of sills intruding the Cretaceous
section on the Ortiz Mine Grant show a center in the western part of the Ortiz Mountains, northof the Tijeras Fault, and another in the area of Captain Davis Mountain, south of the Tijeras
Fault. This "offset" in sill distribution mimics the offset of the Cretaceous section as a whole,suggesting that major movement on the fault occurred after emplacement of the laccoliths.
33.27 Ma augite (hornblende) monzonite cuts the laccolithic bodies and the Ortiz Graben,with minor subsequent movement. Thus the augite monzonite stock emplacement post dates
major movement on the Tijeras Fault and major movement on the Tijeras-Cañoncito Fault
System on the Ortiz Mine Grant occurred during the period 34.29 Ma to 33.27 Ma.
Younger intrusions, with the exception of the granodiorite of Candelaria Mountain, arequartz poor. 31.56 Ma to 31.91 Ma subvolcanic latite plugs slightly predate the 31.31 Ma to
31.48 Ma volcanic rocks of Dolores Gulch. The somewhat greater degree of uncertainty in theages of the volcanic rocks allows for the interpretation that the volcanics and subvolcanic
intrusions are essentially coeval. The 31.1 Ma granodiorite stock at Candelaria Mountainappears to be coeval with the subvolcanic latite plugs as well.
31.56 Ma to 32.2 Ma adularia from Carache Canyon suggests that Carache Canyonmineralization is somewhat older than the subvolcanic latite intrusions of Cunningham Gulch
and Rattlesnake Hill. The collapse breccia pipe at Carache Canyon predates mineralization.
140

Table 7-1. Summary of isotopic dates of rocks from the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. Units are listed from oldest to
youngest, based on field relations. Samples yielding dates greater than 40 Ma are excluded.
Unit

Study/Sample

Age (Ma)

Bachman and Mehnert (1978)

34.0 +/- 2.2

Method, type

Comment

K/Ar hornblende40This study/Ig-30

34.29

This study/Wg-1

35.79

Ar/39Ar , hornblende,isochron
Ar/39Ar, hornblende,isochronfair isochron

40

40

Andesite
Porphyry Ortiz
Mountains

poor isochron

39

Ar/ Ar, hornblende,isochronThis study/Ig-29

39.11

Sauer (1999)/K97-9-25F/3/KD9

34.3 +/- 0.3

Sauer (1999)/K97-9-25C/2/KD9

35.9 +/- 0.09

Sauer (1999)/K97-9-25E/8/KD9

36.2 +/- 0.8

Sauer (1999)/K97-9-25B/4/KD9

33.3 +/- 0.09

Ar/39Ar, hornblende,
plateau

Armstrong (1975)/1222155-61

33.9 +/- 1.2

K/Ar hornblendeKay (1986)
This study/Eg-62
This study/Ig-26

29.6 +/- 1.5
33.27
35.36

Sauer (1999)/O-4-BS/14/KD9

31.3 +/- 0.3

Sauer (1999)/SP-1-BS/20/KD9

30.6 +/- 0.5

Sauer (1999)/SP-1-BS/7/KD9

30.94 +/0.06

Kay (1986)/NMO-13,1072'

34.2 +/- 1.4

This study/Eg-13

31.31

40

This study/Eg-27

31.48

40

Kautz and others (1981)/base34.3 +/- 0.8

K/Ar

Kautz and others (1981)/middle
Weber (1971)/ middle
Kautz and others (1981)/top
Kay (1986)/ OR-9

34.6 +/- 0.7
36.9 +/ 1.2
26.9 +/- 0.6
35.1 +/- 1.4

K/Ar
K/Ar
K/Ar
K/Ar feldspar

Kay (1986)/ OR-10
Kay (1986)/ OR-12
Kay (1986)/ OR-11
Kay (1986)/ OR-8
Kay (1986)/ OR-13
Kay (1986)/ OR-7

30.7 +/- 1.2
30.3 +/- 1.2
29.9 +/- 1.2
33.1 +/- 0.8
35.1 +/- 1.4
31.6 +/- 1.2

K/Ar feldspar
K/Ar biotite
K/Ar whole rock
K/Ar feldspar
K/Ar feldspar
K/Ar biotite

This study/ Eg-68
This study/ Eg-70

31.68
31.91

40

This study/ Wg-12

31.56

40

poor isochron40

Ar/39Ar, hornblende,isochron40

Ar/39Ar, hornblende,isochron40

Ar/39Ar, hornblende,isochron40

Augite(hornblende)monzonite,
Ortiz
Mountains
Augite(hornblende)monzonite, San
Pedro
Mountains
Volcanic rocksof Dolores
Gulch

Espinaso
Volcanics,
Hagan Basin

Subvolcanic
latite plug andtrachytic latite
dikes

K/Ar hornblende
Ar/39Ar, hornblende40
Ar/39Ar, hornblende40

irregular spectrum
poor isochron40

Ar/39Ar, hornblende,
Tmax?

40

Ar/39Ar, hornblende,isochron40

Ar/39Ar, hornblende,
plateau
K/Ar hornblende
Ar/39Ar, K spar
39

Ar/ Ar, K sparfair to good isochron
fair to good isochron

Ar/39Ar, K spar
Ar/39Ar, K sparfair to good isochron
fair to good isochron

Ar/39Ar, sanidine

well behaved

40

141

Table 7-1 (cont.). Summary of isotopic dates of rocks from the Ortiz Porphyry Belt. Units are listed from oldest to
youngest, based on field relations. Samples yielding dates greater than 40 Ma are excluded.
Unit

Study/Sample

Age (Ma)

Granodiorite
stock of
Candelaria
MountainThis study/ Ig-68

31.1

Kay (1986)/ OR-1

39.6 +/- 1.5

Kay (1986)/ OR-2

32.0 +/- 1.2

Mineralizationassociatedminerals

Method, type40

Ar/39Ar, K spar

Comment

fair to good isochron

K/Ar sericite
K/Ar sericite

This study/ OC-43, 564'

32.2

40

Ar/39Ar, adularia

This study/ OC-43, 554'

31.56

40

Ar/39Ar, adularia

142

8

REFERENCES

Abbott, J.C., 1995, Constraints on the deformational history of the Tijeras-Canoncito fault
system, north-central New Mexico [M.S. Thesis]: New Mexico Institute of Mining andTechnology, 161 pp.
Abbott, J.C., Cather, S.M., and Goodwin, L.B., 1995, Paleogene synorogenic sedimentation in
the Galisteo basin related to the Tijeras-Canoncito fault system: New Mexico GeologicalSociety Guidebook 46, p. 271-278.
Abbott, J.C., and Goodwin, L.B., 1995, A spectacular exposure of the Tijeras fault, withevidence of Quaternary motion: New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook 46, p. 117126.
Abbott, J., Goodwin, L.B., Kelley, S., and Maynard, S., 2004, The anatomy of a long-lived fault
system: Structural and thermochronologic evidence for Laramide to Quaternary activity
on the Tijeras Fault, New Mexico: Cather, S., McIntosh, W.C., and Kelley, S. (eds)
Tectonics, Geochronology, and Volcanism of the Southern Rocky Mountains and Rio
Grande Rift, New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources Bulletin.
Abert, J.W., 1846, Senate Executive Document, No. 23, 30th Congress, 1st Session.
Akright, R.L., 1979, Geology and mineralogy of the Cerrillos copper deposit, Santa Fe County,
New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30, pp. 257-260.
Amindyas, C.A., and Brookins, D.G., 1988, Geochemical study of hydrothermally altered rocks,
Cerrillos porphyry copper deposit, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: New Mexico Journalof Science, v. 28, no. 2, p. 125-137.
Anzman, J.R., 1985, Interpretation of geophysical surveys, Carache Canyon area, Ortiz Project,
Santa Fe County, New Mexico: unpublished report for Long Lac Mineral Exploration
Limited, 6 p.
Anzman, J.R., 1986, Synopsis interpretation, induced polarization survey Ortiz Project, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico: unpublished report for Long Lac Mineral Exploration Limited, 2p., maps.
Atkinson, W.W., 1961, Geology of the San Pedro Mountains, Santa Fe County, New Mexico:
New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Bulletin 77, 49 p.
Aubele, J.C., 1979, The Cerros del Rio volcanic field: New Mexico Geological Society,
Guidebook 30, pp. 243-252.
Bachman, G.O., 1975, Geologic map of the Madrid Quadrangle, Santa Fe and SandovalCounties, New Mexico: U.S. Geological survey Geologic Quadrangle Map GQ-1268,
scale 1:62,500.
143

Bachman, G.O., 1976, Cretaceous rocks in the area of the Madrid coal field, New Mexico: New
Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Circular 154, p. 41-43.
Bachman, G.O., and Mehnert, H.H., 1978, New K-Ar dates and the late Pliocene to Holocene
geomorphic history of the central Rio Grande region, New Mexico: Geological Societyof America, Bulletin, v. 89, p. 283-292.
Baldridge, W.S., Damon, P.E., Sahfiqullah, M., and Bridwell, R.J., 1980, Evolution of thecentral Rio Grande Rift, New Mexico: New potassium-argon dates: Earth and Planetary
Science Letters, v. 51, p. 309-321.
Baltz, E.H., 1967, Stratigraphy and regional tectonic implications of part of the Upper
Cretaceous and Tertiary rocks, east-central San Juan Basin, New Mexico: U.S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper 552, 101 pp.
Baltz, E.H., 1978, Resume of Rio Grande depression in north-central New Mexico: New
Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Circular 163, p. 210-228.
Bauer, P., and Giles, D.L., 1995, Turquoise: minipaper in Bauer, P.W., Maynard, S.R., Smith,G.A., Giles, D.L., Lucas, S.G., Barker, J.M., Smith, E.W., and Kottlowski, F.E., Thirdday road log, from Santa Fe to the Cerrillos Hills, Cerrillos and the Ortiz Mountains:
New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 46th Field Conference, Geology of the Santa
Fe Region, pp 60-61.
Bauer, P.W., Maynard, S.R., Smith, G.A., Giles, D.L., Lucas, S.G., Barker, J.M., Smith, E.W.,
and Kottlowski, F.E., 1995, Third-day road log, from Santa Fe to the Cerrillos Hills,
Cerrillos and the Ortiz Mountains: New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 46th
Field Conference, Geology of the Santa Fe Region, pp 60-61.
Baxter, W., 2004, The gold of the Ortiz Mountains, a story of New Mexico and the west’s firstmajor gold rush: Lone Butte Press, Santa Fe, NM, 154 pp.
Beaumont, E.C., 1964, Geology of the anthracite coal deposits of the Madrid area, New Mexico:unpublished report, 21 pp.
Beaumont, E.C., 1979, Geology of the Cerrillos coal field, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: New
Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30, p. 269-274.
Beaumont, E.C., Shomaker, J.W., Stone, W.J., and others, 1976, Guidebook to the coal geology
of northwest New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources,
Circular 54, 58 pp.
Bell, B.S., 1987, Report on the induced polarization and resistivity survey in the Ortiz
Mountains, New Mexico: unpublished report for Long Lac Minerals Exploration (Texas)
Inc., by Phoenix Geophysics, Inc.,

144

Black, B.A., 1979a, Structure and stratigraphy of the Hagan embayment: a new look: New
Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30, p. 101-106.
Black, B.A., 1979b, Oil and gas exploration in the Santa Fe – Galisteo - Hagan area of New
Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30, p. 275-279.
Black, B.A., 1982, Oil and gas exploration in the Albuquerque basin: New Mexico GeologicalSociety, Guidebook 33, p. 313-324.
Burnham, C.W., 1979, Magmas and hydrothermal fluids, in Barns, H.L., ed.s Geochemistry ofhydrothermal ore deposits: New York, John Wiley and Sons, p. 71-136.
Burnham, C.W., 1985, Energy release in subvolcanic environments: implication for breccia
formation: Economic Geology, v. 80, p. 1515-1522.
Burns, S.G., 1897, Ortiz Mine Grant: a report to Thomas A. Edison.
Cather, S.M., 1992, Suggested revisions to the Tertiary tectonic history of north-central New
Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 43, p. 109-122.
Chapin, C.E., and Cather, S.M., 1981, Eocene tectonics and sedimentation in the Colorado
Plateau – Rocky Mountain area: Arizona Geological Society Digest, v. 14, p. 173-198.
Chenowith, W.L., 1979, Uranium in the Santa Fe area, New Mexico: New Mexico GeologicalSociety, Guidebook 30, p. 261-264.
Coles, D.W., 1990, Alteration and mineralization of the Carache Canyon gold prospect, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico [MS Thesis]: Fort Collins, Colorado State University, 183 p.
Connolly, J.R., 1981, Geology of the Precambrian rocks of Tijeras Canyon, Bernalillo County,
New Mexico [M.S. Thesis]: Albuquerque, University of New Mexico, 147 pp.
Cook, W., 1970a, An evaluation of the Ortiz Basin No. 2 breccia and Candelaria-Lime anomaliesof the Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: unpublished report to
Molybdenum Corporation of America, 48 pp.
Cook, W., 1970b, Results of sampling the Cunningham placer, Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico: unpublished report to Molybdenum Corporation of America, 48
pp.
Crane, G.W., 1937, Geological report on the Cunningham Mine, a portion of the Ortiz Mine
Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: unpublished report.
Corry, C.E., 1988, Laccoliths; mechanics of emplacement and growth: Geological Society ofAmerica, Special Paper 22, 110 pp.

145

Dale, V.B., and McKinney, W.A., 1959, Tungsten deposits of New Mexico: U.S. Bureau of
Mines, Report on Investigations, 5517, 72 p.
Dane, C.H., 1946, Stratigraphic relations of Eocene, Paleocene, and latest Cretaceous formationof eastern side of San Juan basin, New Mexico: U.S. Geologic Survey, Oil and Gas
Investigations, Preliminary Chart 24.
Dane, C.H., 1960, The boundary between rocks of Carlile and Niobrara age in San Juan Basin,
New Mexico and Colorado: American Journal of Science (Bradley volume), v. 258-A, p.
46-56.
de Carle, R.J., 1987, Report on the combined helicopter magnetic, electromagnetic, and VLF
survey, Ortiz Mountain Range area, for Long Lac Mineral Exploration (Texas) Inc.:
Private report by Aerodat, Ltd., 50 pp.
de Carle, R.J., 1988, Report on the combined helicopter magnetic, electromagnetic, and VLF
survey, Ortiz Mountain Range area extension survey, for Long Lac Mineral Exploration(Texas) Inc.: Private report by Aerodat, Ltd., 26 pp.
Disbrow, A.E., and Stoll, W.C., 1957, Geology of the Cerrillos area, Santa Fe County, New
Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Bulletin 48, 73 pp.
Elliot, J.C., 1991, Vegetation baseline study for the Ortiz Project Joint Venture: Unpublishedreport for Pegasus Gold Corporation, 39 pp.
Elston, W.E., 1967, Summary of the mineral resource of Bernalillo, Sandoval, and Santa Fe
Counties, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Bulletin
81, 81 pp.
Emerick, W.L., 1950, Geology of the Golden area, Santa Fe County, New Mexico [M.S. Thesis]:
Albuquerque, University of New Mexico, 66 pp.
Erskine, D.W., and Smith, G.A., 1993, Compositional characterization of volcanic products froma primarily sedimentary record: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 105, p. 12141222.
Ferguson, C., and Osbourn, R., 2000, Preliminary geologic map of the San Pedro 7.5-minutequadrangle: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Open-File Report,
OM- .
Fulp, M.S., Connolly, W.J., and Woodward, L.A., 1982, Mineralization in Precambrian rocks in
the Manzanita-North Manzano Mountains, central New Mexico: New Mexico
Geological Society, Guidebook 33, p. 303-304.
Gardner, J.H., 1908, Isolated coal fields in Santa Fe and San Miguel Counties, New Mexico:
Contributions to Economic Geology, 1908, Part II, p. 447-451.
146

Gay, S.P., 1969, Report on induced polarization surveys, Ortiz Mine Grant project, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico: unpublished report by Mineral Surveys, Inc. to Molybdenum
Corporation of America, 9 pp.
Gierzycki, G.A., 1984, Carache Canyon, Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico:
report to Long Lac Mineral Exploration, 26 pp.
Gierzycki, G.A., 1985a, Carache Canyon, Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico –Summary report: report to Long Lac Mineral Exploration, 10 pp.
Gierzycki, G.A., 1985b, Crooked Canyon geology report, Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County,
New Mexico: report to Long Lac Mineral Exploration, 13 pp
Gierzycki, G.A., 1985c, Iron Vein, Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: report toLong Lac Mineral Exploration, 18 pp.
Gierzycki, G.A., and Martin, K., 1985, Eagle Canyon geology report, Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico: report to Long Lac Mineral Exploration, 10 pp.
Giles, D.L., 1995, Cerrillos Mining District: minipaper in Bauer, P.W., Maynard, S.R., Smith,G.A., Giles, D.L., Lucas, S.G., Barker, J.M., Smith, E.W., and Kottlowski, F.E., Thirdday road log, from Santa Fe to the Cerrillos Hills, Cerrillos and the Ortiz Mountains:
New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 46th Field Conference, Geology of the Santa
Fe Region, pp 61-62.
Gilbert, G.K., 1877, Geology of the Henry Mountains, Utah: U.S. Geographical and Geological
Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region, 170 p.
Gorham, T.W., 1979, Geology of the Galisteo Formation, Hagan Basin, New Mexico [M.S.
Thesis]: Albuquerque, University of New Mexico.
Gorham, T.W., and Ingersoll, R.V., 1979, Evolution of the Eocene Galisteo Basin, north-central
New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30, p. 219-224.
Gregg, J., 1954, Commerce of the prairies: University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK.
Griswold, C.T., 1950, Report on the mineral possibilities of the Ortiz Mine Grant: private report
prepared for G.W. Potter of Joplin, Missouri.
Griswold, G.R., 1948, Report on the Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: private
report.
Griswold, G.R., 1951a, Calcite vein and Candelario veins, the Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico, scale 1”=200’: unpublished map for Potter and Sims.

147

Griswold, G.R., 1951b, Underground workings of the Candelaria Mine, the Ortiz Mine Grant,
Santa Fe County, New Mexico, scale 1”=50’: unpublished map for Potter and Sims.
Hafenfeld, S.R., and Anderson, O.J., 1995: History and engineering aspects of Galisteo Dam andReservoir, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: minipaper in Bauer, P.W., Maynard, S.R.,
Smith, G.A., Giles, D.L., Lucas, S.G., Barker, J.M., Smith, E.W., and Kottlowski, F.E.,
Third-day road log, from Santa Fe to the Cerrillos Hills, Cerrillos and the Ortiz
Mountains: New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 46th Field Conference, Geologyof the Santa Fe Region, p 64.
Hallof, P.G., 1986, Review of geophysical results from Ortiz project: unpublished report toLong Lac Mineral Exploration, 5 pp.
Hallof, P.G., and Bell, R.A., 1969, Report on the induced polarization and resistivity survey of
the Ortiz basin grid, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: unpublished report by McPhar
Geophysics, Inc. to Molybdenum Corporation of America, 7 pp.
Harrison, E.P., 1949, Geology of the Hagan coal basin [M.S. Thesis]: University of New
Mexico.
Hayden, F.N., 1869, Third annual report of the United States geological survey of the territories
embracing Colorado and New Mexico, including a report by Persifor Frazer, Jr., titled“On mines and minerals of Colorado”: Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
Hickson, R.J.., 1981, Heap leaching practices at Ortiz Gold Mine, Santa Fe County, New
Mexico: Society of Mining Engineers of AIME, preprint, No. 81-347.
Hook, S.C, and Cobban, W.A., 1980, Reinterpretation of type section of Juana Lopez member of
Mancos Shale: New Mexico Geology, vol. 2, No. 2.
Hunt, C.B., Averitt, P., and Miller, R.L., 1953, Geology and geography of the Henry Mountains
region, Utah: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 228.
Huzarski, J.R., 1971, Petrology and structure of the eastern Monte Largo Hills, New Mexico[M.S. Thesis]: Albuquerque, University of New Mexico, 45 pp.
Independent Mining Consultants, Inc., 1992, Reserve audit prepared for Pegasus Gold
Corporation, Ortiz Project Joint Venture.
Ingersoll, R.V., Cavazza, W., Baldridge, W.S., and Shafiqullah, M., 1990, Cenozoic
sedimentation and paleotectonics of north-central New Mexico: implications for initiationand evolution of the Rio Grande Rift: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 102, p.
1280-1296.

148

Ingersoll, R.V., and Kelley, V.C., 1979, Stratigraphy and paleoenvironments of the Hagan Basin,
north-central New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 30th Field
Conference, p. 197-200.
Jackson M.D., and Pollard, D.D., 1988, The laccolith-stock controversy: New results from thesouthern Henry Mountains, Utah: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 100, p 177139.
Johnson, A.M., and Pollard, D.D., 1973, Mechanics of growth of some laccolithic intrusions in
the Henry Mountains, Utah, Part I, Field observations, Gilbert’s model, physicalproperties, and flow of the magma: Tectonophysics, v. 18, no. 3-4, p. 261-309.
Johnson, D.W., 1903, The geology of the Cerrillos Hills, New Mexico: School of Mines
Quarterly, Vol. 24, pp. 173-246, 303-350, 456-500; vol. 25, 00. 69-98.
Johnson, C.H., 1943, San Pedro Mine, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, U.S. Bureau of Mines,
War Minerals Report 143.
Jones, F.A., 1904, New Mexico mines and minerals: World’s Fair edition: New Mexico Printing
Co., Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Jones, F.A., 1935, Occurrence of gold on the Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico:unpublished engineering manuscript, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Kautz, P.F., Ingersoll, R.V., Baldridge, W.S., Damon, P.E., and Shafiqullah, M., 1981, Geologyof the Espinaso Formation (Oligocene), north-central New Mexico, part 2: GeologicalSociety of America, Bulletin, v. 92, pp. 2318-2400.
Kay, B.D., 1986, Vein and breccia gold mineralization and associated igneous rocks at the Ortiz
Mine, New Mexico, USA [M.S. Thesis]: Golden, Colorado School of Mines, 179 p.
Kelley, V.C., 1963, Geologic map of the Sandia Mountains and vicinity, New Mexico: New
Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Geologic Map 18.
Kelley, V.C., and Northrup, S.A., 1975, Geology of the Sandia Mountains and vicinity: New
Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Memoir 29, 136 pp.
Kelson, K.I., Hitchcock, C.S., and Harrison, J.B.J., 1998, Paleoseismologic assessment of thesouthern Tijeras Fault, Central New Mexico, final technical report: U.S. Geological
Survey, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
Kelson, K.I., Hitchcock, C.S., and Harrison, J.B.J., 1999, Paleoseismology of the Tijeras fault
near Golden, New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, 50th annual Field
Conference Guidebook, pp. 201-209.

149

Keyes, C.R., 1909, Garnet contact deposits of copper and the depths at which they are formed:
Economic Geology, v. 4, p. 365-372.
Keyes, C.R., 1918, Mechanics of laccolithic intrusion [abs.],: Geological Society of America
Bulletin, v. 29, p. 75.
Keyes, C.R., 1922, New Mexican laccolithic structures: Pan-American Geologist, v. 37, no.2, p.
109-120.
Klein, J., and Lajoie, J.J, 1988, Electromagnetics: in Van Blaricom, R., compiler, Practicalgeophysics for the exploration geologist: Northwest Mining Association, pp. 239-290.
Knox, W.P., 1981, I.P. report on Florencio prospect: unpublished report for Gold Fields Mining
Corporation, 2 p., with maps.
Koehler, R.D., and Kelson, K.I., 2000, Paleoseismologic assessment of the northern TijerasCañoncito Fault System, Central New Mexico, final technical report: U.S. Geological
Survey, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
Lamb, G.M., 1968, Stratigraphy of the lower Mancos shale in the San Juan Basin: GeologicalSociety of America, Bulletin, v. 79, p. 827-854.
LeBas, M.J., LeMaitre, R.W., Streckeisen, A., and Zanettin, B., 1986. A chemical classificationof volcanic rocks based on the total alkali silica diagram. J. Pet. 27:745-750.
Lee, W.T., 1913, The Cerrillos coal field, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: U.S. Geologic
Survey, Bulletin 531e, pt. II, p. 285-312.
Lindgren, W., and Graton, L.C., 1906, A reconnaissance of the mineral deposits of New Mexico:
U.S. Geologic Survey, Bulletin 285, p. 74-86.
Lindgren, W., Graton, L.C., and Gordon, C.H., 1910, The ore deposits of New Mexico: U.S.
Geologic Survey, Professional Paper 68, 316 pp.
Lindqvist, W.F., 1980, The exploration of the Ortiz gold deposit, New Mexico – geology andexploration: Colorado Mining Association, 1980 Yearbook, p. 106-112.
Lisenbee, A.L., 1967, Geology of the Cerro Pelon – Arroyo de la Jara area, Santa Fe County,
New Mexico [M.S. Thesis]: Albuquerque, University of New Mexico, 112 pp.
Lisenbee, A.L., 1976, Shale diapirism and the structural development of Galisteo Syncline, SantaFe County, New Mexico; in Woodward, L.A., and Northrup, S.A., eds., Tectonics andMineral Resources of Southwestern North America: New Mexico Geological Society
Special Publication No. 6, pp. 88-94.

150

Lisenbee, A.L. and Maynard, S.R., expected 2001, Geology of the Captain Davis Mountain 7.5min. quadrangle, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, New Mexico Bureau of Mines andMineral Resources, Open-file Geologic Map OF-GM 48 , scale 1:12,000.
Lisenbee, A.L., Maynard, S.R., and Rogers, J. , 2001, Preliminary geologic map of the Picture
Rock 7.5-minute quadrangle: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources,
Open-File Report, OM- .
Lisenbee, A.L., Woodward, L.A., and Connolly, J.R., 1979, Tijeras-Cañoncito fault system – a
major zone of recurrent movement in north-central New Mexico: New Mexico
Geological Society, Guidebook 30, p. 89-99.
Locke, A., and Perry, E.H., 1915, The Santa Fe Mine, report of geological examination: report
to Santa Fe Gold & and Copper Mining Company, 100 pp.
Long, R.C., 1985, Progress report, Lukas Canyon area, Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New
Mexico: unpublished report to Long Lac Mineral Exploration, 39 pp.
Long, R.C., 1986a, Ortiz Mine Grant, summary report: unpublished report to Long Lac Mineral
Exploration, 24 pp.
Long, R.C., 1986b, Second progress report for Lukas Canyon, Ortiz Mine Grant: unpublishedreport to Long Lac Mineral Exploration, 32 pp.
Lucas, S.G., 1980, Stratigraphy and age of the Galisteo Formation and the structural history of
the Rio Puerco fault zone (abstract): Geological Society of America, Abstracts with
Programs, v. 12, p. 279.
Lucas, S.G., 1982, Vertebrate paleontology, stratigraphy, and biostratigraphy of Eocene Galisteo
Formation, north-central New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral
Resources, Circular 186, 34 pp.
Lucas, S.G., 1984, Correlation of Eocene rocks of the northern Rio Grande rift and adjacentareas: implications for Laramide tectonics: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook
35, p. 123-128.
Lucas, S.G., and Hayden, S.N., 1991, Type section of the Permian Bernal Formation and thePermian Triassic boundary in north-central New Mexico: New Mexico Geology, v. 13,
p. 9-15.
Lucas, S.G., and Heckert, A.B., 1995, Triassic stratigraphy around the Sandia Uplift, central
New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook, 46th Field Conference, pp.
233-241.
Lucas, S.G., and Kues, B.S., 1979, Vertebrate biostratigraphy of the Eocene Galisteo Formation,
north-central New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30, p. 225-229.
151

Lucas, S.G., Cather, S.M., Abbott, J.C., and Williamson, T.E., 1997, Stratigraphy and tectonic
implications of Paleogene strata in the Laramide Galisteo Basin, north-central New
Mexico: New Mexico Geology, November, 1997.
Lucas, S.G., Anderson, O.J., and Estep, J.W., 1998, Stratigraphy and correlation of Middle
Cretaceous rocks (Albian-Cenomanian) from the Colorado Plateau to the southern High
Plains, north-central New Mexico: in Lucas, S.G., Kirkland, J.I., and Estep, J.W., eds.,
1998, Lower and Middle Cretaceous Terrestrial Ecosystems: New Mexico Museum of
Natural History and Science Bulletin No. 14, p. 57-66.
Lucas, S.G., Estep, J.W., and Anderson, O.J., 1999, Correlation of Jurassic strata from theColorado Plateau to the High Plains, across the Rio Grande rift, north-central New
Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 50th Field Conference,
Albuquerque Geology, pp. 317-326.
Marcou, J., 1858, Geology of North America, with two reports on the prairies of Arkansas andTexas, the Rocky Mountains of New Mexico, and the Sierra Nevada of California,
originally made for the United States Government: Zurcher and Furrer, Zurich, 144 p.
Martin, K.W., 1991, Summary of drilling exploration and geologic resource evaluation of the
Lukas Canyon deposit: unpublished report for Ortiz Joint Venture.
Maynard, S.R., 1995, Gold mineralization associated with mid-Tertiary magmatism andtectonism, Ortiz Mountains, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: New Mexico GeologicalSociety, Guidebook 46, p. 161-166.
Maynard, S., 2000, Geology of the Golden 7.5-min. quadrangle, Santa Fe County, New Mexico,
New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Open-file Geologic Map OF-GM
36, scale 1:12,000.
Maynard, S., Rogers, J. and others, 2001, Geology of the Madrid 7.5-min. quadrangle, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico, New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Open-file
Geologic Map OF-GM 40, scale 1:12,000.
Maynard, S.R., Nelsen, C.J., Martin, K.W., and Schutz, J.L., 1990, Geology and gold
mineralization of the Ortiz Mountains, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: Mining
Engineering, August 1990, p. 1007-1011.
Maynard, S.R., Woodward, L.A., and Giles, D.L., 1991, Tectonics, intrusive rocks, andmineralization of the San Pedro-Ortiz porphyry belt, north-central New Mexico: New
Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Bulletin 137.
McCallum, M.E., 1985, Experimental evidence for fluidization processes in breccia pipe
formation: Economic Geology, v. 80, p. 1523-1543.

152

McQuiston, F.W., and Shoemaker, R.S., 1981, Gold and silver cyanidation plant practice,
Volume II: Society of Mining Engineers of American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,
and Petroleum Engineers, Inc., New York, 263 pp.
McRae, O.M., 1958, Geology of the northern part of the Ortiz Mountains, Santa Fe County, New
Mexico [M.S. Thesis]: Albuquerque, University of New Mexico, 112 pp.
Metric Corporation, 1991, Late summer and winter wildlife baseline studies and wildlife impact
analysis of the Ortiz Mountains, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: Unpublished report for
Pegasus Gold Corporation.
Milford, H.E., 1994, History of the Los Cerrillos mining area: New Mexico Abandoned Mine
Land Bureau Report 1994-2.
Milford, H.E., 1995, Mining history of the Cunningham deposit and Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico: minipaper in Bauer, P.W., Maynard, S.R., Smith, G.A., Giles,
D.L., Lucas, S.G., Barker, J.M., Smith, E.W., and Kottlowski, F.E., Third-day road log,from Santa Fe to the Cerrillos Hills, Cerrillos and the Ortiz Mountains: New Mexico
Geological Society Guidebook, 46th Field Conference, Geology of the Santa Fe Region,
pp 65-67.
Molenaar, C.M., 1977, Stratigraphy and depostional history of upper Cretaceous rocks of the San
Juan Basin area, New Mexico and Colorado, with a note on economic resources: New
Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 28, p. 159-166.
Moore, J.C., 1979, Uranium deposits in the Galisteo Formation of the Hagan Basin, SandovalCounty, New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30, p. 265-267
Mudge, R.M., 1968, Depth control of some concordant intrusions: Geological Society ofAmerica Bulletin, v. 79, p. 315-322.
Mutschler, F.E., Griffin, M.E., Stevens, D.S., and Shannon, S.S. Jr., 1985, Precious metal
deposits related to alkaline rocks in the North American cordillera – an interpretive
review: Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa, v. 88, p. 355-377.
Mutschler, F.E., Mooney, T.C., and Johnson, D.C., 1990, Precious metal deposits related toalkaline igneous rocks—a space-time trip through the Cordillera:
Myers, D.A., and McKay, E.J., 1976, Geologic map of the north end of the Manzano Mountains,
Tijeras and Sedillo quadrangles, Bernalillo County, New Mexico: U.S. Geological
Survey, Map I-968.
New Mexico Geological Society, 1982, New Mexico highway geologic map, scale 1:1,000,000.
North, R.M., and McLemore, V.T., 1986, Silver and gold occurrences in New Mexico: New
Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Resource Map 15, 32 pp.
153

North, R. M., and McLemore, V.T., 1988, A classification of the precious metal deposits of New
Mexico: in Bulk mineable precious metal deposits of the western United States,
Symposium Proceedings, Geological Society of Nevada.
Ogilvie, I.H., 1905, The high-altitude conoplain: a topographic form illustrated in the Ortiz
Mountains: American Geologist, v. 36, p. 27-34.
Ogilvie, I.H., 1908, Some igneous rocks from the Ortiz Mountains, New Mexico: Journal of
Geology, v. 16, p. 230-238.
Perry, V.D., and Moehlman, R.S., 1938, Report on the Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New
Mexico: unpublished report.
Peterson, J.W., 1958, Geology of the southern part of the Ortiz Mountains, Santa Fe County,
New Mexico [M.S. Thesis]: Albuquerque, University of New Mexico.
Picha, M.G., 1982, Structure and stratigraphy of the Montezuma salient – Hagan Basin area,
Sandoval County, New Mexico [M.S. Thesis]: Albuquerque, University of New Mexico,
248 pp.
Pitard, F.F., 1988, Study of the heterogeneity of the Ortiz gold ore: Confidential report to LAC
Minerals, USA, Inc., 72 pp.
Pollard, D.D., Muller, O.H., and Dockstader, D.R., 1975, The form and growth of fingered sheet
intrusions: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 86, p. 351-363.
Raymond, R.W., 1870, Report on the mineral resources of the states and territories west of the
Rocky Mountains: 40th Congress, 3rd session, Ex. Doc. No. 54., Ch LVII, p. 404-407.
Raymond, R.W., 1870 (for the year 1869), Statistics of mines and mining: House ofRepresentatives Document 207, p. 407.
Raymond, R.W., 1872 (for the year 1870), Statistics of mines and mining: House ofRepresentatives Document 10, p. 283.
Read, A.S., Karlstrom, K.E., and Ilg, B., 1999a, Mississippian Del Padre Sandstone orProterozoic quartzite?: minipaper in NM Geological Society Guidebook, 50th Field
Conference, Albuquerque Geology, 1999, pp 41-45.
Read, A.S., Karlstrom, K.E., Connell, S., Kirby, E., Ferguson, C., Ilg, B., Pazzaglia, F., Osburn,G., and Van Hart, D., 1999b, Geology of the Sandia Crest 7.5-minute quadrangle,
Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines andMineral Resources, Open-file Digital Geologic Map OFDM 6, scale 1:12,000.
Read, C.B., Duffner, R.T., Wood, G.H., and Zapp, A.D., 1950, Coal resources of New Mexico:
U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 89, 24 pp.
154

Robinson, P., 1957, Age of Galisteo Formation, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 41, p. 757.
Sadowski, R.M., 1974, Ortiz Mine Project – geophysical report: Conoco, Inc., unpublishedreport.
Sadowski, R.M., 1975, Ortiz Mine Project – geophysical report: Conoco, Inc., unpublishedreport.
Schroer, G., 1994, Geology of the Greenhorn Au-Cu skarn deposit, Lukas Canyon, Ortiz mining
district, New Mexico [M.S. Thesis]: Colorado State University, 115 pp.
Schutz, J.L., 1988, Gold mineralization in the #1, #2A, #3, and #4 sills and Point Lookout
Sandstone: confidential report for LAC Minerals, USA, Inc.
Schutz, J.L, 1991, Ortiz Mine Grant, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, summary report, gold
resource evaluation of the Carache Canyon prospect: unpublished report for the Ortiz
Project JV.
Schutz, J.L., 1995, Gold mineralization associated with alkaline intrusives, Carache Canyon
breccia pipe prospect, Ortiz Mountains, New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society,
Guidebook 46, p. 167-174.
Schutz, J.L, and Nelsen, C.J., 1990, Geology and gold mineralization of the Carache Canyon
breccia pipe, Ortiz Mountains, New Mexico: in Gold ’90, Proceedings of the Gold ’90
Symposium, Salt Lake City, Utah, D.M. Hausen, editor, p. 65-81.
Seay, M., and Armstrong, D., 1974, Geology of the southwest Ortiz Mountains: unpublishedreport, Continental Oil Company, Mineral Exploration Dept.
Sillitoe, R.H., 1979, Some thoughts on gold-rich porphyry copper deposits: Mineralium
Deposita, v. 14, pp 161-174.
Sillitoe, R.H., 1985, Ore-related breccias in volcano-plutonic arcs: Economic Geology, v. 80, p.
1467-1514.
Smith, D.A., and Nelsen, C.J., 1989, High-resolution helicopter mag-em survey of the Ortiz
Mountains, Santa Fe County, New Mexico: Mining Engineering.
Smith, G.A., 1995, Supplemental road log 3, Cerrillos to I-25 via Waldo: New Mexico
Geological Society Guidebook, 46th Field Conference, Geology of the Santa Fe Region,
pp 77-79.
Smith, G.A., Larsen, D., Harlan, S.S., McIntosh, W.C., Erskine, D.W., and Taylor, S., 1991, A
tale of two volcaniclastic aprons: Field guide to the sedimentology and physicalvolcanology of the Oligocene Espinaso Formation and Miocene Peralta Tuff, north155

central New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Bulletin
137, p. 87-103.
Smith, J.F., and others, 1945, San Pedro and Carnahan Mines, New Placers mining district, SantaFe County, New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey, File Report.
Spiegel, Z., and Baldwin, B., 1963, Geology and water resources of the Santa Fe area, New
Mexico, with contributions by F.E. Kottlowski and E.L. Barrows, and with a section on
geophysics, by H.A. Winkler: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1525, 258 p.;
U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 403 p., 1958.
Springett, M., 1980, The exploration of the Ortiz gold deposit, New Mexico – sampling and ore
reserves: Colorado Mining Association, 1980 Mining Yearbook.
Stearns, C.E., 1943, The Galisteo Formation of north-central New Mexico: Journal of Geology,
v. 51, p. 301-319.
Stearns, C.E., 1953a, Early Tertiary vulcanism in the Galisteo-Tonque area, north-central New
Mexico: American Journal of Science, v. 251, p. 415-452.
Stearns, C.E., 1953b, Tertiary geology of the Galisteo-Tonque area, north-central New Mexico:
Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 64, p. 459-508.
Stearns, C.E., 1953c, Upper Cretaceous rocks of the Galisteo-Tonque area, north-central New
Mexico: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 37, p. 961-974.
Stearns, C.E., 1979, New K-Ar dates and the late Pliocene to Holocene geomorphic history of
the central Rio Grande region, New Mexico: Discussion: Geological Society of America
Bulletin, Part I, v.90, p. 799-800.
Sun, M-S., and Baldwin, B., 1958, Volcanic rocks of the Cienega area, Santa Fe County, New
Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Bulletin 54, 80 pp.
Thompson, T.B., 1964, The geology of the South Mountain area, Bernalillo, Sandoval, and SantaFe Counties, New Mexico [M.S. Thesis]: University of New Mexico, 69 pp.
Thompson, T.B., 1964, The geology of the South Mountain area, Bernalillo, Sandoval, and SantaFe Counties, New Mexico (abs.): New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 15th Field
Conference, p. 188.
Timmons, J.M., Karlstrom, K.E., and Kirby, E., 1995, Geology of the Monte Largo Hills area,
New Mexico: structural and metamorphic study of the eastern aureole of the Sandia
pluton: New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 46th Field Conference, Geology of
the Santa Fe Region, pp. 227-232.

156

Townley, J.M., 1968, History of mining activity in New Mexico, prehispanic to 1920 [M.A.
Thesis]: University of Nevada, Reno.
Townley, J.M., 1971, El Placer: A New Mexico mining boom before 1846: Journal of the West,v. 10, no. 1, p. 102-115.
Turnbull, L.A., Toenges, A.L., Davis, J.E., Reynolds, D.A., and Parks, B.C., 1951, Miller Gulch
and Cook and White coal beds, near Cerrillos, Santa Fe County, New Mexico – reserves,
coking, petrographic, and chemical properties: U.S. Bureau of Mines, Report ofInvestigations 4814, 29 pp.
Wargo, J.G., 1964, Geology of a primary disseminated copper deposit near Cerrillos, New
Mexico: Geological Society of America Special Paper 76, p.296.
Widdecomb, R., 1976, Geology of the Madrid coal mines, Cerrillos coal field, Santa Fe County,
New Mexico (unpublished field project): Albuquerque, University of New Mexico, 22
pp.
Wieduwilt, W.G., 1980, Induced polarization and resistivity survey, Ortiz property, Santa Fe
County, New Mexico: unpublished report for Gold Fields Mining Corporation by Mining
Geophysical Surveys, Inc., 4 p.
Wilson, E.D., 1956, Mineralization in the Alpine, Gold Leaf, and Gypsy Queen areas of the Ortiz
Mountains, New Mexico: unpublished report for Potter and Sims of Joplin, Missouri, 36
pp.
Wislizenus, A., 1848, Memoir of a tour to northern Mexico: Senate Miscellaneous Document,
No. 26, 30th Congress, 1st Session.
Woodward, L.A., 1979, Tectonics of central-northern New Mexico: New Mexico GeologicalSociety, Guidebook 30, p. 101-106.
Woodward, L.A., 1982, Tectonic framework of Albuquerque country: New Mexico GeologicalSociety, Guidebook 33, p. 141-146.
Woodward, L.A., 1984, Basement control of Tertiary intrusions and associated mineral deposits
along Tijeras-Cañoncito fault system, New Mexico: Geology, v. 12, p. 531-533.
Woodward, L.A., 1987, Tectonic map of the Ortiz porphyry belt and Tijeras fault system:
unpublished report for Long Lac Mineral Exploration.
Woodward, L.A., and Ingersoll, R.V., 1979, Phanerozoic tectonic setting of Santa Fe Country:
New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30.

157

Woodward, L.A., Ingersoll, R.V., Fitch, D.C., and Hutchinson, P., 1979, Second day optionalroad log number 2, New Mexico highway 14 to Gold Fields Mining Corporation’s Ortiz
Mine: New Mexico Geological Society, Guidebook 30, p. 27-28.
Wright, A., 1983, The Ortiz gold deposit (Cunningham Hill) – geology and exploration: Nevada
Bureau of Mines and Geology, Report 36, p. 42-51.
Yung, M.B., and McCaffrey, R.S., 1903, The ore deposits of the San Pedro district, New
Mexico: American Institue of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering Transactions, v. 33,
p. 350-362.

158

APPENDIX I. Major oxide and trace element analyses, Ortiz Mountains (from Coles, 1990).
Sample ID

Trachytic latite
porphyry

Trachyte
porphyry

OC-49 722
OC-49 763.7
OC-58 714.5
OC-55 136
DJ-62
DJ-82
OC-12 506.8
OC-27 2158
OC-36 1927
OC-44 85
OC-45 152.6

Tephri-phonolite
IG-63
porphyry
IG-43
Quartz-latite
OCN-8 249.5
porphyry
OCN-10 431
DJ-78
Quartz-trachyte
DJ-102porphyry
IG-96
IG-46
IG-47
IG-48
Quartz monzonite
IG-62
IG-69
IG-93
IG-92
Latite porphyry
OCN-11 409.5
OC-27 2087.6
Foid-bearing
OC-41 2249.5
trachyte
OC-27 2224.8
porphyry
OC-41 2238
OC-40 314.5
Latite-trachyte
OC-45 404
porphyry
OC-53 465.5
IG-32
IG-66
IG-91
IG-94
IG-95
IG-97
DJ-17
DJ-34
DJ-117
OC-13 1066.6
OC-12 377
OC-12 471
OC-16 471.7
OC-31 564
OC-40 661.7

Rock AlteraType
tion
Ttlp
S/C
Ttlp
S/C
Ttlp
S/C
Ttlp
A/S
Ttlp
S/W
Ttlp
S/C
Ttp
S/A
Ttp
S/A
Ttp
S/A
Ttp
S
Ttp
S

SiO2
%
62.50
57.90
57.50
64.00
59.00
56.90
56.43
61.00
62.00
60.40
60.60

TiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3
MnO
FeO %
%
%
%
%
0.38 19.60 0.88
0.60
0.08
0.38 18.50 1.41
0.60
0.07
0.37 18.40 0.24
0.65
0.09
0.40 20.90 0.02
0.15
<.02
0.58 21.20 3.09
0.20
0.19
0.45 19.30 0.91
0.65
0.10
0.25 19.70 0.51
0.60
0.23
0.17 19.20 1.55
0.25
0.02
0.17 18.20 0.44
0.40
0.03
0.49 20.60 2.70
0.25
<.02
0.44 22.60 0.52
0.15
<.02

MgO
%
0.32
1.36
1.43
0.12
0.23
0.40
0.30
0.29
0.19
0.22
0.22

CaO
%
0.61
2.47
3.32
0.38
0.23
4.66
3.69
1.89
1.84
0.12
0.23

Na2O
%
5.55
3.60
4.73
6.20
5.40
4.41
3.55
5.26
2.53
5.17
4.37

K2O
%
5.68
7.51
6.06
4.95
5.69
5.16
8.54
7.14
10.80
6.54
5.88

P2O5
Totals
LOI %
%
%
0.29
1.60 98.09
0.28
3.80 97.88
0.26
4.40 97.45
0.26
1.10 98.48
0.33
1.90 98.04
0.28
4.80 98.02
0.24
3.90 97.94
0.20
2.20 99.17
0.24
1.70 98.54
0.25
2.40 99.14
0.21
3.30 98.52

CO2
%
0.51
3.40
4.10
<.02
<.02
3.70
2.96
1.46
1.53
<.02
<.02

H20+
%
1.10
0.36
0.25
0.94
1.70
1.01
0.58
1.15
0.42
2.13
2.19

0.59
1.04
0.33
<.02
<.02
0.19
0.03
1.08
0.35
1.76
0.02

Ag
As
Au
B
Ba
(ppm) (ppm) (ppb) (ppm) (ppm)
0.1
5.6
<2
17
1800
0.1
19.0
8
18
2100
0.1
2.5
<2
19
1700
0.6
2.0
3
18
1800
0.1
2.6
<2
51
1100
0.9
<.5
<2
81
1000
1.9
3.3
<2
72
980
1.4
182.0
13
26
1200
0.2
5.3
<2
16
1700
2.8
153.0 588
57
1500
2.3
16.0
<2
33
1400

Ttpp

F

51.87

0.77

20.15

3.70

2.50

0.20

2.03

6.21

4.50

5.06

0.37

2.33

99.69

0.02

2.08

0.04

0.2

8.2

6

116

1900

Tqlp
Tqlp
Tqlp
Tqtp
Tqtp
Tqtp
Tqmd
Tqmd
Tqmd
Tqmd
Tqmd
Tqmd
Tlp
Tlp
Tftp
Tftp
Tftp
Tftp
Tltp
Tltp
Tltp
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap

F
F
F
S
W/B
W
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
H
H
M
M
B/S
B/S
B/S
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P

62.40
62.72
64.23
65.90
68.80
67.76
64.36
59.00
60.90
62.26
60.62
58.74
61.82
61.35
59.80
60.10
60.90
61.00
56.50
51.30
56.30
61.60
59.98
63.70
58.80
61.96
61.15
59.70
64.40
58.30
63.40
57.90
63.10
59.20
63.80
64.80

0.38
0.41
0.41
0.22
0.20
0.25
0.42
0.78
0.70
0.70
0.89
1.02
0.33
0.49
0.17
0.19
0.17
0.20
0.81
0.73
0.81
0.46
0.98
0.48
0.81
0.78
0.69
0.55
0.49
0.70
0.46
0.60
0.38
0.71
0.32
0.32

17.00
16.79
17.43
16.90
16.80
17.26
16.30
16.70
16.70
17.01
16.52
16.42
19.29
18.29
19.20
18.90
19.60
18.90
20.90
18.60
19.90
17.20
17.32
17.77
16.78
16.47
17.43
17.20
16.80
17.30
16.70
16.60
17.10
17.10
14.40
16.10

2.74
2.40
2.15
1.28
0.40
0.95
2.17
3.34
3.53
3.45
4.30
4.10
2.15
3.20
1.65
2.42
1.62
2.11
3.63
3.54
4.02
1.45
3.45
2.25
3.55
1.21
3.00
1.53
2.62
1.09
0.70
1.20
0.55
0.93
0.38
0.54

0.85
1.30
0.90
0.20
0.15
0.25
1.20
2.05
2.20
1.65
1.95
2.25
0.50
0.40
0.70
0.65
0.70
0.90
0.50
4.55
0.50
2.75
1.75
1.55
1.95
2.95
1.70
2.20
1.55
4.90
2.70
4.30
3.40
4.75
2.05
2.05

0.06
0.06
0.08
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.08
0.19
0.14
0.16
0.11
0.15
0.11
0.08
0.06
0.05
0.34
0.07
0.07
0.29
0.13
0.13
0.19
0.12
0.16
0.13
0.07
0.07
0.03
0.15
0.07
0.18
0.09
0.14
0.09
0.07

0.86
0.74
0.51
0.25
0.15
0.05
1.18
2.08
2.12
1.50
2.16
2.43
0.11
0.41
0.17
0.25
0.11
0.18
1.52
1.75
2.03
1.60
1.51
0.99
1.75
1.23
1.65
2.27
1.46
2.22
1.41
2.24
0.89
1.67
0.84
0.83

3.14
2.97
3.12
2.23
1.32
0.46
4.00
6.02
5.53
4.97
5.58
6.46
1.93
2.81
3.63
2.63
1.22
2.45
1.15
0.69
1.22
5.19
5.17
4.03
5.68
4.70
5.46
6.82
2.79
7.02
4.02
5.10
3.11
5.00
3.49
2.67

5.06
4.73
6.19
4.79
5.13
6.61
4.72
4.04
3.76
4.06
4.32
3.96
5.42
6.38
7.28
6.11
8.31
6.13
5.51
4.19
5.28
4.34
4.67
5.23
3.82
4.61
4.75
3.78
4.62
3.57
4.79
4.66
4.95
3.78
4.48
4.82

3.96
4.36
3.60
4.29
4.66
4.89
2.40
1.75
2.56
2.17
2.64
2.40
7.13
4.78
3.72
4.84
5.09
4.85
4.20
5.13
3.60
1.94
3.59
2.52
2.67
3.50
2.42
1.51
2.24
1.52
2.71
3.16
2.96
2.61
3.54
3.28

0.42
0.15
0.14
0.41
0.25
0.04
0.32
0.65
0.54
0.27
0.34
0.34
0.04
0.14
0.23
0.22
0.35
0.21
0.52
0.50
0.49
0.40
0.31
0.18
0.31
0.22
0.27
0.38
0.54
0.39
0.38
0.44
0.31
0.46
0.44
0.33

1.70
2.46
0.46
2.60
0.60
0.91
0.60
0.70
0.50
0.85
0.61
0.82
0.45
0.93
2.50
2.00
0.70
1.60
3.40
6.90
3.90
1.40
1.00
1.01
3.17
1.25
0.96
1.90
1.70
1.20
1.00
1.60
0.70
1.60
4.40
2.80

98.57
99.09
99.22
99.12
98.48
99.49
97.75
97.30
99.18
99.05
100.04
99.09
99.28
99.26
99.11
98.36
99.11
98.60
98.71
98.17
98.18
98.46
99.92
99.83
99.45
99.01
99.55
97.91
99.24
98.36
98.34
97.98
97.54
97.95
98.23
98.61

0.50
0.84
0.02
1.55
0.02
<.02
<.02
0.09
<.02
<.02
<.02
0.21
<.02
0.14
1.84
1.31
0.09
0.82
<.02
1.93
<.02
0.16
0.14
0.09
0.26
0.15
<.02
0.56
0.03
0.05
0.41
1.00
<.02
0.01
3.25
1.62

0.96
1.08
0.33
0.99
0.61
0.77
0.60
0.52
0.45
0.35
0.49
0.58
0.37
0.65
0.84
0.38
0.62
0.01
2.11
4.64
2.08
1.07
0.59
0.78
2.43
1.09
0.71
1.10
1.34
1.07
0.51
0.62
0.60
1.00
1.14
1.08

<.02
0.03
0.03
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
0.03
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
0.02
0.67
0.06
0.05
<.02
2.31
0.02
0.11
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.17
<.02
<.02
<.02
0.16
0.27
0.20
0.18
0.09
0.25
0.12

0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
1.3
0.6
3.5
0.6
1.1
1.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
<.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.7
0.0
0.1

<.5
1.1
0.7
0.9
0.9
3.2
<.5
<.5
0.9
1.4
0.7
0.5
0.7
1.5
3.9
4.3
30.0
8.3
70.1
41.0
65.1
<.5
2.1
1.1
0.8
<.5
0.8
2.0
<.5
11.0
7.4
1.4
1.5
8.0
42.0
6.2

13
36
10
<2
9
2
<2
<2
<2
4
3
3
<2
10
<2
<2
<2
<2
12
17
<2
2
3
<2
3
3
5
91
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
4
<2

12
40
40
15
12
46
<10
<10
11
59
56
55
52
49
305
121
191
53
36
42
28
10
59
54
48
46
35
<10
<10
<10
15
12
14
<10
35
19

1700
1700
1700
1400
1900
1800
1300
1400
1200
1200
1100
1000
3100
1800
540
990
80
560
1400
1600
1300
1300
1400
1400
1200
1400
1200
1100
1200
900
1300
1700
1600
1400
710
1800

S%

Sample ID
OC-50 1488.8
DJ-13
Trachytic latite
OC-4 498.3
porphyry
OC-17 831
OC-34 111.8
OC-41 1501
Andesite
OC-49 99.5
porphyry
OC-67 782
OC-33 216
OC-36 3349.7
OC-36 608.2
OC-44 107
OC-27 1514.7
OC-27 2227.6
OC-36 850.8
OC-41 1056.4
OC-12 291
OC-16 594
OC-33 406.9
OC-34 371
OC-36 122.4
OC-50 1517
OC-13 1058
OC-45 1301.8
OC-41 1270
OC-41 1703.8
OC-50 1378
DJ-32
DJ-61
IG-50
IG-54
Augite monzonite
IG-64& hornblendeIG-44
augiteIG-55
monzodiorite
IG-90
IG-101
IG-98
Phonotephrite
porphyry &IG-99
phonotephrite
IG-100Rock AlteraType
tion

SiO2
%

TiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3
MnO
FeO %
%
%
%
%

MgO
%

CaO
%

Na2O
%

K2O
%

P2O5
Totals
LOI %
%
%

CO2
%

H20+
%

S%

Ag
As
Au
B
Ba
(ppm) (ppm) (ppb) (ppm) (ppm)

Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tap
Tamd
Tamd
Tamd
Tam
Tam
Tam
Tam
Tptp
Tpt
Tpt

65.10
57.80
62.80
58.10
63.40
63.90
62.90
64.00
70.90
67.40
66.00
69.00
61.10
65.20
66.70
64.70
67.03
59.10
68.70
66.30
63.20
65.00
62.60
58.90
65.30
64.80
66.40
59.40
67.30
55.23
56.10
58.56
54.10
54.50
55.89
53.85
50.51
47.16
47.65

0.32
0.70
0.57
0.61
0.85
0.44
0.42
0.56
0.53
0.48
0.57
0.42
0.46
0.33
0.32
0.49
0.32
0.57
0.34
0.80
0.85
0.40
0.55
0.78
0.48
0.41
0.38
0.66
0.33
1.24
0.91
0.86
1.11
1.07
0.89
0.88
0.86
1.77
1.75

1.01
1.99
1.62
1.77
0.20
1.30
1.17
1.62
0.29
0.14
0.33
0.22
0.79
0.18
0.59
0.74
0.73
0.40
0.16
0.15
0.17
0.23
1.02
1.89
0.45
0.59
0.10
1.90
0.50
2.30
1.78
1.25
2.03
1.72
1.36
1.63
2.40
2.48
2.49

2.00
6.17
2.88
0.90
0.68
3.58
3.00
4.03
0.34
0.62
0.54
0.18
1.04
2.25
1.06
1.36
0.48
0.67
0.28
0.69
0.88
0.57
2.48
2.66
1.05
1.83
0.55
10.10
3.08
7.54
6.04
5.58
7.19
6.60
5.81
4.50
6.80
8.08
7.99

5.46
3.68
5.15
4.66
3.76
4.16
4.72
4.11
3.72
3.32
6.06
4.34
3.52
7.04
4.82
2.70
3.79
7.87
4.80
5.01
2.95
7.48
3.36
2.76
3.35
6.17
6.54
3.74
4.10
4.25
4.58
5.30
4.61
4.72
5.04
5.72
4.42
4.41
4.57

3.27
1.85
2.53
4.36
6.94
2.81
2.73
1.93
4.08
3.76
3.55
3.06
2.84
1.97
4.10
4.40
3.49
0.30
3.93
4.43
5.32
3.69
4.07
3.80
7.45
3.96
6.15
0.22
4.62
2.92
3.55
3.59
3.49
3.72
4.41
4.88
4.42
4.21
4.01

0.29
0.44
0.39
0.54
0.41
0.36
0.35
0.37
0.40
0.37
0.39
0.24
0.40
0.28
0.29
0.37
0.33
0.41
0.31
0.44
0.45
0.32
0.40
0.45
0.34
0.34
0.46
0.44
0.29
0.51
0.49
0.26
0.55
0.48
0.27
0.37
0.39
0.60
0.59

2.62
1.69
0.02
0.07
<.02
0.76
0.30
0.08
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
2.17
1.44
1.54
1.04
0.09
0.04
0.09
<.02
<.02
<.02
2.29
3.55
1.04
1.97
0.09
0.05
0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
0.02
0.05
0.17
0.09
<.02
0.09

0.47
1.52
1.03
2.07
1.45
0.48
0.80
0.68
1.70
2.70
1.47
2.09
2.63
1.32
0.99
2.33
2.39
4.55
1.42
1.04
2.48
0.75
1.36
2.13
0.48
0.01
0.31
0.56
0.46
0.26
0.60
0.24
0.26
0.24
0.40
2.48
3.07
3.33
3.60

0.15
0.03
0.33
0.14
<.02
0.32
0.29
0.05
0.03
0.06
0.12
0.77
0.29
1.57
0.19
0.11
0.06
1.60
1.16
0.04
<.02
<.02
0.38
0.54
0.05
0.51
0.05
0.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
0.02
0.02
<.02
0.02

0.1
0.3
0.1
0.7
1.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.5
0.7
1.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
2.1
0.6
0.7
6.6
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.3
1.1
0.7
0.2
1.1
1.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
<.1
<.1

P
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
S/A
S/A
S/A
S/A
S/C
S/C
S/C
S/C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A/C
A/C
K
K
K
TM
TM
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F

15.70
17.00
16.60
16.70
19.00
16.50
16.60
16.70
18.24
19.50
17.50
17.50
17.00
16.60
16.10
18.40
16.50
17.40
16.80
18.70
19.70
19.90
17.10
17.70
17.40
16.66
17.60
18.20
16.70
18.10
18.30
18.57
18.60
18.90
19.41
18.93
19.14
18.32
18.26

0.15
2.99
0.83
0.89
0.46
0.74
0.96
1.77
0.66
0.15
1.37
0.16
0.74
1.99
0.60
0.53
0.33
2.86
1.61
0.04
0.59
0.04
1.35
0.90
0.47
0.82
1.78
0.52
0.60
4.67
3.47
3.75
4.00
3.47
3.55
3.60
3.50
5.40
4.30

1.40
2.70
4.00
6.95
0.25
3.10
3.40
3.45
0.30
0.20
0.15
0.25
4.25
0.30
1.40
0.75
2.25
3.45
0.15
0.20
0.45
0.15
1.80
2.00
0.75
0.65
1.40
1.40
0.40
2.10
2.40
1.45
2.65
2.40
2.10
2.25
3.20
2.95
3.85

0.08
0.17
0.08
0.18
<.02
0.05
0.06
0.06
<.02
<.02
0.03
<.02
0.12
0.02
0.07
0.02
0.25
0.26
<.02
<.02
<.02
<.02
0.05
0.09
0.03
0.03
<.02
0.05
0.02
0.17
0.15
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.24
0.21
0.19
0.21
0.21

3.40
3.30
1.20
2.40
2.00
1.60
1.70
1.00
2.30
3.30
1.80
2.50
5.50
2.10
2.50
4.30
2.30
4.90
1.70
1.40
3.60
0.70
4.40
6.00
1.70
2.30
0.50
1.10
0.40
0.30
0.70
0.48
0.30
0.30
0.67
2.68
3.47
3.47
3.75

98.18
98.79
98.65
98.06
97.95
98.54
98.01
99.60
101.76
99.24
98.29
97.87
97.76
98.26
98.55
98.76
97.80
98.19
98.78
98.16
98.16
98.48
99.18
97.93
98.77
98.56
101.86
97.73
98.34
99.33
98.47
99.86
98.84
98.09
99.64
99.50
99.30
99.06
98.82

2.6
1.6
1.5
2.3
10.0
<.5
5.6
1.8
70.7
5.2
3.5
119.0
2.5
512.0
113.0
0.6
11.0
86.2
1180.0
15.0
15.0
2.9
1.6
5.2
21.0
593.0
0.7
<.5
<.5
<.5
<.5
2.9
3.3
2.3
4.2
7.5
5.0
5.8
6.1

6
10
<2
9
16
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
49
160
5
28
40
17
<2
31
130
6
21
<2
<2
<2
17
84
<2
<2
2
<2
<2
5
<2
<2
11
<2
<2
<2
4

19
14
14
14
27
15
15
15
75
33
30
42
28
19
34
51
40
19
35
35
45
11
90
73
32
40
11
<10
<10
<10
19
65
38
26
84
59
52
38
47

1500
1600
1300
1600
2600
1500
1300
820
1700
1800
950
1100
1700
720
1500
1500
970
<20
960
2000
2400
1600
1200
330
2300
1700
2000
100
1500
1300
1600
2300
2000
2300
2000
1900
1900
2800
2900

APPENDIX I. Major oxide and trace element analyses, Ortiz Mountains (from Coles, 1990).
Sample ID

Trachytic latite
porphyry

Trachyte
porphyry

OC-49 722
OC-49 763.7
OC-58 714.5
OC-55 136
DJ-62
DJ-82
OC-12 506.8
OC-27 2158
OC-36 1927
OC-44 85
OC-45 152.6

Tephri-phonolite
IG-63
porphyry
IG-43
Quartz-latite
OCN-8 249.5
porphyry
OCN-10 431
DJ-78
Quartz-trachyte
DJ-102porphyry
IG-96
IG-46
IG-47
IG-48
Quartz monzonite
IG-62
IG-69
IG-93
IG-92
Latite porphyry
OCN-11 409.5
OC-27 2087.6
Foid-bearing
OC-41 2249.5
trachyte
OC-27 2224.8
porphyry
OC-41 2238
OC-40 314.5
Latite-trachyte
OC-45 404
porphyry
OC-53 465.5
IG-32
IG-66
IG-91
IG-94
IG-95
IG-97
DJ-17
DJ-34
DJ-117
OC-13 1066.6
OC-12 377
OC-12 471
OC-16 471.7
OC-31 564
OC-40 661.7

Be
Bi
Br
Cd
Ce
Co
Cr
Cs
Cu
Eu
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
4
<2
<2
<1
110
5
29
4.1
<1
1
3
<2
<2
<1
110
5
41
5.1
1
<1
3
<2
<2
<1
110
3
19
4.1
<1
1
3
<2
<2
<1
110
3
19
4.1
<1
<1
5
<2
<2
<1
120
11
13
1.9
69
1
4
<2
<2
<1
92
5
7
2.7
37
1
3
<2
<2
<1
170
1
9
5.6
9
1
5
8
2.2
<1
290
5
19
5.4
13
2
2
<2
<2
<1
110
1
51
3.9
1
<1
4
<2
2.5
<1
66
13
33
3.8
274
1
2
<2
<2
<1
150
5
17
4.3
61
<1

Fe
(%)
0.8
1.1
0.8
<.2
1.7
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.6
1.8
0.4

Fe
Hf
Hg
(ppm) (ppm) (ppb)
510
5
<5
510
5
<5
290
5
10
290
5
<5
790
5
10
1100
7
<5
380
8
<5
430
19
<5
120
9
<5
420
7
<5
460
8
<5

Ir
La
Li
Lu
Mn
Mo
(ppb) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
<50
71
6
1.1
600
4
<50
65
8
1.0
533
3
<50
70
4
0.9
702
<1
<50
71
57
0.9
15
<1
<50
51
46
1.5
1261
4
<50
55
38
1.7
740
6
<50
130
26
2.6
1673
<1
<50
170
9
9.0
135
<1
<50
77
12
1.7
282
3
<50
30
16
1.4
99
54
<50
84
12
1.8
89
<1

Na
(%)
3.17
2.00
2.64
3.19
3.10
2.67
1.90
2.90
1.50
2.94
2.55

Nb
Ni
Pb
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
52
3
20
48
1
18
49
<1
<2
57
<1
13
88
7
78
86
<1
21
105
<1
28
150
3
59
54
1
27
87
5
256
125
3
97

4

3

2.1

<1

93

25

57

14.0

97

2

---

720

5

5

<50

65

43

<.2

---

5

----

56

29

47

2
3
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
14
13
22
22
5
3
4
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
1
1

<2
3
3
<2
<2
7
<2
2
<2
3
5
3
5
15
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
9
<2
<2
7
3
3
5
7
<2
<2
<2
5
<2
<2
8
<2
<2

<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
9.0
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2

<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1

73
76
79
86
76
92
65
91
61
73
88
95
87
100
230
180
230
180
150
190
130
48
120
65
87
110
62
37
72
57
61
99
87
67
35
30

5
7
7
1
1
3
7
13
15
17
31
23
5
9
1
5
<1
3
15
23
17
9
19
13
17
15
17
11
7
17
5
11
9
13
5
5

61
53
47
39
41
33
55
53
31
67
97
120
51
51
9
43
39
37
33
29
55
51
59
73
31
47
43
61
73
39
77
61
61
57
71
75

1.0
3.9
2.0
1.2
1.8
1.1
0.9
1.3
2.4
0.7
0.5
1.2
1.3
1.7
404.0
7.4
73.0
8.6
12.0
6.5
4.7
<.5
1.7
<.5
2.2
1.6
<.5
0.6
0.5
<.5
8.9
1.1
2.3
4.1
3.1
3.9

155
129
15
13
13
5
21
33
31
17
37
31
7
37
11
1
11
19
15
214
7
17
13
7
15
17
25
764
21
33
27
33
29
27
27
5

<1
2
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
<1
3
1
2
<1
2
<1
<1
3
1
2
<1
2
2
1
2
<1
<1
1
2
2
1
1
1
<1
<1

2.3
----1.0
0.3
--2.1
3.8
3.4
----------1.4
1.8
1.3
1.6
2.6
4.8
3.1
3.0
----------2.4
2.7
4.2
2.0
4.1
2.9
4.1
1.4
1.6

450
850
520
700
480
130
360
570
450
470
610
610
100
280
4900
3900
3800
3600
280
1550
670
310
740
32
560
720
440
530
460
450
450
450
380
460
290
180

5
6
6
6
5
9
4
6
4
5
6
6
5
7
21
17
18
16
6
5
6
4
8
5
4
8
5
3
3
3
3
5
5
4
3
3

<5
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
<5
5
5
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
<5
5
20
30
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5

<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50

43
47
50
53
56
67
31
44
35
43
56
55
47
65
170
130
160
1303
86
120
67
26
71
37
50
66
37
19
38
29
31
55
46
37
20
20

25
24
16
9
11
8
9
8
24
7
8
9
5
7
12
11
234
18
38
868
29
16
9
7
11
8
5
13
14
29
25
19
40
40
23
31

0.6
<.2
<.2
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.4
<5.4
<5.8
<8
<5.9
1.3
1.8
1.2
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.2
0.4

497
----485
131
--545
1307
1042
----------392
463
2535
503
493
1952
981
911
----------553
199
1070
545
1363
760
994
702
553

2
117
10
1
1
1
<1
2
<1
1
7
1
1
9
<1
6
<1
6
<1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
<1
1
1
2
1
<1
1
<1

3.00
------2.68
3.02---2.78
2.50
2.18---------------4.08
3.39
4.53
3.61
3.12
2.23
3.21
2.71
---------------2.36
2.77
2.17
1.80
2.83
3.08
2.24
2.20
2.73

27
30
31
39
34
45
25
28
27
22
30
27
47
33
140
125
150
125
77
71
77
17
35
21
24
40
21
17
26
13
25
31
28
21
21
19

1
11
13
1
<1
1
9
5
<1
21
29
25
7
13
1
1
<1
3
15
17
15
1
17
15
17
17
7
9
7
7
<1
13
3
3
9
5

23
13
21
26
18
2
14
29
67
25
31
21
17
3
26
20
1409
70
27
56
18
9
23
2
19
19
15
12
16
14
69
31
32
20
15
8

Sample ID
OC-49 1488.8
722
OC-50
DJ-13
Trachytic latite
OC-4 498.3
porphyry
OC-17 831
OC-34 111.8
OC-41 1501
Andesite
OC-49 99.5
porphyry
OC-67 782
OC-33 216
OC-36 3349.7
OC-36 608.2
OC-44 107
OC-27 1514.7
OC-27 2227.6
OC-36 850.8
OC-41 1056.4
OC-12 291
OC-16 594
OC-33 406.9
OC-34 371
OC-36 122.4
OC-50 1517
OC-13 1058
OC-45 1301.8
OC-41 1270
OC-41 1703.8
OC-50 1378
DJ-32
DJ-61
IG-50
IG-54
Augite monzonite
IG-64& hornblendeIG-44
augiteIG-55
monzodiorite
IG-90
IG-101
IG-98
Phonotephrite
porphyry &IG-99
phonotephrite
IG-100

Be
Bi
Br
Cd
Ce
Co
Cr
Cs
Cu
Eu
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
3
1
1
4
1
2
1
2
2
2
4
5
1
2
1
2
2
2
4
3
4
3
4
4
4
3
3

<2
<2
<2
2
4
<2
<2
<2
2
4
<2
4
<2
<2
<2
5
2
8
4
<2
4
<2
<2
<2
<2
7
<2
<2
<2
11
<2
3
<2
<2
3
7
3
5
7

<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
2.4
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
4.8
<2
<2
<2
<2
10.0
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
5.6
<2
<2
<.2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2

<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
20
9
<1
<1
<1
2
<1
<1
9
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1

64
56
65
78
73
65
52
66
65
51
63
54
57
34
55
71
42
110
22
67
120
43
59
88
56
34
26
61
50
100
110
120
120
110
150
150
110
140
140

3
13
11
13
9
7
11
9
5
11
13
7
9
5
7
11
9
31
9
15
9
3
9
13
7
5
1
5
3
21
17
17
21
19
19
21
25
37
37

75
55
73
29
49
59
73
69
37
41
63
57
61
63
69
53
39
65
57
67
23
41
41
33
39
59
43
49
57
33
27
65
41
37
43
19
35
17
17

3.0
2.8
6.9
20.0
2.7
10.0
5.0
8.9
5.4
2.9
3.0
2.9
3.6
1.4
2.5
15.0
3.5
1.1
2.6
2.3
3.7
2.2
6.2
18.0
4.2
1.5
2.1
<.5
<.5
1.7
5.5
6.1
6.3
5.7
7.4
15.0
13.0
9.3
12.0

47
37
41
27
43
23
13
56
35
11
69
161
23
23
35
37
15
159
288
25
115
<1
29
77
37
39
<1
177
71
29
71
17
55
63
45
61
99
75
85

1
2
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
2
2
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
2
2
<1
1
1
1
<1
3
2
3

Fe
(%)

Fe
Hf
Hg
(ppm) (ppm) (ppb)

Ir
La
Li
Lu
Mn
Mo
(ppb) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)

Na
(%)

1.2
4.2
3.5
5.8
0.5
2.9
2.7
2.8
0.6
<.2
1.0
0.9
3.7
1.3
1.4
1.0
1.8
4.1
1.2
<.2
0.9
<.2
2.4
1.7
1.0
1.1
<.2
1.2
0.4
4.6
3.7
--4.4
3.4
-----------

760
670
480
550
400
190
470
600
310
190
360
520
290
260
290
900
350
380
170
260
450
830
430
2500
310
260
220
300
140
730
1050
660
700
900
720
920
820
820
820

<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50

3.22
2.31
2.97
2.74
2.05
2.49
2.40
2.56
2.13
2.01
3.58
2.54
2.15
4.27
2.94
1.50
2.30
4.28
2.53
2.75
1.80
4.45
2.85
1.40
2.07
3.48
3.66
2.19
2.73
2.58
2.61
--2.722.33-----------

4
3
4
3
4
4
3
4
4
5
4
4
3
3
2
4
3
5
<1
4
4
4
3
3
4
2
4
3
3
6
7
7
5
5
8
10
5
7
6

5
20
<5
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
10
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
30
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
10
<5
<5
<5
25
20
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
5
<5
<5
5

31
33
35
43
34
31
29
36
34
21
33
27
31
14
28
35
23
64
18
41
61
26
30
52
26
11
10
30
31
54
63
76
64
59
91
92
72
82
82

8
37
32
41
153
43
25
15
130
147
11
36
44
6
12
258
23
74
10
220
30
6
544
64
15
6
2
12
10
31
27
13
25
28
13
18
27
13
13

0.3
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.9
0.5
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.4
0.5
<.2
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.9
0.4
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.3

591
1239
616
1476
37
344
467
455
87
55
292
29
921
197
541
378
1741
1747
47
45
59
33
151
758
270
240
39
364
159
1273
1162
--15221693-----------

4
1
3
<1
<1
2
<1
2
<1
<1
3
1
4
2
2
2
4
85
<1
1
<1
<1
3
7
2
3
3
1
2
<1
<1
1
2
1
1
3
1
3
3

Nb
Ni
Pb
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
22
20
24
26
30
24
23
27
29
27
25
15
24
22
18
29
20
30
20
26
27
26
26
23
29
20
24
23
24
36
43
41
41
41
60
66
50
63
63

9
5
5
3
1
7
5
5
1
5
7
3
7
<1
9
13
5
5
5
17
3
1
9
5
5
5
5
9
3
5
3
21
3
1
17
19
27
25
23

<2
34
15
30
27
22
25
20
18
512
312
1204
21
13
130
18
18
233
292
<2
97
<2
33
6
22
102
<2
6
13
35
48
35
47
47
43
47
41
47
49

APPENDIX I. Major oxide and trace element analyses, Ortiz Mountains (from Coles, 1990).
Sample ID

Trachytic latite
porphyry

Trachyte
porphyry

OC-49 722
OC-49 763.7
OC-58 714.5
OC-55 136
DJ-62
DJ-82
OC-12 506.8
OC-27 2158
OC-36 1927
OC-44 85
OC-45 152.6

Tephri-phonolite
IG-63
porphyry
IG-43
Quartz-latite
OCN-8 249.5
porphyry
OCN-10 431
DJ-78
Quartz-trachyte
DJ-102porphyry
IG-96
IG-46
IG-47
IG-48
Quartz monzonite
IG-62
IG-69
IG-93
IG-92
Latite porphyry
OCN-11 409.5
OC-27 2087.6
Foid-bearing
OC-41 2249.5
trachyte
OC-27 2224.8
porphyry
OC-41 2238
OC-40 314.5
Latite-trachyte
OC-45 404
porphyry
OC-53 465.5
IG-32
IG-66
IG-91
IG-94
IG-95
IG-97
DJ-17
DJ-34
DJ-117
OC-13 1066.6
OC-12 377
OC-12 471
OC-16 471.7
OC-31 564
OC-40 661.7

Rb
Sb
Sc
Se
Sm
Sn
Sr
Ta
Tb
Te
Th
Tl
U
V
W
Y
Yb
Zr
Zn
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
330
0.6
1.3
2
6.0
<5
415
2.0
0.6
<.2
36.5
1.8
11.0
38
4
33
3
310
9
415
0.8
1.5
2
6.0
<5
435
2.0
0.7
<.2
36.0
2.3
11.0
36
3
44
3
290
9
350
0.4
1.7
1
5.9
7
400
1.9
0.7
<.2
34.3
1.8
9.4
40
1
39
3
290
7
240
0.4
1.5
<1
6.1
<5
470
1.9
0.7
<.2
37.4
1.5
10.0
33
<1
26
3
320
25
195
1.7
2.0
<1
5.5
5
220
4.0
0.8
<.2
52.8
1.0
13.0
79
4
25
4
350
113
175
1.4
1.0
1
5.9
6
260
4.5
0.9
<.2
56.2
1.1
16.0
33
4
25
4
400
15
415
0.8
0.4
<1
5.3
6
145
4.1
0.5
<.2
110.0
1.8
26.4
17
1
41
5
570
19
375
1.2
0.6
<1
5.9
6
265
2.0
0.8
<.2
222.0
1.0
92.9
21
4
62
11
1050
9
465
0.6
0.5
<1
2.5
<5
335
1.1
<.5
<.2
55.8
1.5
17.0
3
<1
36
3
400
29
275
1.4
1.2
<1
3.6
<5
330
4.9
0.7
<.2
60.1
1.1
14.0
3
17
45
3
390
131
295
2.2
3.9
<1
7.8
9
235
7.0
1.1
<.2
95.9
1.1
19.0
7
8
45
6
530
45
125

1.7

8.1

3

9.0

<5

1375

3.7

0.9

<.2

41.6

<.2

10.0

158

3

14

2

135

99

105
115
84
140
145
135
44
33
70
55
69
48
92
101
315
3151
565
410
195
275
165
43
81
51
51
93
24
20
70
33
95
70
81
65
175
105

0.2
0.5
0.3
0.9
0.7
0.2
<.1
<.1
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
1.0
0.3
2.9
4.3
8.7
4.3
1.7
5.2
1.4
0.1
0.8
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.6
1.3
1.3
0.8
1.1
0.7
0.6

3.6
3.6
3.4
0.8
0.8
1.1
5.4
9.5
10.0
7.1
11.0
13.0
1.0
2.5
0.4
0.7
0.5
0.6
7.2
6.1
10.0
6.4
7.0
5.2
9.0
6.5
8.3
8.4
6.5
11.0
6.4
7.0
3.7
7.4
3.6
3.8

2
1
1
<1
<1
2
1
<1
<1
2
<1
2
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
2
<1
<1
1
1
<1
<1
1
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
<1
<1
1
<1

6.1
7.0
8.3
3.5
2.3
4.8
5.5
8.4
5.8
8.3
10.0
11.0
7.1
10.0
3.4
2.6
2.6
2.5
11.0
9.1
9.4
4.5
13.0
6.2
9.4
11.0
7.5
4.2
6.4
5.9
5.9
7.2
5.7
6.5
3.8
3.3

<5
<5
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
7
6
<5
<5
8
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
<5
<5
5
<5
<5
5
6
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
7
<5
<5

705
680
735
320
405
470
815
785
565
680
715
760
1070
795
245
365
105
310
535
255
460
810
820
1020
665
800
710
805
720
644
760
820
855
645
260
625

1.2
1.6
1.9
1.5
1.3
2.3
1.7
1.8
1.1
1.6
2.4
2.6
2.5
1.9
2.5
1.9
2.3
2.5
4.6
4.0
4.2
0.8
3.3
1.5
2.1
3.5
1.5
0.8
1.4
0.9
1.1
1.5
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.1

0.8
0.9
1.0
<.5
<.5
<.5
0.9
1.1
0.9
0.9
1.3
1.4
0.8
1.2
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.8
1.2
0.6
1.2
0.7
1.5
0.9
0.9
1.3
0.9
0.6
1.0
0.6
0.7
1.0
0.7
0.8
0.7
<.5

<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2

19.0
46.0
22.0
18.0
21.1
21.2
7.9
8.2
11.0
11.0
12.0
12.0
20.3
26.5
231.0
183.0
238.0
182.0
55.0
47.8
53.0
6.4
19.0
10.0
11.0
17.0
8.7
5.9
8.0
6.4
7.7
23.1
19.0
10.0
6.4
6.3

<.2
<.2
<.2
1.1
1.1
0.4
<.2
<.2
0.2
0.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
0.2
0.4
0.9
1.6
0.8
0.6
1.2
0.6
<.2
0.2
<.2
0.2
0.3
<.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.7
0.8

4.2
10.0
5.3
4.4
4.5
4.4
2.2
2.3
1.6
1.6
3.2
2.7
3.0
4.6
56.4
63.9
84.8
64.4
14.0
19.0
11.0
1.8
3.0
2.0
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.9
2.3
1.4
2.3
5.6
5.2
2.3
2.1
2.3

33
56
52
8
11
24
43
92
94
86
144
158
64
72
17
20
23
26
17
136
134
56
130
78
106
82
100
106
74
90
46
116
53
61
41
21

<1
3
4
<1
<1
<1
2
1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
5
6
4
3
6
50
8
<1
<1
<1
1
2
2
1
<1
<1
13
1
<1
<1
2
<1

17
11
10
14
9
12
16
26
21
11
14
18
12
15
55
47
81
61
37
28
31
10
24
<5
13
19
8
11
21
20
16
17
18
21
31
12

3
<2
2
<2
<2
2
2
4
3
2
3
3
2
3
11
8
11
9
5
4
4
<2
3
2
3
3
3
<2
2
3
3
2
<2
3
<2
<2

160
165
160
295
225
300
135
160
175
135
160
160
135
175
1100
1030
1085
1000
340
315
320
97
210
115
155
200
135
95
140
145
140
155
160
150
140
120

77
41
71
51
35
27
51
91
81
75
65
63
47
33
17
27
210
41
527
573
399
65
63
53
75
57
39
67
33
79
87
85
63
145
27
43

Sample ID
OC-49 1488.8
722
OC-50
DJ-13
Trachytic latite
OC-4 498.3
porphyry
OC-17 831
OC-34 111.8
OC-41 1501
Andesite
OC-49 99.5
porphyry
OC-67 782
OC-33 216
OC-36 3349.7
OC-36 608.2
OC-44 107
OC-27 1514.7
OC-27 2227.6
OC-36 850.8
OC-41 1056.4
OC-12 291
OC-16 594
OC-33 406.9
OC-34 371
OC-36 122.4
OC-50 1517
OC-13 1058
OC-45 1301.8
OC-41 1270
OC-41 1703.8
OC-50 1378
DJ-32
DJ-61
IG-50
IG-54
Augite monzonite
IG-64& hornblendeIG-44
augiteIG-55
monzodiorite
IG-90
IG-101
IG-98
Phonotephrite
porphyry &IG-99
phonotephrite
IG-100

Rb
Sb
Sc
Se
Sm
Sn
Sr
Ta
Tb
Te
Th
Tl
U
V
W
Y
Yb
Zr
Zn
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
145
33
96
290
295
105
83
120
205
155
190
165
105
93
195
195
190
22
150
190
195
185
230
375
355
130
260
25
90
68
100
83
85
79
110
130
64
72
70

0.7
0.3
1.1
1.1
7.2
0.4
2.1
0.4
1.0
2.1
0.9
4.4
0.6
0.8
0.9
0.5
0.8
3.8
1.6
1.2
3.4
0.3
0.6
4.2
0.4
1.3
0.2
<.1
<.1
0.1
0.3
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.2
0.6
0.9

4.2
9.1
7.5
8.4
6.6
6.2
5.0
7.0
6.2
7.0
6.7
5.0
6.6
2.7
4.1
6.6
4.2
4.1
3.4
5.0
8.2
3.4
7.0
6.7
3.6
2.7
1.8
8.7
4.0
9.4
6.6
4.7
7.4
5.2
5.1
6.4
11.0
11.0
11.0

<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
1
<1
<1
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
2
1
<1
3
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
1
3
<1
2

4.3
7.1
6.3
7.6
6.1
5.3
5.6
5.9
7.0
5.6
5.1
4.1
4.8
2.6
4.6
5.0
3.7
8.1
3.7
6.2
11.0
3.5
5.4
7.7
3.4
2.5
1.4
6.0
4.1
10.0
9.0
12.0
11.0
10.0
16.0
15.0
10.0
15.0
15.0

<5
<5
<5
7
<5
<5
9
<5
6
5
6
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
10
<5
<5
9
<5
<5
9
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5

415
655
690
335
235
780
675
520
350
355
240
220
575
290
390
220
320
185
335
315
365
340
265
260
270
560
350
490
730
970
861
1230
1175
1200
1300
1025
1370
1140
1150

1.5
1.0
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.1
1.0
0.5
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.2
0.5
1.1
2.2
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.2
0.6
0.7
1.0
1.2
3.3
2.8
3.4
2.7
3.2
5.4
5.9
4.1
6.5
6.6

0.5
1.3
1.2
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.9
<.5
0.9
0.9
0.6
0.8
<.5
0.6
0.9
<.5
1.1
<.5
0.7
1.0
<.5
0.5
1.1
0.5
<.5
<.5
0.9
<.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.8
1.2
1.6
1.5

<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<0.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2
<.2

6.2
9.0
8.4
10.0
11.0
7.8
8.5
8.4
9.4
9.0
8.5
8.8
7.9
13.0
6.3
7.7
6.3
22.9
6.0
11.0
11.0
6.9
7.9
11.0
7.8
11.0
12.0
8.4
6.5
16.0
27.3
27.5
24.5
22.8
29.7
46.4
44.6
36.9
37.0

0.6
0.4
0.9
1.8
1.5
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.5
0.5
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.8
1.0
1.0
0.4
0.8
0.8
1.0
0.6
0.8
1.4
1.6
0.8
1.1
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.4
<.2
0.3
<.2
0.2
0.2

2.4
2.0
2.5
2.4
3.8
2.1
3.0
2.5
3.2
3.6
3.1
2.3
3.2
4.2
2.1
5.8
3.0
7.4
1.8
3.7
6.2
1.9
2.2
3.8
1.8
3.1
3.2
2.5
2.1
3.7
7.5
6.4
6.5
5.9
7.0
11.0
13.0
8.7
9.5

41
87
70
82
66
29
59
43
10
40
35
25
57
23
21
66
44
128
47
87
47
40
19
86
11
15
12
114
35
171
107
122
141
121
134
122
186
248
264

8
<1
<1
<1
15
<1
<1
<1
7
5
13
13
22
4
6
26
2
9
8
10
14
9
<1
20
21
11
4
2
<1
<1
<1
1
2
2
<1
4
<1
2
2

14
15
15
38
25
15
12
21
22
24
22
43
10
9
21
22
19
23
30
19
30
8
27
37
25
14
20
18
10
25
27
17
28
25
36
26
15
17
19

<2
4
3
2
<2
2
<2
3
2
3
<2
2
<2
3
<2
3
<2
3
3
2
3
<2
2
<2
<2
<2
<2
3
<2
3
4
2
3
2
4
3
2
3
3

140
140
150
170
210
120
140
170
195
200
190
180
160
175
135
195
150
210
149
200
190
180
185
190
175
120
175
170
115
160
230
130
150
140
200
285
145
135
140

29
149
49
322
101
41
63
41
117
288
1375
51
53
33
256
37
861
1281
81
272
81
3
47
59
17
65
3
45
35
93
81
35
105
105
103
95
79
89
91