U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Porphyry Copper Assessment of British

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5090–C

Global Mineral Resource Assessment 

Prepared in cooperation with the British Columbia Geological Survey, Yukon Geological Survey,

and XDM Geological Consultants, Inc.
This page intentionally left blank.
Porphyry Copper Assessment of British

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

By Mark J. Mihalasky, Arthur A. Bookstrom, Thomas P. Frost, and 

Steve Ludington, with contributions from James M. Logan, 

Andre Panteleyev, and Grant Abbott

Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5090–C

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey 

Global Mineral Resource Assessment 

Michael L. Zientek and Jane M. Hammarstrom, editors

Prepared in cooperation with the British Columbia Geological Survey, Yukon 

Geological Survey, and XDM Geological Consultants, Inc.
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011

Revised: 2013 

This report and any updates to it are available online at:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5090/c/

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes 

only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, it may contain copyrighted materials that 

are noted in the text. Permission to reproduce those items must be secured from 

the individual copyright owners.

Suggested citation:

Mihalasky, M.J., Bookstrom, A.A., Frost, T.P., and Ludington, S., with contributions from Logan, J.M., Panteleyev, 

A., and Abbot, G., 2011, revised 2013, Porphyry copper assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

Canada: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5090-C, v. 1.1, 128 p. and data tables.
iii

Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................2

Terminology............................................................................................................................................3

Assessment methods....................................................................................................................................3

Report Format.................................................................................................................................................4

Permissive Tract Descriptions.....................................................................................................................4

Porphyry Copper Assessment of Western Canada..................................................................................5

Porphyry Copper Deposits and Prospects of Western Canada....................................................5

Porphyry Copper Deposits in the Context of Physiographic Belts and Accreted Terranes.....5

Major Tectonic Features and Igneous Assemblages of the Canadian Cordillera .....................7

Probabilistic Assessment of Undiscovered Mineral Resources ...........................................................7

Descriptive Models for Canadian Cordilleran Porphyry Copper ..................................................7

Permissive Tracts for Porphyry Copper ............................................................................................9

Assignment of Deposits and Prospects to Permissive Tracts.....................................................12

Grade and Tonnage Models.......................................................................................................................13

Statistical Testing................................................................................................................................13

Clusters of Relatively Closely Spaced Porphyry Copper Deposits and Prospects..................14

Groups of Porphyry Copper Deposits and Prospects (Aggregated According to 

the 2-km Rule) ........................................................................................................................14

Development of New Grade and Tonnage Models for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au Porphyry 

Copper Deposits ....................................................................................................................15

Exploration History and Status .........................................................................................................18

Estimated Copper Resources Versus Exploration History ....................................................................18

Estimation of Undiscovered Resources...................................................................................................20

Summary of Probabilistic Assessment Results ......................................................................................25

Considerations for Users of this Assessment.........................................................................................25

Acknowledgements.....................................................................................................................................25

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................25

Appendix A. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane 

Island-Arc, British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. ....................................................31

Appendix B. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane 

Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au, British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada........................51

Appendix C. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular IslandArc, British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada..................................................................71

Appendix D. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran 

Continental Arc, British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. ...........................................84

Appendix E. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental 

Arc, British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada................................................................106

Appendix F. Table of Attributes of Porphyry Copper Deposits and Prospects, British Columbia 

and Yukon Territory, Canada (attached file; http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5090/c/).

Appendix G. Grade and Tonnage Model for Calc-Alkaline Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au Deposits 

of the Canadian Cordillera. .........................................................................................................118

Appendix H. Geographic Information System (GIS) Files Representing the Porphyry Copper 

Mineral Resource Assessment Permissive Tracts, Deposits and Significant 
iv

Prospects, and Accompanying Metadata, Porphyry Copper Assessment, British Columbia 

and Yukon Territory, Canada (also attached file; http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5090/c/)...................126

Appendix I. Assessment Team Member Information...........................................................................127 

Figures

1. Map showing the distribution of porphyry copper deposits relative to generalized 

 tectonic belts and major terranes of the Canadian Cordillera ..................................................6

2. Map showing major terranes and superterranes of the Canadian Cordillera ........................8

3. Ages of porphyry copper deposits and igneous rocks in western Canada .............................10

4. Diagrammatic sketch illustrating application of the 2-km rule for grouping adjacent 

 deposits and prospects ..................................................................................................................16

 5. Graph showing the proportion contributed to total estimated copper from the 

 start of each of five sequential resource-reporting time intervals .........................................19

 A1. Maps showing tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia 

 and Yukon Territory, Canada..........................................................................................................48

A2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer simulation 

 of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—

 British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada............................................................................50

B1. Maps showing permissive tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry

 Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada............................................................68

B2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer 

 simulation of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane 

 Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ......................70

C1. Maps showing tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island-and Continental 

 Arc Porphyry Cu—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ............................................81

C2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer 

 simulation of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed 

 Island-and Continental Arc Porphyry Cu—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

 Canada...............................................................................................................................................83

 D1. Maps showing permissive tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc

 —British Columbia and Yukon Territory ......................................................................................103

 D2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer 

 simulation of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran 

 Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.........................................105

E1. Maps showing permissive tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British 

 Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada........................................................................................115

E2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer 

 simulation of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental 

 Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ..............................................................117

 G1. Tonnage model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits .................................................................121 

 G2. Copper grade model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits ..........................................................122

 G3. Molybdenum grade model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits..............................................123

 G4. Gold grade model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits .............................................................124

 G5. Silver grade model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits ...........................................................125
v

Tables

 1. Permissive tracts for porphyry copper deposits in the Canadian Cordillera ..................11

 2. Tectonic settings and characteristic igneous rocks of permissive tracts for 

 Canadian Cordilleran porphyry copper deposits...................................................................11

 3. Dimensions of zones of mineralized and altered rocks of Canadian Cordilleran 

 porphyry copper deposits .........................................................................................................15

 4. Compilation of published resource estimates through time for Canadian 

 Cordilleran porphyry copper deposits.....................................................................................17

 5. Estimates of numbers of undiscovered deposits, porphyry copper assessment 

 of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada..................................................................21

 6. Summary of probabilistic assessment results, porphyry copper assessment 

 of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada..................................................................21

 7. Identified resources in known porphyry copper deposits listed by permissive 

 tract, porphyry copper assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

 Canada..........................................................................................................................................22

A1. Summary of selected resource assessment results for tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), 

 Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada......................31

A2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island 

 Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada...........................................................34

A3. Known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tract 003pCu2001

 (CA01),Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

 Canada .........................................................................................................................................37

A4. Significant calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au prospects in tract 003pCu2001 

 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

 Canada .........................................................................................................................................38

A5. Readily available recent exploration activities for deposits and prospects in 

 tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia and 

 Yukon Territory, Canada.............................................................................................................41

 A6. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane 

 Island Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ...............................................43

A7. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in tonnage and grade models 

 for Canadian Cordilleran calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au for tract 003pCu2001 

 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada........43

 A8. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit 

 density for tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia 

 and Yukon Territory, Canada.....................................................................................................44

 A9. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 

 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

 Territory, Canada ........................................................................................................................45

B1. Summary of selected resource-assessment results for tract 003pCu2002 

 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and 

 Yukon Territory, Canada.............................................................................................................51

B2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc 

 Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada .....................................53
vi

B3. Known alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits in tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), 

 Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon 

 Territory, Canada ........................................................................................................................56

B4. Significant alkalic porphyry Cu-Au prospects in tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), 

 Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon 

 Territory, Canada ........................................................................................................................58

B5. Readily available recent exploration activities for deposits and prospects in 

 tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British 

 Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ...................................................................................61

B6. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane 

 Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada .................62

 B7. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in comparing Canadian 

 Cordilleran alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits to the world model of Singer and 

 others (2008) for porphyry Cu-Au deposits (model 20c) for tract 003pCu2002 

 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and 

 Yukon Territory, Canada ............................................................................................................63

 B8. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit 

 density for tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—

 British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada......................................................................63 

 B9. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 

 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia 

 and Yukon Territory, Canada.....................................................................................................63

 C1. Summary of selected resource assessment results for tract 003pCu2003 

 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and 

 Yukon Territory, Canada ............................................................................................................71

 C2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- 

 and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada..............................72 

 C3. Known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tract 003pCu2003 

 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and 

 Yukon Territory, Canada ............................................................................................................74 

 C4. Significant porphyry Cu±Mo±Au prospects in tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular 

 Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

 Canada .........................................................................................................................................75 

 C5. Readily available recent exploration activities for deposits and prospects in 

 tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British 

 Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ...................................................................................76

 C6. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular 

 Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

 Canada .........................................................................................................................................76

 C7. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in tonnage and grade models 

 for Canadian Cordilleran calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au for tract 003pCu2003 

 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

 Territory, Canada ........................................................................................................................77

 C8. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit density 

 for tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British 

 Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. ..................................................................................78
vii

 C9. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 

 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British 

 Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada..................................................................................78

 D1. Summary of selected resource assessment results for tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), 

Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada................84

 D2. Map units the define tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental 

Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ..........................................................86

D3. Known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), 

Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada................94

D4. Significant porphyry copper prospects in tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran 

 Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada....................................95

D5. Readily available recent exploration activities for deposits and prospects in 

tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and 

Yukon Territory, Canada...........................................................................................................96

D6. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran 

Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada....................................97

D7. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in tonnage and grade models 

 for Canadian Cordilleran calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au for tract 003pCu2004 

 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

 Canada ........................................................................................................................................99

D8. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit density 

 for tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and 

 Yukon Territory, Canada............................................................................................................99

D9. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 

003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada.....................................................................................................................100

 E1. Summary of selected resource assessment results for tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), 

Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada .........................106

 E2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ...............................................................................107

 E3. Known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), 

Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada .........................109

 E4. Significant calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au prospects in tract 003pCu2005 

(CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ...........109

 E5. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late 

Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada..................................111

 E6. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in tonnage and grade models 

for Canadian Cordilleran calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au for tract 003pCu2005 

(CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada ...........111

 E7. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit density 

for tract 003pCu2005 (CA05),Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada......................................................................................................................112 

 E8. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 

003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada.....................................................................................................................112

 G1. Estimated resources of deposits used in the grade and tonnage model for 

 Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits..............................................................................................119

 G2. Summary of t-test results for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits against the four 

 porphyry copper deposit model distributions of Singer and others (2008)....................120
viii

Conversion Factors

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

Length

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

yard (yd) 0.9144 meter (m)

Area

acre 0.4047 hectare (ha)

acre 0.4047 square hectometer (hm2

) 

acre 0.004047 square kilometer (km2

)

square mile (mi2

) 259.0 hectare (ha)

square mile (mi2

) 2.590 square kilometer (km2

) 

Mass

ounce, avoirdupois (oz) 28.35 gram (g) 

pound, avoirdupois (lb) 0.4536 kilogram (kg) 

ton, short (2,000 lb) 0.9072 megagram (Mg) or metric ton

ton, long (2,240 lb) 1.016 megagram (Mg) or metric ton
ix

SI to Inch/Pound

Multiply By To obtain

Length

meter (m) 3.281 foot (ft)

kilometer (km) 0.6214 mile (mi)

meter (m) 1.094 yard (yd) 

Area

hectare (ha) 2.471 acre

square hectometer (hm2) 2.471 acre

square kilometer (km2

) 247.1 acre

hectare (ha) 0.003861 square mile (mi2

) 

square kilometer (km2

) 0.3861 square mile (mi2)

Mass

gram (g) 0.03527 ounce, avoirdupois (oz)

kilogram (kg) 2.205 pound avoirdupois (lb)

megagram (Mg) or metric ton 1.102 ton, short (2,000 lb)

megagram (Mg) or metric ton 0.9842 ton, long (2,240 lb)
This page intentionally left blank.
Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and 

Yukon Territory, Canada

By Mark J. Mihalasky1 , Arthur A. Bookstrom2 , Thomas P. Frost3 , and Steve Ludington4, with contributions 

from James M. Logan5

 , Andre Panteleyev6 , and Grant Abbott7

1

U.S. Geological Survey, mjm@usgs.gov.

2

U.S. Geological Survey, abookstrom@usgs.gov.

3

U.S. Geological Survey, tfrost@usgs.gov. 

4

U.S. Geological Survey, slud@usgs.gov.

5

British Columbia Geological Survey, Jim.Logan@gov.bc.ca. 

6

XDM Geological Consultants, xdmgeo@shaw.ca.

7

Yukon Geological Survey, grant.abbott@gov.yk.ca. 

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey does regional, national, 

and global assessments of resources (mineral, energy, water, 

biologic) to provide science in support of land management 

and decision making. Mineral resource assessments provide 

a synthesis of available information about where mineral 

deposits are known and suspected to be in the Earth’s crust, 

which commodities may be present, and estimates of amounts 

of resources that may be present in undiscovered deposits.

Canada is an important source of copper, consistently 

ranking as one of the top 10 world producers during the past 

decade (2000-2010). The preponderance of this production 

has been from porphyry-copper-type deposits in the western 

Canadian Cordillera. A probabilistic mineral resource 

assessment of undiscovered resources associated with 

porphyry copper deposits in western Canada was completed 

as part of a global mineral resource assessment. The purpose 

of the assessment was to (1) compile a database of known 

deposits and significant prospects, (2) delineate permissive 

areas (tracts) for undiscovered porphyry copper deposits 

that may be present in the upper kilometer (minimally) of 

the Earth’s crust, and (3) provide probabilistic estimates of 

amounts of copper (Cu), molybdenum (Mo), gold (Au), and 

silver (Ag) that could be contained in undiscovered porphyry 

copper deposits in the tracts. The study was done by the U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS) in collaboration with geologists 

from the British Columbia Geological Survey, Yukon 

Geological Survey, and industry consultants.

The database of known deposits and significant prospects 

includes an inventory of mineral resources in 89 known 

porphyry copper (and 2 related copper-bearing polymetallic 

vein) ore zones, representing 50 porphyry copper deposits, 

and lists key characteristics of 280 additional porphyry copper 

and related copper-bearing prospects, as indicated by currently 

available exploration results, which also are summarized. 

Resource and exploration and development activity are updated 

with information current through April 2010.

The delineation of permissive tracts and probabilistic 

estimation of resources in undiscovered deposits were done 

using the USGS three-part mineral resource assessment 

approach. Permissive tracts are defined in accordance with 

descriptive models for porphyry copper deposits to include 

igneous rocks and known deposits and prospects within 

magmatic arcs related to convergent plate-margin boundary 

zones. Frequency distributions of total tonnages and average 

grades of thoroughly explored deposits were used as models 

for undiscovered deposits and include a new grade and tonnage 

model for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in 

western Canada.

Five permissive tracts for the occurrence of porphyry 

copper deposits were delineated: 2 island-arc tracts, 1 tract of 

transitional, mixed island-arc and continental arc affinities, and 

2 continental arc tracts.

In permissive tract 003pCu2001, calc-alkaline igneous 

rocks of Middle Triassic to Late Jurassic age in accreted islandarc terranes of the Intermontane belt are assessed for calcalkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits. The area of this tract is 

175,250 km2

. In 12 known deposits, the total reported tonnage 

of ore is 8,100 million metric tons (Mt) containing 24.6 Mt 

copper. An estimated 6.9 undiscovered deposits contain a 

calculated mean of 8.9 Mt copper and a median of 6.9 Mt 

copper. The spatial density for the 18.9 known plus estimated 

undiscovered deposits in this tract is approximately 11 deposits 

per 100,000 km2.

In permissive tract 003pCu2002, alkaline igneous rocks 

of Middle Triassic to Late Jurassic age within the Intermontane 

accreted island-arc terranes are assessed for alkaline porphyry 

Cu-Au deposits. The area of this tract is 109,290 km2

. In 12 

known deposits the total reported tonnage of ore is 6,440 
2 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Mt, containing 20.9 Mt copper. An estimated 7 undiscovered 

deposits contain a calculated mean of 22 Mt copper and 

a median of 13 Mt copper. The spatial density for the 19 

known plus estimated undiscovered deposits in this tract is 

approximately 17 deposits per 100,000 km2.

In permissive tract 003pCu2003, calc-alkaline igneous 

rocks of Late Triassic to Early Cretaceous age within the 

accreted Insular terranes of mixed island-arc and continental arc 

affinities are assessed for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

deposits. The area of this tract is 58,360 km2. The total tonnage 

of ore reported in the 2 known deposits is 1,160 Mt containing 

3.17 Mt copper. An estimated 2.3 undiscovered deposits contain 

a calculated mean of 3 Mt copper and a median of 1.9 Mt 

copper. The spatial density for the 4.3 known plus estimated 

undiscovered deposits in this tract is approximately 7 deposits 

per 100,000 km2.

In permissive tract 003pCu2004, calc-alkaline igneous 

rocks in continental magmatic arcs of Jurassic to Eocene age 

are assessed for porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits. The area of 

this tract is 639,500 km2. The total tonnage of ore reported for 

the 23 known deposits is 6,520 Mt containing 17.9 Mt copper. 

An estimated 9.6 undiscovered deposits contain a calculated 

mean of 13 Mt copper and a median of 11 Mt copper. The 

spatial density for the 32.6 known deposits plus the estimated 

undiscovered deposits in this tract is approximately 5 deposits 

per 100,000 km2.

In permissive tract 003pCu2005, calc-alkaline igneous 

rocks in continental magmatic arcs of Oligocene to Pliocene 

age are assessed for porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits. The area 

of this tract is 32,840 km2. The total tonnage of ore reported for 

the 1 known deposit is 44.8 Mt containing 0.224 Mt copper. An 

estimated 1.4 undiscovered deposits contain a calculated mean 

of 1.8 Mt copper and a median of 0.72 Mt copper. The spatial 

density for the 2.4 known plus estimated undiscovered deposits 

in this permissive tract is approximately 7 deposits per 100,000 

km2.

Western Canada has been thoroughly explored for 

porphyry copper deposits. The total estimated copper 

contained in known deposits is about 66.8 Mt (based on 2010 

data), as compared to a 49 Mt mean of estimated copper 

in undiscovered deposits and a 34 Mt median of estimated 

copper in undiscovered deposits. The copper contained in 

known porphyry copper deposits represents about 58 percent 

of the total of known and undiscovered porphyry copper 

deposits (based on mean values). About 86 percent of the 

increase in estimated copper resources between 1993 and 2009 

resulted from the discovery of extensions to known deposits. 

Nevertheless, exploration for undiscovered deposits continues, 

especially in and around significant prospects and in parts 

of permissive tracts that are mostly hidden beneath younger 

volcanic, sedimentary, or vegetated surficial cover.

Introduction 

Porphyry copper deposits are the most important source 

of copper (Cu) in the world. The primary (hypogene) ore 

mineral in porphyry copper deposits is chalcopyrite (copperiron-sulfide, CuFeS2

). This and other copper-bearing minerals 

occur in and around stockworks of intersecting veinlets in 

hydrothermally altered porphyritic igneous intrusions and their 

host rocks. In some deposits, supergene processes alter the 

original copper minerals and make chalcocite (Cu2S) the most 

important ore mineral. Molybdenum (Mo), silver (Ag), and 

gold (Au) are important byproducts in many deposits. 

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) does national and 

global assessments of resources (mineral, energy, water, 

biologic) to provide science in support of decision making. 

Mineral resource assessments provide a synthesis of available 

information about where mineral deposits are known and 

suspected to be in the Earth’s crust, which commodities may 

be present, and estimates of amounts of resources that may be 

present in undiscovered deposits. 

A probabilistic mineral resource assessment of 

undiscovered resources associated with porphyry copper 

deposits in western Canada was done as part of a global 

mineral resource assessment (GMRAP) (Briskey and 

others, 2001). This global assessment provides a consistent, 

comprehensive analysis of current information about global, 

nonfuel mineral resources of platinum-group elements, 

copper, and potash in selected types of mineral deposits. 

These commodities were chosen partly for their economic 

importance, but also as prototypes for estimation of resources 

in other orthomagmatic, magmatic-hydrothermal, sedimenthosted hydrothermal, and evaporitic deposit types. 

The purpose of the assessment for western Canada was 

to (1) compile a database of known deposits with identified 

minerals inventory, (2) delineate permissive areas (or tracts of 

land) for undiscovered porphyry copper deposits that may be 

present in the upper kilometer of the Earth’s crust, (3) estimate 

numbers of undiscovered porphyry copper deposits within the 

permissive tracts, and (4) provide probabilistic estimates of 

amounts of copper, molybdenum, gold, and silver that could 

be contained in undiscovered porphyry copper deposits in the 

tracts. 

Results of the assessment are provided at a scale of 

1:1,000,000 and could be used to:

• Evaluate known and undiscovered copper resources,

• Design and evaluate new mineral-exploration programs,

• Anticipate economic, environmental, and social 

impacts of mineral development, and 

• Provide information for aiding in land-use decisions 

where competing, or mutually exclusive uses or environmental issues may coincide.

The study was done by the USGS in collaboration with 

geologists from the British Columbia Geological Survey 

(BCGS), the Yukon Geological Survey (YGS), and XDM 

Geological Consultants of Vancouver, British Columbia. 
Assessment Methods 3

Terminology

The terminology used in this study follows the definitions 

used in the 1998 assessment of undiscovered deposits of 

gold, silver, copper, lead, and zinc in the United States (U.S. 

Geological Survey National Mineral Resource Assessment 

Team, 2000; U.S. Bureau of Mines and U.S. Geological Survey, 

1980; Bates and Jackson, 1997). The terminology is intended to 

represent standard definitions and general usage by the minerals 

industry and the resource-assessment community. Some 

countries in the world recently have adopted more rigorous 

definitions of terms for estimating mineral resources and 

mineral reserves and for reporting exploration information to 

comply with legal mandates (Committee for Mineral Reserves 

International Reporting Standards, 2004). 

Mineral deposit. A mineral concentration of sufficient 

size and grade that it might, under the most favorable of 

circumstances, be considered to have potential for economic 

development. 

Undiscovered mineral deposit. A mineral deposit believed 

to exist 1 km or less below the surface of the ground, or an 

incompletely explored mineral occurrence or prospect that 

could have sufficient size and grade to be classified as a deposit. 

Descriptive mineral deposit model. A set of data in a 

convenient, standardized form that describes a group of mineral 

deposits having similar characteristics. 

Grade and tonnage model. Frequency distributions of the 

grades and sizes of thoroughly explored, and(or) completely 

mined out, individual mineral deposits that are classified by a 

descriptive mineral deposit model. 

Permissive tract. The surface projection of a volume of rock 

where the geology permits the existence of a mineral deposit of 

a specified type. The probability of deposits of the type being 

studied occurring outside the tract is negligible. 

Resource. A mineral concentration of sufficient size and 

grade, and in such form and amount that economic extraction of 

a commodity from the concentration is currently or potentially 

feasible. 

Identified resources. Resources whose location, grade, 

quality, and quantity are known or can be estimated from 

specific geologic evidence. For this assessment, identified 

resources are the deposits that constitute the grade and tonnage 

models used in the assessment (which can include measured, 

indicated, and inferred mineral resources at the lowest available 

cut-off grade). In addition, deposits that are not included in the 

models used for the assessment may be considered as identified 

resources if they are characterized well enough by deposit 

type, grade, and tonnage to meet U.S. Securities and Exchange 

Commission or CRIRSCO8 reporting guidelines. 

Undiscovered resources. Resources in undiscovered 

mineral deposits whose existence is postulated on the basis 

of indirect geologic evidence. These include undiscovered 

resources in known types of mineral deposits postulated to exist 

in permissive geologic settings. Undiscovered resources may 

include active mines if the resource is delineated incompletely. 

For example, a deposit that is explored only partially and 

reported as “open to the west or open at depth” could be 

counted as an undiscovered deposit. Undiscovered resources in 

extensions to identified resources are not addressed explicitly in 

the assessment process. 

Calc-alkaline, calc-alkalic; alkaline, alkalic. These 

terms are used in a general, non-rigorous manner to refer to 

plutonic igneous rocks of granitoid composition (calc-alkaline 

or calc-alkalic) and of syenitoid through dioritoid to gabbroid 

composition (alkaline or alkalic), and their volcanic equivalents 

(see Le Maitre and others, 2002, provisional field classifications, 

figs. 2.10 and 2.19). In the igneous literature, the “-alkaline” 

and “-alkalic” terms are defined and used in multiple and 

inconsistent ways (see Arculus, 2003). For this assessment, the 

term calc-alkalic is used synonymously for calc-alkaline, and 

alkalic synonymously for alkaline, as well as for their associated 

deposits, which are classified as calc-alkaline (or calc-alkalic) 

Cu±Mo±Au or alkaline (or alkalic) porphyry copper subtypes. 

NI 43-101. National Instrument 43-101. A Canadian mineral 

resource classification scheme and set of rules and regulations 

for how publicly traded companies report and display scientific 

and technical information about mineral projects. The purpose 

of NI 43-101 is to protect investors and other interested parties 

from erroneous, misleading, unproven, or otherwise fraudulent 

information and promotional materials. For additional 

information, see http://www.cim.org, http://www.ni43-101.

net, http://www.osc.gov.on.ca, or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

National_Instrument_43-101.

Assessment Methods

The assessment of undiscovered porphyry copper 

deposits in western Canada was done using the three-part 

form of mineral-resource assessment based on mineral 

deposit models (Singer, 1993, 2007a, b). This form of mineral 

resource assessment provides internally consistent estimates of 

undiscovered resources that can be evaluated using economic 

filters and other tools for economic, environmental, and policy 

analysis. Assessments are based on analogy, that is, that 

undiscovered resources will be like those that already have been 

discovered. 

In applying the three-part form of mineral resource 

assessment, (1) permissive tracts are delineated according to 

8

Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards (2006) 

(http://www.crirsco.com/welcome.asp).
4 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

the types of deposits permitted by the geology, (2) the amount 

of metal in typical deposits is estimated by using grade and 

tonnage models, and (3) the number of undiscovered deposits 

of each type is estimated by using a variety of subjective 

methods (Singer, 2007a). 

Descriptive mineral deposit models provide criteria for 

delineating permissive tracts for undiscovered deposits by 

highlighting features of deposit types that are obtained readily 

from geologic maps, such as tectonic setting and host-rock 

lithology (Singer, 2007a; Singer and Berger, 2007). Mineral 

occurrence databases are used to plot the spatial distribution 

of known deposits and prospects. Based on published geologic 

maps, areas that include permissive geology for the deposit 

type, as well as any known deposits are outlined as permissive 

tracts. Permissive tracts delineate typical fundamental 

geologic features, or units, that characterize the deposit type, 

such as magmatic arcs for porphyry copper deposits. 

A permissive tract for porphyry copper deposits is 

delineated as a geographic area that includes volcanic and 

intrusive rocks of a specified age range that are part of a 

magmatic arc related to convergent plate margin boundary 

zones. The tract generally is bounded by the outline of the 

magmatic arc, as depicted on the scale of the maps available 

for tract delineation, and also should include known porphyry 

copper deposits and prospects of that age range. The tract also 

may include areas suspected to include similar geology, but 

covered by younger or structurally overlying materials that are 

less than 1 km thick.

Frequency distributions of pre-mining tonnages and 

average grades of thoroughly explored deposits of a given type 

are used as models for grades and tonnages of undiscovered 

deposits (Singer, 1993). Models are constructed from average 

grades and tonnage based on the total production, reserves, 

and resources at the lowest possible cutoff grade, as described 

in Singer and others (2008) for porphyry copper deposits. 

Numbers of undiscovered deposits at various quantiles 

(degrees of belief) are estimated by an assessment team of 

experts using a variety of strategies, such as density models 

or counting and assigning probabilities to anomalies (Singer, 

2007b). Probable amounts of undiscovered resources are 

estimated by combining estimates of numbers of undiscovered 

deposits with grade and tonnage models by using a Monte 

Carlo simulation (Root and others, 1992; Bawiec and 

Spanski, in press). Results are reported as estimates of the 

mean expected number of undiscovered deposits along with 

the associated standard deviation and variance, cumulative 

probability graphs, and associated data tables showing the 

amounts of the commodities predicted by the estimates, all 

based on the team’s consensus estimates for each permissive 

tract.

Guidelines for porphyry copper assessment in 

the GMRAP project are summarized and discussed in 

Hammarstrom and others (in press) and references therein. For 

more detailed descriptions of the three-part form of mineral 

resource assessment, see Singer (1993, 2007a, b), Singer and 

Berger (2007), and Menzie (2005a, b). 

Report Format

This report includes an overview of the regional geologic 

setting of porphyry copper deposits in western Canada and a 

summary of results. The assessment data and results for each 

permissive tract are presented in a standardized format in 

appendixes A through E. Appendix F is an Excel workbook 

containing information about the porphyry copper deposits 

and prospects included in this study. Descriptive and grade 

and tonnage models used or developed for this particular 

assessment region are described below. A new grade and 

tonnage model for calc-alkaline-porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

deposits of the Canadian Cordillera is included as appendix G.

Permissive tract boundaries and information about 

deposits and significant prospects are included in appendix 

H as ESRI geographic information system (GIS) files 

(geodatabase format) that accompany this report. Political 

boundaries are based on U.S. Department of State (2009). 

Permissive Tract Descriptions 

Appendixes A through E contain summary information for 

each permissive tract. Each permissive tract is assigned three 

identifiers: (1) a unique 10-character “Coded_ID” number, (2) 

a descriptive tract name, and (3) a user-defined “Tract_ID” 

number. The Coded_ID tract identifier is constructed to serve as 

a key field for lookup tables within the global GIS. The Coded_

Id designates the United Nations geographical region9 (003 for 

North America), a deposit type abbreviation (pCu for porphyry 

copper), and a unique 4-digit number for each permissive 

tract (2001 through 2005 for this assessment). The descriptive 

tract name references a readily identifiable geographical or 

geological feature. The optional user-defined Tract_ID is 

convenient shorthand used by the authors to refer to tracts (for 

example, CA01PC, CA02PC) throughout the text and summary 

tables. The assessment for each permissive tract includes the 

following:

• Coded_ID, Tract name (User_ID), authorship, and 

author affiliation,

• Information and references for the deposit type 

assessed,

• Information about the tract location and the geologic 

feature assessed,

• Summary table of selected resource assessment results 

for the tract,

• Rationale for tract delineation,

• Geologic criteria,

9

UNdata, 2009, United Nations Statistics Division 

(http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49alpha.htm).
Porphyry Copper Assessment of Western Canada 5

• Known deposits (table),

• Significant prospects, mineral occurrences, and related 

deposit types (table),

• Exploration history,

• Sources of information,

• Rationale for grade and tonnage model selection,

• Estimate of the number of undiscovered deposits,

• Rationale for the estimate,

• Probabilistic assessment simulation results,

• References,

• Page-size tract map, and

• Cumulative frequency plot of simulation results.

Porphyry Copper Assessment of 

Western Canada

Porphyry Copper Deposits and Prospects of 

Western Canada

According to Singer and others (2008), the western 

Canadian provinces of British Columbia and the Yukon Territory 

contain 54 known porphyry copper deposits. By comparison, the 

much larger total area of the rest of Canada contains only five 

known porphyry copper deposits (see Singer and others, 2008). 

Recognizing this, and given a limited time to complete this 

study, we concentrated on porphyry-copper potential of British 

Columbia and Yukon. Appendix F lists characteristic attributes 

of about 350 porphyry copper deposits and prospects in the 

western Canadian study area. MINFILE databases of the British 

Columbia (MINFILE BC, 2009) and Yukon geological surveys 

(MINFILE YT, 2009), which are available on the Internet, contain 

records for more than 600 porphyry copper deposits, prospects 

and showings. The MINFILE record for each site lists its 

name, location (latitude, longitude), commodities, ore minerals, 

alteration types, deposit types, host terranes, types and ages of 

host rocks, associated igneous intrusions, sample intervals, and 

interval assay results. Most records also contain an inventory of 

assay data, a narrative description of the geology of the site and 

its history of exploration, and a list of references. 

For major mines and developed prospects, we compiled 

information from descriptive articles in Special Volume 15 of 

the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, edited by 

A. Sutherland Brown (1976), and Special Volume 46 of the 

Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, edited 

by T. Schroeter (1995). For recently active exploration projects, 

we compiled information from British Columbia Mining and 

Mineral Exploration Overviews (Schroeter and others 2006, 

2007; DeGrace and others, 2008, 2009). These sources led us to 

Web sites of minerals-exploration companies, where we found 

up-to-date project summaries and technical reports.

Porphyry Copper Deposits in the Context of 

Physiographic Belts and Accreted Terranes

The Canadian Cordilleran region trends northwesterly 

along the western margin of North American. Maps by Jackson 

(1976) and by Wheeler and others (1991) show the boundaries 

of five parallel tectonic belts that comprise the Canadian 

Cordillera. From inland to coastal, these are the Foreland, 

Omineca, Intermontane, Coast, and Insular belts. A map by 

Pilcher and others (1976) shows the distribution of porphyry 

copper deposits and prospects in relation to the general geology 

and tectonic belts mapped by Jackson (1976). Ney and Hollister 

(1976), Dawson and others (1991) and McMillan (1991) 

described the distribution of Canadian Cordilleran porphyry 

copper deposits in the context of these belts, as illustrated in 

figure 1 and summarized below.

The Foreland (or Eastern Marginal belt) consists of 

folded and northeastward thrust-faulted sedimentary strata. 

The Foreland belt contains few igneous rocks and no known 

porphyry copper deposits. 

The Omineca belt consists of metasedimentary, 

metavolcanic, and metaplutonic rocks that were metamorphosed 

during Jurassic to Paleocene orogenic crustal thickening. The 

Omineca belt contains few porphyry copper prospects. Uplifted 

metamorphic core complexes in its southern part expose plutons 

that probably are eroded too deeply for preservation of any 

porphyry copper deposits that may have existed before uplift 

and erosion.

The Intermontane belt lies between the mountainous 

Omineca and Coast belts. It generally corresponds to the 

Intermontane superterrane, which includes the Quesnel and 

Stikine island-arc terranes and the Cache Creek ocean-floor 

terrane. These terranes were accreted to North America in 

Jurassic time (between about 186 and 170 Ma). The Quesnel 

and Stikine island-arc terranes contain both pre-accretionary and 

post-accretionary porphyry copper deposits of both calc-alkaline 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au and alkaline porphyry Cu-Au subtypes. 

The Cache Creek ocean-floor terrane, however, contains only 

post-accretionary porphyry copper deposits. 

In northern British Columbia, much of Stikinia is overlain 

by Middle Jurassic to Cretaceous sedimentary strata of the 

Bowser Basin. Rickets and others (1992) interpreted the Bowser 

Basin as a fore-deep basin. They suggested that thrust loading 

of the Cache Creek terrane on Stikinia initiated subsidence of 

the Bowser Basin. This began in early Middle Jurassic time 

(from about 178 to 174 Ma), after accretion of Quesnellia and 

during closure of the Cache Creek ocean, but before accretion 

of Stikinia. In southern British Columbia, much of Stikinia is 

covered by Cretaceous to Eocene volcanic and epiclastic rocks 

and Miocene plateau basalts.

The Coast belt consists mostly of a composite granitoid 

batholith of Late Jurassic to Miocene age, which parallels 

the coast. Inclusions of highly metamorphosed rocks of the 

Insular belt are common in the western and central parts of 

the batholith. Inclusions of less metamorphosed rocks of the 

Intermontane belt are common along its eastern margin. Inland 
6 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Figure 1. Map showing the distribution of porphyry copper deposits relative to generalized tectonic belts and major 

terranes of the Canadian Cordillera (derived from McMillan, 1991; Wheeler and McFeely, 1991; Wheeler and others, 

1991; Gordey and Makepeace, 1999; Massey and others, 2005). The terranes are represented as a collage of pastel 

colors (for terrane names and geologic characteristics, see Wheeler and McFeely, 1991, and Wheeler and others, 1991). 

Also shown are the Bowser Basin, the Skeena arch, and the Nechako basin, after Gabrielse and others (1991).

*#*#

*#

")

*#

") ") ") *#

") ") ") ") ") ")

*#

*#

*#

") ")

*#

*#*#

") ")") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") *# ") ")

*#

")")

*#

") ") ")")

*#

") ")

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ")

*#

*#

*#

") ") ") ")

*#

*#

")

*#

!

!

!

!

!

Calgary

Victoria

Edmonton

Vancouver

Whitehorse

140°W 130°W 120°W 110°W

60°N

50°N

Nechako

Basin

Political boundary source U.S. Department of State (2009)

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

0 100 200 300 400 KILOMETERS

0 100 200 MILES

FORELAND BELT

OMINECA BELT

INTERMONTANE BELT

COAST BELT

INSULAR BELT

Nechako

Basin

Bowser

Basin

EXPLANATION

") Porphyry Cu +/- Mo +/- Au

*# Alkaline porphyry Cu-Au

Basins

Approximate tectonic belt boundaries

Skeena Arch

Skeena Arch
Probabilistic Assessment of Undiscovered Mineral Resources 7

from the exposed part of the batholith, satellite plutons intrude 

co-magmatic volcanic rocks. Most porphyry copper prospects in 

the Coast belt are near the upper-eastern margin of the batholith, 

or near later intrusions of Oligocene-Miocene age.

The Insular belt includes Vancouver Island, the Queen 

Charlotte Islands, and many other islands that generally 

constitute a chain of islands between the mainland and the 

open Pacific Ocean. The Insular belt corresponds to the Insular 

superterrane, which consists of the Wrangellia and Alexander 

island-arc terranes, which were accreted to North America 

by Cretaceous time. Wrangellia contains both pre- and postaccretionary porphyry copper occurrences.

Major Tectonic Features and Igneous 

Assemblages of the Canadian Cordillera

In the Canadian Cordillera, major paleogeographic 

elements of the western margin of ancient North America 

(Laurentia) include the Mackenzie platform, the Lower 

Paleozoic Selwyn black-shale basin, the Cassiar terrane, 

the Cambrian Kootenay arc (a carbonate shelf), the 

Late Proterozoic Windermere rift, the Mesoproterozoic 

Belt-Purcell intracratonic basin, and the Yukon-Tanana 

terrane. The Yukon-Tanana terrane (fig. 2) is a far-traveled 

pericratonic terrane. It probably represents a rifted fragment 

of Laurentia, upon which an oceanic island-arc was 

superimposed (Nelson and others, 2006; Colpron and others, 

2007; Nelson and Colpron, 2007).

Major accreted terranes of ocean-floor affinity include the 

Slide Mountain and Cache Creek terranes. The Slide Mountain 

terrane represents a closed marginal ocean between the 

Laurentian margin and the Yukon-Tanana terrane. It probably 

formed in response to back-arc extension, caused by rollback 

of subduction beneath the Yukon-Tanana terrane (Nelson and 

others, 2006). The Quesnel and Stikine island-arc terranes 

envelop the east, north, and west margins of the exotic and 

far-traveled Cache Creek oceanic terrane (fig. 2). According 

to Mihalynuk and others (1994), counterclockwise oroclinal 

rotation of the Stikine and Nisling terranes in the Late Triassic 

to Early Jurassic caused enclosure of the Cache Creek terrane.

Major accreted oceanic island-arc terranes include 

Quesnellia and Stikinia (of the Intermontane superterrane), 

as well as Wrangellia and the southern Alexander terrane (of 

the Insular superterrane). The northern Alexander terrane is 

a pericratonic fragment with affinities to the Farewell terrane 

of central Alaska (JoAnne Nelson, written commun., 2010). 

The younger and relatively minor Chugach (CG) and Yakutat 

(YT) terranes are in southeastern Alaska and are, therefore, not 

included in this study.

The whole collage of accreted terranes generally is 

bounded on the east by the Northern Rocky Mountain and 

Tintina fault systems, which are physiographically expressed 

as the Northern Rocky Mountain Trench in British Columbia 

and the Tintina Trench in Yukon. The western boundary, 

excluding the Wrangellia, Alexander, and other terranes 

outboard of the Coast belt, is formed by the Denali fault 

system and other fault systems to the south. These transcurrent 

fault systems have accommodated several hundred kilometers 

of mainly right-lateral strike-slip motion since the middle 

Cretaceous (Gabrielse, 1985). These post-accretion strikeslip faults have thus modified the spatial relationships of the 

accreted terranes of the western North America.

Regional igneous assemblages include: (1) Triassic and 

Early to Middle Jurassic volcanic and intrusive igneous rocks 

related to subduction beneath the Quesnel, Stikine, and YukonTanana island arcs; (2a) Late Jurassic to mid-Cretaceous 

intrusions of the discontinuous Omineca batholith (mostly in 

the Selwyn Basin and Cassiar terrane, but also in the Quesnel 

and Yukon-Tanana terranes); (2b) Late Jurassic to midCretaceous intrusions of the Coast Plutonic Complex; (3) Late 

Cretaceous to early Tertiary volcanic and plutonic rocks in and 

around the Coast Plutonic complex, including Eocene volcanic 

and plutonic rocks that extend east across the Intermontane 

Belt and into the Omineca Belt in southern and northern 

British Columbia and central Yukon; (4) igneous rocks of 

the Oligocene to Holocene Cascade-Garibaldi-Pemberton 

magmatic arc; and (5) flood basalts of Miocene-Pliocene age 

in southern British Columbia.

Probabilistic Assessment of 

Undiscovered Mineral Resources

Descriptive Models for Canadian Cordilleran 

Porphyry Copper 

USGS descriptive models for porphyry copper deposits 

and their various subtypes include general porphyry copper 

models by Cox (1986a) and Berger and others (2008). A 

global porphyry copper database by Singer and others (2008) 

also contains tabular descriptive information along with grade 

and tonnage data. USGS descriptive models for subtypes 

of porphyry copper deposits include those for skarn-related 

porphyry copper, porphyry Cu-Au, and porphyry Cu-Mo 

deposits by Cox (1986b, c, d).

McMillan (1991) described two types of Canadian 

Cordilleran porphyry copper deposits—porphyry copper 

deposits associated with calc-alkaline igneous rocks, and 

porphyry Cu-Au deposits associated with alkaline igneous 

rocks. 

Panteleyev (1995a) wrote a descriptive model for 

calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits associated 

with porphyritic intrusions of quartz diorite, granodiorite, 

or quartz monzonite. The ore bodies are in, or adjoin, these 

intrusions and consist of large zones of mineralized quartz 

veins and veinlets, closely spaced fractures, stockworks, and 

breccia bodies that are economically bulk-mineable for their 

copper, molybdenum, and gold. Zones of disseminated sulfide 

mineralization are also present, but generally in subordinate 

amounts. Ore minerals consist of pyrite and chalcopyrite with 

lesser molybdenite, bornite, and magnetite (see Panteleyev, 

1995a, for full description).
8 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Tintina

Fault

Fault

Fault

Fault

Cassiar Terrane Cassiar terrane

Selwyn

Basin b

Kootenay

terrane

Kechika

Trough trough

Denali

Border

Ranges

Kaltag

Alaska

Range

Yukon-Tanana

Yukon

Flats

Upland

Queen

Charlotte

Fault

TF

BSF

CSZ

CSF

FRF

PF

TkF

KF

SRMT

YF

NFF

Brooks

Range

Pacific

Ocean

Arctic

Ocean

eastern

limit

of

Cordilleran

deformation

AB

N.W.T.

U.S.A.

B.C.

B.C.

YT

AK

TY

N.W.T.

T WN

TY

TWN

TY

TY

TY

0 200

km

Angayucham/

Tozitna/Innoko

Farewell

Coldfoot, Ruby,

Seward

Arctic-Alaska,

Hammond

Koyukuk, Nyak, Togiak

Kilbuck

Goodnews Klinkit/Harper Ranch

Stikine assemblage

Peninsular

Taku, Nisling

Prince William

Chugach

Cache Creek

Wrangellia

Alexander

Yukon-Tanana

Windy-McKinley

Yakutat

Stikinia

Quesnellia

metamorphic

rocks

Pacic Rim

North America - 

miogeocline

Methow

North America - 

basinal (incl. Kootenay)

Cadwallader

Chilliwack

Crescent

Bridge River

Harrison

Slide Mountain

Outboard Insular

Intermontane

Northern Alaska

Ancestral North America

FW

FW

KY

KY

KY

WR

PE

CH

CH

YA

YT

ST

QN

PR

NAm

NAm

m

m

AA

AA

RB

RB

RB

RB

RB

FW

FW

FW

KY

KY

KY

KY

KB

GD

KB

AX

AX

AX

WR

WR

WR

PE

PE

CH

CH

PW

PW

CH

YA YA

WM

AG

AG

AG

CC

WM

WM

AG

AG

AG

AG

TK

TK

YT

YT

YT

HR

HR

HR

ST

ST

ST

QN

QN

HA QN QN

CD

CK

MT

PR

PR

CR

CR

NAb

NAb

NAb

NAb

NAb

NAm

NAm

NAm

NAm

NAm

BR

HA

CD

CK MT

BR

SM

SM

SM

SM

SM

SM

CC

CC

CC

m

m

m

GD

72°N

58°N

68°N

50°N

58°N

144°W

144°W

124°W

132°W

160°W

62°N

120°W

Figure 2. Map showing major terranes and superterranes of the Canadian Cordillera (from Nelson and Colpron, 2007). Fault abbreviations: BSF – Big Salmon fault; CSF – Chatham Strait fault; CSZ – Coast shear zone; FRF – Fraser River fault; KF – Kechika fault; 

NFF – Nixon Fork-Iditarod fault; PF – Pinchi fault; SMRT – southern Rocky Mountain trench; TkF – Takla-Finlay-Ingenika fault system; 

YK – Yalakom fault. Other abbreviations: AB – Alberta; AK – Alaska; BC – British Columbia; NWT – Northwest Territories; YT – Yukon 

Territory.
Probabilistic Assessment of Undiscovered Mineral Resources 9

Panteleyev (1995b) also wrote a descriptive model for 

alkalic porphyry Cu-Au deposits associated with porphyritic 

intrusions of dioritic to syenitic composition. The ore bodies 

consist of zones of fractured and mineralized rocks and 

mineralized breccias that are economically bulk-mineable for 

their contained copper and gold. Ore consists of stockworks 

of intersecting veinlets and disseminations of chalcopyrite, 

pyrite, magnetite, bornite and chalcocite±rare galena, sphalerite, 

tellurides, tetrahedrite, gold, and silver±traces of platinum group 

elements (see Panteleyev, 1995b, for full description).

Panteleyev’s models best describe the porphyry copper 

deposits of the Canadian Cordillera (Panteleyev, 1995a, 

b). Plutonic, classic (stock-related, cylindrical porphyritic 

intrusions), and volcanic subtypes of these models describe 

geologic characteristics of deposits formed at respectively deep, 

moderate, and shallow levels of the upper crust.

Permissive Tracts for Porphyry Copper

Areas where the geology permits the existence of mineral 

deposits of a specified type are called permissive tracts. 

Criteria for identification of permissive tracts are derived from 

descriptive models, which are based on studies of known 

deposits. According to Singer (2007a), permissive boundaries 

are defined such that the probability of deposits of the type 

delineated occurring outside the boundary are negligible 

(specifically, tracts are drawn such that the probability of 

a deposit occurring outside the boundary is less than 1 in 

100,000 to 1,000,000). According to M.L. Zientek and J.M. 

Hammarstrom (written commun., 2007): 

The fundamental unit for delineation of a permissive 

tract for porphyry copper is a subduction-related 

magmatic arc of a given age-range [subsequently 

this definition was expanded to also include postcollisional and post-subduction magmatic belts]. 

Porphyry copper deposits form as hydrothermal 

systems associated with relatively shallowly 

emplaced porphyritic stocks in volcano-plutonic 

arcs. Each permissive tract for porphyry copper 

deposits is outlined by delineating a geographic 

area on a geologic map that includes volcanic and 

plutonic rocks of a magmatic arc of a specified age 

range. The tract may include known porphyry copper 

deposits and prospects of that age range, and it may 

overlap with tracts for deposits of other age ranges. 

A permissive tract may also include areas covered 

by younger materials, where estimated depths to 

underlying permissive rocks are less than about 1 km.

To define magmatic episodes associated with porphyry 

copper deposits, we consulted histograms of age determinations 

on igneous rocks and porphyry copper deposits by Christopher 

and Carter (1976) and Dawson and others (1991). Then we 

made similar histograms based on up-to-date compilations of 

isotopic age determinations (fig. 3). We plotted age data for 

igneous rocks from Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004a, b). We 

compiled and plotted age data for porphyry copper deposits in 

western Canada from McMillan and others (1995), Mortensen 

and others (1995), Sinclair (2007), Singer and others (2008), 

and records in the MINFILE databases.

From the compiled histograms, we recognized five sets of 

porphyry copper deposits and prospects, defined on the basis of 

their subtypes, ages and host terranes (relative to pre- or postaccretionary intrusions). Each of these five sets of porphyry 

copper occurrences is associated with a tract of plutonic and 

volcanic rocks. Thus, we defined and delineated five permissive 

tracts, constrained by the ages and compositions of igneous 

rocks associated with either calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

deposits or alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits in the Canadian 

Cordillera.

The first two (oldest) tracts are co-extensive with islandarc terranes, in which porphyry copper deposits formed before 

their accretion to North America. The third tract is co-extensive 

with island-arc terranes superimposed on fragments of 

continental crust, in which porphyry copper deposits formed in 

a transitional tectonic setting between island arc and continental 

arc magmatism during accretion of island arc terranes to the 

Cordilleran continental margin. The last two (youngest) tracts 

are co-extensive with continental magmatic arcs and accreted 

island-arc and oceanic terranes, in which porphyry copper 

deposits formed after accretion to North America.

Table 1 lists and briefly describes each of these five 

permissive tracts in terms of age range, magmatic-arc type 

and porphyry copper subtype. The geologic feature assessed 

is identified for each tract. Table 2 lists types of intrusive and 

volcanic rocks in each tract and gives interpretive remarks about 

the tectonic settings and origins of the igneous rocks in each 

tract.

We delineated permissive tracts by selecting map units 

representing igneous rocks of appropriate age and composition 

from digital geologic maps of British Columbia and Yukon. 

These maps were compiled from geologic maps (scale 

1:250,000) for presentation at a scale of 1:1,000,000. First, 

we selected all map units representing lithologic assemblages 

containing igneous rocks. From those maps, we selected map 

units representing rocks of age ranges appropriate to each tract 

and then, selected map units representing lithologic assemblages 

containing rocks of compositions appropriate to each tract (table 

2). For map units including rocks with ages appropriate to more 

than one tract, location was considered to determine the proper 

tract assignment, which could include assignment to more than 

one tract. In the GIS map attribute table of all igneous units, we 

recorded a reason for including or excluding any map unit from 

each tract.

After selecting permissive map units, we added a 10-km 

buffer zone around intrusive rocks and a 2-km buffer zone 

around bodies of volcanic rocks. This buffer expanded the 

area of the permissive tract to include all significant porphyry 

copper prospects and to include unexposed permissive rocks 

and porphyry copper deposits proximal to mapped permissive 
10 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

0 50 100 150 200

Number of Age Determinations

250

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 50 100 150 200 250

Number of Age Determinations

Age, Ma

Age, Ma

Late continental arc

tract 02

tract 01

tract 03

Insular

tract 04

05

Permissive Tracts: 003pCu2001; 02; 03; 04; 05 (igneous rocks)

tract

Number of age determinations Number of age determinations

A

B

Alkaline Cu - Au

Calc-alkaline Cu +/- Mo +/- Au

EXPLANATION

Island-arcs

Intermontane

Continental magmatic arcs

Figure 3. Ages of porphyry copper deposits and igneous rocks in western Canada. A, Histogram 

showing frequency distribution of ages of Canadian porphyry copper deposits. B, Histogram showing frequency distribution of isotopic age determinations on igneous rocks of the Canadian Cordillera. (See text for explanation and data sources.)
Coded_ID User_ID Tract name and deposit type Porphyry Cu age range (Ma) Geologic feature assessed Permissive map unit

geologic age range 

003pCu2001 CA01 Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu 222-168

Porphyry Cu systems associated with calc-alkaline igneous 

rocks of the Quesnel and Stikine accreted island-arc terranes 

Middle Triassic to La

Jurassic 

003pCu2002 CA02 Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au 212-183

Porphyry Cu-Au systems associated with alkaline igneous 

rocks of the Quesnel and Stikine accreted island-arc terranes 

Middle Triassic to La

Jurassic 

003pCu2003 CA03 Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 173-154 Porphyry Cu systems associated with calc-alkaline igneous rocks of Wrangellia and the Alexander mixed island-arc and continental-arc terranes Triassic to Cretaceou003pCu2004 CA04 Cordilleran Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 134-35

Porphyry Cu systems associated with predominantly calcalkaline igneous rocks of post-accretionary continental 

magmatic arcs

Jurassic to Eocene 

003pCu2005 CA05 Late Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 29-7

Porphyry Cu systems associated with predominantly calcalkaline igneous rocks of the Cascades-GaribaldiPemberton continental magmatic arc Oligocene to Pliocen

Table 1. Permissive tracts for porphyry copper deposits in the Canadian Cordillera.

Coded_ID User_ID Tectonic setting Characteristic intrusive rocks Characteristic volcanic rocks Interp

003pCu2001 CA01 island arc quartz diorite, tonalite, granodiorite, granite andesite, dacite, rhyodacite, rhyolite Calc-alkaline igneous roc

beneath island arcs

003pCu2002 CA02 island arc gabbro, diorite, monzonite, syenite basalt, basaltic andesite, latite, trachyte, phonolite Alkalic igneous rocks gen

island arcs

003pCu2003 CA03 mixed, island arcs and continental arcs quartz diorite, tonalite, granodiorite, granite andesite, dacite, rhyodacite, rhyolite Calc-alkaline igneous roc

beneath composite island 

the Cordilleran continent

003pCu2004 CA04 continental arc quartz diorite, tonalite, granodiorite, granite andesite, dacite, rhyodacite, rhyolite Mostly calc-alkaline igne

subduction beneath the C

003pCu2005 CA05 continental arc quartz diorite, tonalite, granodiorite, granite andesite, dacite, rhyodacite, rhyolite Calc-alkaline igneous roc

beneath the Cordilleran c

Table 2. Tectonic settings and characteristic igneous rocks of permissive tracts for Canadian Cordilleran porphyry copper deposits.
12 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

rocks. The buffers allow for possible downward expansion 

of intrusions below their surface expressions (subsurface 

satellite cupolas of intrusions and unmapped parts of 

plutons), and for extensions of intrusive and extrusive units 

beneath overlapping cover materials (mineral occurrences 

that are covered by younger materials, such as basalt flows, 

glacial till, colluvium, alluvium, or basin-fill sediments 

less than 1 km thick). The rationale for buffering, and in 

particular for choosing 10-km and 2-km buffers, is derived 

from a number of factors:

• Uncertainty related to the true, on-the-ground location 

of the mapped igneous rock contacts, as represented 

on geologic maps compiled from a number of scales 

from a number of sources.

• Intrusion contacts commonly slope outwards, and 

porphyry copper deposits, which can form peripherally to intrusive bodies, can have alteration areas as 

extensive as 10 km (Singer and others, 2008).

• Bodies of permissive volcanic rocks may have 

relatively thin edges, which might be discontinuous, 

covered, or otherwise not mapped at the scale of the 

source geologic maps used for the assessment.

• Proximity analysis of volcanic rock-hosted epithermal 

gold and silver deposits in Nevada indicate that the 

majority of significant occurrences lie within 10 km 

of a plutonic body, as mapped at 1:500,000 scale (for 

additional details, see Mihalasky, 2001, p. 75-76).

• Ten kilometers is a subjective, expert-based estimate 

representing the nominal extent of a mining lease, 

which may or may not include peripheral “backyard” 

claims, prospects, or other exploration areas.

• A radius of 10 km around a pluton may be a fair 

approximation for the extent of (or at least encompasses) the potentially mineralizing system (that 

is, the extent of district or local-scale hydrothermal 

circulation; see Nesbitt and Muehlenbachs, 1989; Sillitoe and Bonham, 1990).

• A radius of 2 km around volcanic map units (as 

opposed to 10 km around plutonic map units) 

represents an expert-based judgment that related or 

concealed intrusions in those map units are likely to 

be much smaller and limited in extent (Hammarstrom 

and others, in press).

• Accepted precedent for the use of buffers around 

igneous map units to delineate permissive tracts in 

previous USGS mineral resource assessments, including Singer (1996) and Wallace and others (2004).

Although these buffers may not be appropriate in all 

instances—10 km may be an overstatement with regard to 

small igneous bodies or an understatement for extensive, 

long-lived bodies—but, for all practical purposes, it is 

considered reasonable for including permissive areas of 

interest within the tectonic environment being assessed (for 

more detailed discussion, see Wallace and others, 2004, p. 

105; 125-126; 131).

We then adjusted tract boundaries to include 

aeromagnetic anomalies (Natural Resources Canada, 2008a, 

b) interpreted to represent subsurface intrusions related to 

the tract, but extending beyond its buffered margins. We also 

looked for copper anomalies associated with molybdenum, 

lead, or zinc anomalies (National Resources Canada, 2008c), 

as possible indicators of porphyry copper systems to be 

included in permissive tracts. In the Quesnel and Stikine 

terranes, we considered large areas of high copper and nickel 

concentrations to be permissive for alkaline porphyry Cu-Au 

deposits, and we included them in tract 003pC2002 (CA02). 

Next, we used a spatial modeling algorithm to smooth 

the boundaries of the permissive tracts (see the metadata 

associated with the tracts for additional details). We then 

trimmed the buffered and smoothed tracts so as not to extend 

across major strike-slip faults and terrane boundaries. We 

also cut out and excluded areas of plutons that are younger 

than the time span of the magmatic arc represented by the 

permissive tract. Finally, we checked to see that every known 

porphyry copper deposit and significant prospect is within its 

assigned tract. 

Although the tracts are delineated so as to include all 

areas considered to have potential for undiscovered porphyry 

copper deposits, the following caveats should be kept in 

mind. The tracts were drawn on the basis of geologic maps 

at scales no larger than 1:250,000, and small intrusions, 

such as dikes, may not be represented on maps of such 

scales. Similarly, areas of hydrothermally altered rocks are 

not indicated on most small scale bedrock geologic maps. 

Furthermore, some important deposits have been discovered 

in areas where mineralized rocks may be covered and hidden 

by basalt flows or deposits of unconsolidated surficial 

materials, such as glacial till, colluvium, or alluvium. These 

cover materials may be opaque to most currently available 

(and affordable) exploration methods, even where cover 

material is much less than 1 km thick.

Assignment of Deposits and Prospects to 

Permissive Tracts

Assignment of each deposit and prospect to its proper 

permissive tract (and grade and tonnage model) required 

each to be classified as either a calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au, or an alkaline porphyry Cu-Au subtype. This 

is reported in most MINFILE records for porphyry copper 

deposits and prospects. Assignment to permissive tracts 

also required an estimation of the age of each deposit and 

prospect in terms of millions of years before the present 

(Ma).
Grade and Tonnage Models 13

We compiled and plotted age data for porphyry copper 

deposits from McMillan and others (1995), Mortensen and 

others (1995), Sinclair (2007), Singer and others (2008), and 

from MINFILE records. These records list available isotopic 

age determinations, as well as geologic ages of oldest and 

youngest host rocks. For deposits and prospects for which 

there was only relative geologic age information available, we 

assigned numerical ages according to the following procedures. 

For undated deposits and prospects in a group or cluster 

with one or more dated deposits, we assigned the mid-range age 

of the dated deposit or deposits to the undated ones. Otherwise, 

we assigned a numerical age based on the geologic age of the 

youngest host rock. For example, if the youngest host rocks 

were Eocene in age, we assigned a mid-Eocene age of 45 Ma. 

However, if the youngest host rocks were Late Cretaceous to 

Tertiary in age, we assigned the age of the Late CretaceousTertiary boundary (65 Ma). In this way, we assigned estimated 

numerical ages to all of the deposits and prospects in the table 

included in appendix F, and assigned them accordingly to 

permissive tracts. Appendix F lists age constraints for each 

isotopic age determination or estimated numerical age.

Grade and Tonnage Models

Frequency distributions of metal grades and ore tonnages 

from well-explored deposits are employed as models to estimate 

the grades and tonnages of undiscovered deposits that are of 

the same type and occur in geologically similar settings (Singer 

1993, 2007a). Grade and tonnage models based on porphyry 

copper deposits of the world have been developed by Singer 

and others (2008) and include data from deposits that are 

classified by Cox and Singer (1986) into three deposit subtypes: 

(1) porphyry copper deposits (model 17), (2) porphyry Cu-Au 

(model 20c), and (3) porphyry Cu-Mo deposits (model 21a). 

Our assessment uses the Singer and others (2008) grade 

and tonnage models as a starting point, but rather than using the 

Cox and Singer (1986) deposit classification scheme above, we 

adopt an alternate classification scheme specifically developed 

for Canadian Cordillera deposits by Panteleyev (2005a, b), 

which groups deposits into calc-alkalic Cu-Mo-Au and alkalic 

Cu-Au subtypes. In order to determine whether the Singer and 

others (2008) models are appropriate for estimating the grade 

and tonnage of undiscovered Canadian Cordillera deposits, 

statistical tests were performed.

Statistical Testing

Using well-explored Canadian Cordillera deposits in our 

assessment area, we performed statistical tests to determine 

if their mean values of grade and tonnage are significantly 

different from the corresponding means of the Singer and 

others (2008) grade and tonnage models. The spreads or 

variabilities of grades and tonnages were also evaluated. The 

two-sample t-test is used to make these comparisons (Trochim, 

2006). In a t-test, the means and distributions of two sets of 

observations are compared to test if they may come from 

the same population, or if they represent distinct populations 

(additional discussion of the test methodology is included in 

appendix G). 

Menzie and Singer (1993) developed a grade and tonnage 

model for porphyry copper deposits in British Columbia 

and Alaska. They found that, as a group, these deposits have 

significantly smaller tonnages and significantly lower copper 

grades than those of the general porphyry copper model by 

Singer and others (1986). Assuming similar results for our 

assessment area, we tested separately Canadian calc-alkaline 

and alkaline deposit subtype grades and tonnages against 

Singer and others’ (2008) general porphyry copper model (364 

deposits, including models 17, 20c, and 21a), porphyry copper 

model (231 deposits, porphyry copper model only), porphyry 

Cu-Au model (92 deposits, model 20c only), and porphyry 

Cu-Mo model (41 deposits, model 21a only) (see appendix G, 

table G2). Prior to performing the tests, the Canadian deposits 

in the Singer and others (2008) database were removed.

For tonnage of ore, these t-tests indicated that the mean 

in either type (calc-alkaline Cu±Mo±Au or alkaline Cu-Au) of 

Canadian Cordilleran porphyry copper deposit is not different 

statistically from the mean of tonnages of the deposits in 

the respective porphyry copper models of Singer and others 

(2008). Furthermore, the mean of copper grade of Canadian 

alkalic porphyry Cu-Au deposits is not different statistically 

from that of porphyry copper deposits in the Cu-Au model of 

Singer and others (2008). 

For copper grade, however, the mean of Canadian 

Cordillera calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits 

statistically is lower than that of copper grades for the 

deposits in the general model of Singer and others (2008). 

This difference required us to make a new grade and tonnage 

model for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera, which is included in appendix G of this 

assessment.

Starting with the data of Singer and others (2008), we 

searched for recently updated estimates of total resources of 

known porphyry copper deposits in the Canadian Cordillera. 

During the past few years, record amounts of exploration 

and infill drilling have been done in the Canadian Cordillera. 

Tens of thousands of meters have been drilled at many 

properties in order to extend known resources of operating 

mines, revive shut-down past producers, or extend and 

improve estimated resources of previously sub-economic 

deposits. James Logan (BCGS) contributed new estimates of 

tonnages and grades of many deposits that have undergone 

such recent exploration. 

Annual Exploration Overviews for 2005 through 2009, 

published by the British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines 

and Petroleum Resources, list and describe active exploration 

projects and name the companies involved in this work. Most 

of these companies have Web sites on which they describe 

their projects and post drilling results and technical reports 

with up-to-date estimates of tonnages and grades, reported 
14 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

in accordance with Standards for Disclosure for Mineral 

Projects in Canada, as set forth in National Instrument 

43-101 (British Columbia Securities Commission, 2005). 

According to Singer and others (2008, p. 4), data 

gathered for each deposit should include average grade of 

each metal or mineral commodity of possible economic 

interest and the associated tonnage of ore based on the total 

production, reserves, and resources at the lowest possible 

cutoff grade. According to a consensus of USGS grade and 

tonnage modelers, estimated resources should include all 

proven and probable reserves, or measured and indicated 

resources, and also inferred resources. These terms are 

defined and explained in standards and guidelines adopted by 

the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy, and Petroleum 

(Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting 

Standards, 2004). 

In compiling these data, we have encountered many 

ambiguities and inconsistencies. For example, some 

production records list only the amounts of metals produced 

and do not include the average grade of the ore mined, or 

the tonnage of the ore milled. Operating mines may not 

differentiate clearly between originally estimated resources, 

remaining resources, and resources added as a result of 

exploration during mining. Some reports list proven and 

probable reserves, and others list measured and indicated 

resources, but many do not list inferred resources. Therefore, 

we included inferred resources only if they were available.

Singer (1993) also mentioned that resource estimates 

used in grade and tonnage models should be based on the 

lowest cutoff grades of possible economic interest. He also 

noted that cutoff grades commonly are near the median grade 

within the deposits, but that exceptions may exist where 

production costs are relatively high (as in underground mines 

in ores that require milling) or relatively low (as in open-pit 

mines in ores amenable to heap leaching). We found great 

variability in the availability of cutoff grades to accompany 

estimates of tonnage and grade.

Clusters of Relatively Closely Spaced Porphyry 

Copper Deposits and Prospects

Porphyry copper deposits and prospects commonly 

occur in clusters. We use the term “cluster” to describe a set 

of deposits or prospects that are relatively closely spaced, as 

compared to the spacing of deposits or prospects outside the 

cluster. Thus, we use cluster as a relative term that does not 

imply a specified distance between the clustered deposits or 

prospects. Where clusters of similar deposits or prospects are 

cospatial with the same or similar bodies of igneous rocks, it 

is reasonable to suppose that they formed by similar processes 

that occurred during similar time intervals. If isotopic age 

determinations are available for one or more of the deposits of 

a cluster, we estimated the ages of similar but undated deposits 

of the cluster to be that of the mid-range of the available age 

determinations.

Groups of Porphyry Copper Deposits and 

Prospects (Aggregated According to the 2-km 

Rule) 

For grade and tonnage models to be internally consistent 

there must be a spatial limit that determines how to group 

together deposits and prospects near to one other for the 

purposes of grade and tonnage modeling and deposit 

endowment estimation. The 2-km rule states that, “deposits 

that have mineralization or alteration separated by less than an 

arbitrary but consistent distance—2 km for porphyry copper 

deposits—are combined into one deposit” (Singer and others, 

2005b, p. 491). This rule also applies to deposit-density models 

because they must be consistent with tonnage and grade models. 

We use the term “group” to describe that part of a cluster 

in which the deposits and prospects are sufficiently close 

together that they are within the spacing required by the 2-km 

rule for porphyry copper deposits. However, for the 2-km rule 

to be rigorously applied for sites with noncircular zones of 

mineralization and alteration, the relative orientations of the 

long and short axes of the neighboring sites must be known. 

Singer and others (2008) listed the lengths of the long and short 

axes of alteration zones associated with 21 Canadian Cordilleran 

porphyry copper deposits. As shown in table 3, the average 

length of the long axes is 5 km, and the average length of the 

short axes is 2 km. However, we do not know the directional 

orientations of the long and short axes of these deposits, and we 

do not know the shapes, sizes, or orientations of other clustered 

deposits and prospects included in this assessment. Therefore, 

we could not apply the 2-km rule rigorously as it is defined.

Figure 4 illustrates how we applied a modified 2-km 

deposit-grouping rule with the limited information available in 

the time allowed for this assessment. Rotation of the long axis 

through 360 degrees describes a circle with the diameter of the 

long axis. Such a circle around each of the points representing a 

neighboring deposit or prospect covers all possible orientations 

of the long axes of the neighboring zones of mineralization and 

alteration of the neighboring deposits. Based on the 21 sites in 

table 3, the mean diameter of such a circle is about 5 km, so its 

radius is 2.5 km. Thus, the center points of average neighboring 

alteration zones would be less than 7 km (2.5+2.5+2 km) apart. 

Therefore, for compilation of the grade and tonnage information, 

we grouped deposits and prospects represented by points that are 

less than about 7 km apart. This is the equivalent of buffering all 

deposit and prospect points using a 2.5 km radius, then grouping 

together those points whose buffer zones lie within 2 km of one 

another. 

For purposes of estimation of undiscovered deposits, any 

prospect within a group is considered as a possible extension to 

the known resources of the group, rather than as an undiscovered 

deposit. In order for a prospect to be counted as a possible 

undiscovered deposit, it must be outside of a group that includes 

a known deposit (see example, fig. 4). Nevertheless, our tables 

of known deposits include estimated tonnages and grades of 

individual deposits within groups, as well as total tonnages and 

average grades for the aggregated resources of the group.
Grade and Tonnage Models 15

Development of New Grade and Tonnage 

Models for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au Porphyry 

Copper Deposits

T-tests using updated grade and tonnage data indicated 

that the mean copper grade of the Canadian calc-alkaline 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits statistically is lower than that 

of the non-Canadian deposits in the general model (models 

17, 20c, and 21a) dataset of Singer and others (2008).We 

therefore constructed new grade and tonnage models for 

Canadian Cordilleran deposits of the calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au subtype (appendix G). In the new models, we 

included only resource estimates that we considered reasonably 

well constrained and substantiated. Nevertheless, preliminary 

estimates of incompletely known deposits and not fully 

substantiated estimates from press releases are included in 

tables of known deposits in permissive tracts. Although such 

deposits are excluded from the grade and tonnage models, they 

are included in calculations of spatial densities of known and 

undiscovered deposits in permissive tracts.

One explanation for relatively low copper grades in 

Canadian porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits, as compared to 

the general model, is that significant zones of supergene 

Cu-enrichment are uncommon in porphyry copper deposits 

of Canada. Supergene enrichment occurs when the original 

sulfide minerals are oxidized in the near-surface environment by 

meteoric waters, and the metals are leached and reprecipitated 

at, or near the top of, the existing water table. According to Ney 

and others (1976) zones of supergene enrichment may have 

formed before continental-scale glaciations during Pleistocene 

time, but most were removed by glacial erosion. Nevertheless, 

zones of oxidation and supergene enrichment are preserved in 

deposits that were not glaciated, or were covered by younger 

materials that protected them from glacial erosion, or underwent 

post-glacial oxidation and weak to moderate supergene 

enrichment. 

Much of the Yukon interior was not glaciated. According 

to Froese and others (2009), it was cold enough to support 

permafrost, but it was too dry to support glaciers. Therefore, 

oxidized and leached caps, as well as supergene-enriched zones, 

which formed in earlier times of greater warmth and moisture, 

are preserved in Yukon at the Casino and Williams Creek 

deposits. 

In southern British Columbia, Tertiary volcanic and 

sedimentary cover strata protected supergene-enriched zones 

Long axis (km) Short axis (km)

Eaglehead Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2001 (CA01) 5.6 1.5

Gnat Lake Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2001 (CA01) 4 2

Red Bluff Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2001 (CA01) 6 4

Schaft Creek Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2001 (CA01) 3.1 1.3

Chuchi Alkaline Cu-Au 003pCu2002 (CA02) 10 2

Dorothy Alkaline Cu-Au 003pCu2002 (CA02) 2.3 1.8

Mt. Milligan Alkaline Cu-Au 003pCu2002 (CA02) 5.5 4.5

Mt. Polly Alkaline Cu-Au 003pCu2002 (CA02) 3.6 2

Red Chris Alkaline Cu-Au 003pCu2002 (CA02) 5 1.5

Sulphurets Alkaline Cu-Au 003pCu2002 (CA02) 6 3

Hushamu Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2003 (CA03) 6 3

Island Copper Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2003 (CA03) 5.2 1.1

Bell Copper Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 3.2 2.6

Granisle Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 3.2 2.2

Huckleberry Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 5 2.5

Kemess North Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 6.7 2.6

Louise Lake Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 4 1

Ox Lake Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 1.3 1.3

Pine Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 4.5 2

Poplar Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 2 0.9

Taseko Calc-alkalic Cu±Mo±Au 003pCu2004 (CA04) 5 1.5

5 2

2

7

Plus 2-km between zones of altered rocks

Maximum distance between grouped sites

Zone of altered rocks Deposit name Subtype Tract

Means of axes of zones of altered rocks

Table 3. Dimensions of zones of mineralized and altered rocks of Canadian Cordilleran porphyry copper deposits.
16 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

EXPLANATION

Deposit

Prospect

Area of grouped

 adjacent deposits

 and prospects

Idealized long and

 short axes of 

 mineralization

 and alteration zones

2.0 km

2.5 km

7.0 km

7.0 km

2.5 km

2.0 km

2.5 km 2.0 km 2.5 km

5.0 km

Example of

prospect

counted as

undiscovered

deposit

Examples

of prospects

considered as

possible

extensions 

of the group

> 2.0 km

Figure 4. Diagram illustrating application of the 2-km rule for grouping adjacent deposits and prospects. Sites less than 

about 7 km apart were grouped. (See text for explanation of rationale for grouping.)
Grade and Tonnage Models 17

Deposit name First g-t 

estimate Discovery year 1976 (Mt Cu)

1993 

(Mt Cu)

1995 

(Mt Cu)

2008 2009 

(Mt Cu) (Mt Cu)

AFTON-AJAX GP 1976 1971 0.31 0.67 0.83 1.14 2.95

AXE-PRIMER GP 1976 1973 0.08 0.33 0.39 0.55 0.55

Bell Copper 1976 1963 0.56 0.56 0.56 1.78 1.78

Berg 1976 1963 1.6 1.6 1.6 0.95 1.85

DOROTHY-NAK GP 1976 1976 0.1 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.62

GALORE CREEK 1976 1956 1.33 3.01 4.06 3.57 6.25

GIBRALTAR GP 1976 1968 1.21 1.21 1.21 3.69 3.97

Gnat Lake (Gnat Pass) 1976 1960 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12

HIGHLAND VALLEY GP 1976 1954 6.94 10.07 7.35 9.77 12.48

HUCKLEBERRY GP 1976 1961 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.85 0.9

Kwanika (Swan) 1976 1974 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.59

LORRAINE GP 1976 1931 0.07 0.09 0.09 0.21 0.27

Maggie 1976 1970 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51

Minto 1976 1973 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.15 0.41

Morrison (Hearne Hill) 1976 1963 0.36 0.36 0.36 1.03 0.7

New Nanik (Nanika) 1976 1973 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07

OK GP 1976 1965 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.34 0.61

POLLEY GP 1976 1970 0.12 0.12 0.19 0.67 0.69

Red Chris 1976 1974 0.23 0.23 0.58 1.83 2.54

SULPHURETS GP 1976 1960 1.32 0.78 1.43 1.55 3.83

1976 Subtotal: 15.74 20.57 20.21 28.97 41.69

Big Onion (Cimbria) 1993 1977 - 0.07 0.4 0.4 0.4

Brenda 1993 1947 - 0.36 0.29 0.36 0.36

Bronson Slope 1993 1988 - 0.14 0.14 0.24 0.21

Cash 1993 1976 - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Casino 1993 1969 - 1.29 0.29 2.12 2.12

Catface 1993 1960 - 0.6 0.57 1.14 1.14

COPPER MTN GP 1993 1957 - 0.93 1.31 1.53 1.83

Fish Lake (Prosperity) 1993 1960 - 2.52 2.53 2.53 2.53

Gambier Island 1993 1978 - 0.3 0.33 0.33 0.33

Granisle 1993 1955 - 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.7

HED 1993 1981 - 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04

Hi-Mars 1993 1978 - 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

Island Copper 1993 1966 - 1.35 1.46 1.55 1.55

KEMESS GP 1993 1983 - 0.65 1.2 1.79 1.45

Mount Milligan 1993 1987 - 0.92 1.35 0.96 1.16

Poison Mountain 1993 1966 - 0.49 1.87 1.94 1.94

Rey Lake 1993 1973 - 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08

SCHAFT CREEK GP 1993 1958 - 2.72 2.9 3.59 3.79

Williams Creek (Carmacks) 1993 1970 - 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.18

1993 Subtotal: 13.34 15.64 19.48 20.16

Eaglehead 1995 1981 - - 0.18 0.12 0.32

GIANT COPPER GP 1995 1930 - - 0.15 0.66 0.22

Jean 1995 1995 - - 0.08 0.08 0.08

Lexington-Lone Star 1995 1968 - - 0 0 0.11

Louise Lake 1995 1992 - - 0.15 0.15 0.36

Pine 1995 1968 - - 0.06 0.06 0.11

Poplar 1995 1974 - - 0.87 0.87 0.87

Taseko 1995 1988 - - 0.12 0.08 0.08

1995 Subtotal: 1.61 2.02 2.15

HUSHAMU GP 2008 1967 - - - 1.6 1.6

KINASKAN GP 2008 2006 - - - 0.59 0.83

2008 Subtotal: 2.19 2.43

Chuchi 2009 1991 - - - - 0.11

2009 Subtotal: 0.11

Grand Total: 15.74 33.91 37.46 52.66 66.54

Table 4. Compilation of published resource estimates through time for Canadian Cordilleran porphyry 

copper deposits. 

[Cu, copper; Mo, molybdenum; Au, gold; Ag, silver; g-t, grade and tonnage; Mt, million metric tons; deposit names in 

caps are grouped (GP); -, no data. See report text for sources of data. These estimates represent those that were available 

through 2009. They have not been updated with resource estimates made to the deposits or prospects listed in appendix 

F in 2010. ]
18 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

at the Afton, Gibraltar and Krain deposits. In west-central 

British Columbia, the Berg deposit has a blanket of mildly 

supergene-enriched ore that probably formed after Pleistocene 

glaciation. Small amounts of post-glacial supergene minerals 

also are present at many other Canadian Cordilleran deposits. 

Nevertheless, “no supergene zones have been found in Canada 

that compare in size and grade with the major examples in the 

southwestern United States, or Central or South America” (Ney 

and others, 1976, p. 77).

Socioeconomic and geographic factors also allow for 

exploration and development of lower grade porphyry copper 

deposits in western Canada, which has access to inexpensive 

hydroelectric power, and geographically is well-situated to sell 

and ship copper concentrates to Pacific-Rim countries. The 

government of British Columbia has mining and exploration 

investment tax credit programs, and the British Columbia and 

Yukon geological surveys provide geoscience databases and a 

Web-based mineral tenure system (DeGrace and others, 2009). 

In addition, major mining companies and junior exploration 

companies are able to raise capital for exploration and 

development on the Vancouver and Toronto stock exchanges. In 

times of high gold prices, Canadian porphyry Cu-Au targets have 

been particularly attractive to investors.

Exploration History and Status

Mustard (1976) tabulated dates of original lode discovery, 

porphyry copper discovery, beginning of exploration and 

development, and mining startup for 24 Canadian Cordilleran 

porphyry copper systems. Before 1950, two-thirds of these 

deposits had been discovered as veins or other types of deposits, 

but only the Lorraine and Brenda deposits had been recognized 

as porphyry copper deposit types. Although potential for large, 

low-grade copper deposits had been recognized in the Highland 

Valley area in 1917, it was not until 1954 that the Bethlehem 

deposit was recognized as a porphyry copper deposit. Production 

began there in 1962. Four other porphyry copper deposits were 

discovered in the 1950s—Krain (in the Highland Valley group), 

Schaft Creek, Granisle, and Galore Creek. 

From 1960 to 1971, 24 additional porphyry copper ore 

bodies were discovered in the Canadian Cordillera. Four of these 

are in the Highland Valley group, and four are in the Gibraltar 

group, but 16 others are individual deposits. By 1971, the total 

of known Canadian porphyry copper ore bodies was 32, but as 

grouped by the 2-km rule of Singer and others (2005a), the total 

was 24 because 6 of these are in the Highland Valley group and 4 

are in the Gibraltar group. 

According to Mustard (1976) the boom in exploration 

activities in the early 1960s, which led to the first peak in 

discovery rates, was based on the combination of a number of 

factors, including (1) recognition that low-grade porphyry copper 

deposits could support economically viable mining operations; 

(2) emergence of Japan as a major market for concentrate; (3) 

an investment climate that encouraged and supported mineral 

development with favorable tax laws, adequate land tenure, 

and developing transportation systems and power sources; (4) 

excellent geographic and geologic databases; (5) technological 

developments (such as geochemical and geophysical methods 

for minerals exploration, and helicopter support); and (6) a 

proliferation of exploration-oriented companies and professional 

societies. Although the global economy has fluctuated widely, 

these same factors also supported the most recent boom in 

exploration and discovery, which probably ended with the world 

recession of 2009.

By 1995, the total number of known Canadian porphyry 

copper deposits (as grouped by the 2-km rule) had increased 

from 24 to 31 deposits. These deposits, and four additional 

prospects were described in CIM Special Volume 46 (Schroeter, 

1995). Thus, seven porphyry copper discoveries were added in 

the 24 years between 1971 and 1995.

Singer and others (2008) were able to compile tonnages 

and grades for 54 western Canadian porphyry copper ore 

bodies. However, four of these ore bodies belong to the 

Highland Valley group, and two belong to the Kemess group. 

Therefore, the total number of Canadian porphyry copper 

deposits in 2008 was 50, which represents an increase of 19 

deposits in 13 years.

Graphs of minerals-exploration expenditures in western 

Canada by Mustard (1976) and DeGrace and others (2009) 

indicate cyclical fluctuations with increasingly higher peaks 

through time. Starting at about $5M/yr in 1950, annual 

expenditures increased to about $40M/yr by 1970, spiked to 

nearly $200M/yr in 1980, and spiked again from 1988 to 1990 

to about $250M/yr. After that, exploration expenditures dropped 

to less than $50M/yr from about 1999 to 2004, and then spiked 

again to a record $400M/yr in 2006. Since 2004, about a 

quarter to a third of these exploration expenditures have been 

for porphyry copper exploration. Most of that money was spent 

to increase and improve the estimated resources of previously 

discovered deposits. As previously discovered deposits become 

increasingly well constrained, the proportion of exploration 

efforts directed at discovery of undiscovered deposits probably 

will increase again.

Estimated Copper Resources versus 

Exploration History

Estimated total tonnage of copper contained in Canadian 

Cordilleran porphyry copper deposits has more than quadrupled 

since 1976. It has increased from about 15.7 Mt copper in 1976 

to about 66.5 Mt copper10 in 2009 (table 4 and fig. 5). However, this increase applies only to estimated total resources and 

does not take into account the progressive depletion of known 

resources by mining. 

 10Note that this value and the exploration history analysis presented in 

this section are based upon resource estimates that were available through the 

end of 2009, and do not reflect updated estimates for 2010 as listed in table 7 

or the appendixes. Using table 7 data, the total would be about 66.8 Mt copper 

for 2010.
Estimated Copper Resources versus Exploration History 19

13.3

15.6

19.5

20.2

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

1 9 7 5 1 9 8 0 1 9 8 5 1 9 9 0 1 9 9 5 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 2 0 10

Ye a r

 Copper, in millions of metric tons

15.7

20.6

20.2

1.6 2.0

2.2

2.4

0.1

2.2

41.7

29.0

66.5

52.7

37.4

33.9

15.7

Figure 5. Graph showing the proportion contributed to total estimated copper (in millions of metric tons, Mt) from the start 

of each of five sequential resource-reporting time intervals: (1) discovered deposits as of, and after, 1975 (black line), (2) 

new discoveries since 1975 (green line), (3) since 1993 (blue line), (4) since 1995 (orange line), and (5) since 2008 (red line). 

(See report text for sources of data.)

Early grade and tonnage models based on Canadian Cordilleran porphyry copper deposits by Menzie and Singer 

(1993) and Grunsky (1995) indicated that the Canadian 

deposits were significantly smaller than those of the general 

porphyry copper model by Singer and others (1986). Since 

then, however, estimated tonnages of the Canadian deposits 

have increased according to a series of more recent grade and 

tonnage models (Singer and others, 2002, 2005a, 2008) and 

the data presented in appendixes F and G of this report. As a 

result, presently estimated tonnages of Canadian Cordilleran 

porphyry copper deposits are indistinguishable statistically 

from those of the global grade and tonnage model by Singer 

and others (2008).

Before about 1992, copper resources were added mostly 

by discovery of previously unknown deposits. Since then, 

however, copper resources have been added mostly by discovery of extensions to previously known deposits. This change 

occurred as the Canadian Cordillera became increasingly wellexplored. As numbers of known and partially known deposits 

increased, new discoveries became harder to find, exploration 

efforts turned increasingly to extensions of known resources. 

This trend was accentuated during the period from about 2003 
20 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

to 2008, as metal prices rose, and the economic potential of 

previously subeconomic parts of known deposits gained economic favorability. This drove a record amount of drilling in 

and around known deposits from 2003 to 2008. 

Figure 5 summarizes the history of discovery and successive published estimates of total contained copper for 

Canadian porphyry copper deposits from initial to current 

estimates. The resource-reporting time intervals for which data 

were available for this compilation include pre-1976, 1976-

1993, 1993-1995, 1995-2008, and 2008-2009. Data for table 

4 and figure 5 are from Sutherland Brown (1976), Mustard 

(1976), MINFILE BC (2009), MINFILE YT (2009), Menzie 

and Singer (1993), Singer and others (2008), and references 

specific to each deposit, as cited in appendix F. The data for 

1995 are from articles in Schroeter (1995). A comparable data 

set, compiled by Grunsky (1995), also is available. Resource 

estimates available in 2008-2009 have not been updated to 

include information added to appendix F in 2010.

As enumerated in table 4 and graphically represented 

in figure 5, between 1976 and 2009, reported resources for 

deposits known in 1976 had grown from 15.7 Mt to 41.7 

Mt, an increase of 26.0 Mt (see fig. 5, the tonnage interval 

between the green and black lines). Between 1993 and 2009, 

reported resources for deposits known in 1993 had grown 

from 13.3 Mt to 20.2 Mt, an increase of 6.9 Mt (see fig. 5, 

the tonnage interval between the blue and green lines). Thus, 

the earliest known deposits have grown the most through 

addition of extensions (an increase in 26.0 Mt between 1976 

and 2009 versus an increase in 6.9 Mt between 1993 and 

2009). For example, from 1975 to 1993, the total resource 

base had increased from 15.7 Mt to 33.9 Mt, of which 13.3 

Mt were added from new discoveries, while only 4.9 Mt 

were added by discoveries of extensions of known deposits (20.6 Mt–15.7 Mt=4.9 Mt). In contrast, between 1993 

and 2009, the total resource base had increased by 32.6 Mt 

(66.5 Mt–33.9 Mt=32.6 Mt), of which 4.7 Mt were added 

from new discoveries (0.1 Mt+2.4 Mt+2.2 Mt=4.7 Mt), and 

27.9 Mt were added owing to discoveries of extensions of 

known deposits (32.6 Mt–4.7 Mt=27.9 Mt). As such, for the 

latter resource-reporting time interval between 1993 and 

2009, about 86 percent of the increase in estimated copper 

resources resulted from the discovery of extensions to known 

deposits, while about 14 percent resulted from newly discovered deposits.

The total of the mean estimates of copper resources 

contained in undiscovered deposits (table 5) from our study 

(about 48.7 Mt at depths less than about 1 km) plus the total 

presently known copper resources (about 66.8 Mt, using the 

updated 2010 resource estimates; see footnote 10 on page 

18) is 115.5 Mt of copper (tables 6 and 7). Based upon these 

estimates, the copper contained in known porphyry copper 

deposits represents about 58 percent of the total of known 

and undiscovered porphyry copper deposits at depths of 1 km 

or less. Similarly, the estimated copper contents of undiscovered porphyry copper deposits amount to about 42 percent 

of the total copper resources in the Canadian Cordillera at 

depths of 1 km or less. During the recent surge in exploration activity, most of the effort was directed toward increasing the resources of known deposits. As the limits of known 

deposits are approached, exploration efforts likely will shift 

back toward finding undiscovered deposits. This probably 

will involve target identification by further study of favorable prospects and exploration for hidden porphyry-copper 

occurrences by a variety of traditional and novel geological, 

geochemical, geophysical, remote-sensing, and geospatial 

methods. Target testing will continue to require abundant 

drilling, sampling, assaying, record-keeping, and thoughtful 

interpretation.

Estimation of Undiscovered Resources

According to Singer (1993), estimates of the number of 

undiscovered deposits in a permissive tract explicitly represent 

the subjective probability (at a given level of confidence, 

or degree of belief) that some fixed but unknown number 

of undiscovered deposits exists within the delineated tract. 

We held an estimation workshop in early February 2009 to 

estimate numbers of undiscovered porphyry copper deposits 

in the Canadian Cordillera. Participants in the workshop 

(see appendix I) were USGS geologists Art Bookstrom, 

Tom Frost, Steve Ludington, and Mark Mihalasky. Our 

panel also included three Canadian geologists with careerlong experience and knowledge of the geology and mineral 

resources of the Canadian Cordillera: Grant Abbott (YGS), 

James Logan (BCGS), and Andre Panteleyev, author of 

descriptive models for Canadian Cordilleran calc-alkaline 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits and alkaline porphyry Cu-Au 

deposits. 

Before our estimation workshop, we made preliminary 

versions of five permissive tracts. We compiled a preliminary 

table of known porphyry copper deposits (based on MINFILE 

records), and we made preliminary assignments of deposits 

and prospects to tracts. James Bliss (USGS) did preliminary 

statistical testing of the tonnages and grades of Canadian 

Cordilleran porphyry copper deposits versus other deposits in 

the tonnage and grade models for porphyry copper deposits 

of the world by Singer and others (2008). Tom Frost made 

a preliminary version of the tonnage and grade models for 

calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits, based on the 

Canadian Cordilleran subset of the global models by Singer 

and others (2008). 

Michael Zientek (USGS; Global Mineral Resource 

Assessment Project Co-Chief) began our workshop with an 

introduction to the goals of the project and the three-part 

method for estimation of undiscovered mineral resources. Tom 

Frost described statistical testing of tonnage and grade models 

and his preliminary version of the tonnage and grade models 

for Canadian Cordilleran porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits. 

We then discussed the tracts sequentially. For each tract, we 

discussed the geology of the permissive tract. We reviewed the 

list of known porphyry copper deposits and prospects in the 
N90 N50 N10 N05 N01 Nund s Cv% Nknown Ntotal

003pCu2001 CA01 Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu 3 5 14 14 14 6.9 4.3 62 12 18.9 

003pCu2002 CA02 Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au 3 6 13 13 13 7 3.8 54 12 19 003pCu2003 CA03 Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 1 2 4 5 6 2.3 1.5 66 2 4.3 

003pCu2004 CA04 Cordilleran Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 3 8 19 19 19 9.6 5.9 61 23 32.6 003pCu2005 CA05 Late Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 0 1 3 4 4 1.4 1.4 99 1 2.4 

Total 27.2 50 77.2

Coded_ID User_ID

Consensus estimates of numbers of 

Tract name and deposit type undiscovered deposits Summary statistics

Cu (t) Mo (t) Au (t) 

003pCu2001 CA01 Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu 8,900,000 370,000 460 003pCu2002 CA02 Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au 22,000,000 130,000 1,600 

003pCu2003 CA03 Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 3,000,000 130,000 160 003pCu2004 CA04 Cordilleran Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 13,000,000 530,000 640 

003pCu2005 CA05 Late Continental Arc Porphyry Cu 1,800,000 76,000 92 

Total 48,700,000 1,236,000 2,952 

Coded_ID User_ID Tract name and deposit type Mean expected amounts of meta

Table 5. Estimates of numbers of undiscovered deposits, porphyry copper assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.[Cu, copper; Au, gold; Nxx, estimated number of deposits associated with the xxth percentile; Nund, expected number of undiscovered deposits; s, standard deviation; Cv%, coef

ber of known deposits in the tract with identified resources; Ntotal, total of expected number of deposits plus known deposits; area, area of permissive tract in square kilometers; d

as the total number of deposits per km2; Nund, s, and Cv% are calculated using a regression equation (Singer and Menzie, 2005).]

Table 6. Summary of probabilistic assessment results, porphyry copper assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.[Cu, copper; Mo, molybdenum; Au, gold; Ag, silver; t, metric tons; Mt, million metric tons]
22 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Table 7. Identified resources in known porphyry copper deposits listed by permissive tract, porphyry copper assessment of British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

003pCu2001 CA01 HIGHLAND VALLEY GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Ann (included in Highmont) 43.4 117,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Bethlehem 677 3,050,000 108,320 3.4 271

003pCu2001 CA01 Getty South (Trojan) 36 169,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Highland Valley Copper (Valley Cu) 1,356 5,020,000 81,336 8.1 1,323

003pCu2001 CA01 Highmont 265 705,000 108,650 1.1 239

003pCu2001 CA01 IDE-AM (included in Highmont) 11.5 31,000 575 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 JA 260 1,120,000 44,200 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Krain (Getty North) 72.1 224,000 8,652 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Lornex 514 2,190,000 77,100 3.1 617

HIGHLAND VALLEY TOTAL 3,179.7 12,500,000 413,361 15.9 2,448

003pCu2001 CA01 GIBRALTER GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Gibraltar 1,297 3,800,000 77,790 - 105

003pCu2001 CA01 Sawmill 68.5 167,000 - - -

GIBRALTAR TOTAL 1,365 3,970,000 81,900 - 105

003pCu2001 CA01 KEMESS GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Kemess North 719.2 1,080,000 - 107.9 -

003pCu2001 CA01 Kemess South 228.8 375,000 - 101.8 -

KEMESS TOTAL 948 1,460,000 - 209.5 -

003pCu2001 CA01 KINASKAN GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Goat 71.2 283,000 - 28.3 157

003pCu2001 CA01 Kinaskan 176 528,000 - 63.5 -

KINASKAN TOTAL 247.2 811,000 92 157

KWANIKA GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Kwanika Central 182.6 530,000 - 52 -

003pCu2001 CA01 Kwanika (South Central) 129.1 387,000 12,900 11.6 227 

KWANIKA TOTAL 311.7 917,000 12,900 63.7 227

SCHAFT CREEK GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 NABS 90.7 306,000 42,629 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Schaft Creek 1,393.3 3,480,000 264,727 250.8 2,160

SCHAFT CREEK TOTAL 1,484 3,790,000 311,640 250.8 -

003pCu2001 CA01 INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

003pCu2001 CA01 Brenda 227 363,000 88,530 3 143

003pCu2001 CA01 Bronson Slope - Red Bluff 129.8 208,000 10,384 57.1 317

003pCu2001 CA01 Eaglehead** 79.5 321,000 3,975 3.5 43

003pCu2001 CA01 Gnat Lake (Gnat Pass) 30.4 119,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 HED* 23 37,000 9,200 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Pine 70 105,000 - 39.9 -

Tract Total 8,095 24,601,000

Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu

Coded_ID User_ID Deposit or Group Tonnage (Mt) Contained Cu (t) Contained Mo (t) Contained Au (t) Contained Ag (t)

003pCu2002 CA02 AFTON-AJAX GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Afton (old pit + new block-cave) 96.8 981,958 - 68.6 300

003pCu2002 CA02 Ajax area (JV) 523 1,510,000 5,230 96.8 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Big Onion (Afton) 3.3 23,200 - 1.5 -

003pCu2002 CA02 DM-Audra-Crescent 108.8 221,000 - 10.9 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Galaxy 5.4 31,900 - 1.1 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Iron Mask 2.4 20,200 - 1 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Rainbow 30.7 162,000 - 3.7 -

AFTON-AJAX TOTAL 770.4 2,950,000 - 183.4 300

003pCu2002 CA02 AXE-PRIMER GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe 116.7 501,810 14,004 - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe - South zone (included in Axe) 37.2 179,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe - West zone (included in Axe) 5.8 27,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Primer - North zone 23 161,000 - - -

AXE-PRIMER TOTAL 139.7 663,000 13,970

003pCu2002 CA02 COPPER MTN GROUP 0 0

003pCu2002 CA02 Alabama 29 102,000 - 4.6

003pCu2002 CA02 Copper Mountain (Similco-Ingerbelle) 455.7 1,730,000 4,557 118.5 1,393

COPPER MTN TOTAL 484.7 1,830,000 4,847 123.1 1,393

003pCu2002 CA02 POLLEY GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Lloyd-Nordik 7.2 22,300 - 1.7 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Mount Polley (Cariboo-Bell) 204.8 664,000 - 63.5 -

POLLEY TOTAL 212.5 686,000 - 65.2 -

003pCu2002 CA02 LORRAINE GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Jajay (Lorraine) 31.9 210,000 - 5.4 150

003pCu2002 CA02 Misty 3 18,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 TAM 7.2 39,600 - - 30

LORRAINE TOTAL 42.2 268,000 - 5.4 180

003pCu2002 CA02 GALORE CREEK GROUP

(Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au)

[Cu, copper; Mo, molybdenum; Au, gold; Ag, silver; t, metric tons; Mt, million metric tons; -, no data; *, deposit with unsubstantiated grade and tonnage 

estimate, based on a press release to a newsletter. Such deposits are listed here but are not included in the grade and tonnage model.**, deposit is known to be 

open in one or more directions, so that the presently estimated tonnage and grade probably do not represent the entire deposit. Such deposits are listed here, but 

are not included in the grade and tonnage model. Resource estimates are through 2009 but include updates for 2010 when available.] 
Estimation of Undiscovered Resources 23

Table 7. Identified resources in known porphyry copper deposits listed by permissive tract, porphyry copper assessment of British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.—Continued

003pCu2002 CA02 Iron Mask 2.4 20,200 - 1 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Rainbow 30.7 162,000 - 3.7 -

AFTON-AJAX TOTAL 770.4 2,950,000 - 183.4 300

003pCu2002 CA02 AXE-PRIMER GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe 116.7 501,810 14,004 - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe - South zone (included in Axe) 37.2 179,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe - West zone (included in Axe) 5.8 27,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Primer - North zone 23 161,000 - - -

AXE-PRIMER TOTAL 139.7 663,000 13,970

003pCu2002 CA02 COPPER MTN GROUP 0 0

003pCu2002 CA02 Alabama 29 102,000 - 4.6

003pCu2002 CA02 Copper Mountain (Similco-Ingerbelle) 455.7 1,730,000 4,557 118.5 1,393

COPPER MTN TOTAL 484.7 1,830,000 4,847 123.1 1,393

003pCu2002 CA02 POLLEY GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Lloyd-Nordik 7.2 22,300 - 1.7 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Mount Polley (Cariboo-Bell) 204.8 664,000 - 63.5 -

POLLEY TOTAL 212.5 686,000 - 65.2 -

003pCu2002 CA02 LORRAINE GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Jajay (Lorraine) 31.9 210,000 - 5.4 150

003pCu2002 CA02 Misty 3 18,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 TAM 7.2 39,600 - - 30

LORRAINE TOTAL 42.2 268,000 - 5.4 180

003pCu2002 CA02 GALORE CREEK GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - C, J, NJ, SW, WFG 1,382.6 5,670,000 - 304.2 5,543

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - Central (included in Galore) 233.9 1,570,000 - 81.9 1,637

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - Copper Canyon 164.8 575,000 - 89 1,178

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - Junction (included in Galore) 101.6 567,000 - 33 382

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - North Junction (included in Galore) 7.7 116,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - Southwest (included in Galore) 170.6 595,000 - 108 424

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - West Fork Glacier (included in Galore) 60.8 301,000 - 21.2 299

GALORE CREEK TOTAL 1,547 6,250,000 - 393 6,722

003pCu2002 CA02 SULPHURETS GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Kerr 225.3 924,000 - 51.8 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Mitchell 1,509.9 2,720,000 - 966.3 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Sulphurets Gold 87.3 236,000 - 62.9 -

SULPHURETS TOTAL 1,822.5 3,880,000 72,900 1080.7 3,827

003pCu2002 CA02 INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

003pCu2002 CA02 Chuchi 50 105,000 - 10.5 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Minto 34.4 408,000 - 11.1 143

003pCu2002 CA02 Mount Milligan 602.7 1,160,000 - 210.3 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Red Chris 714.8 2,540,000 - 200.9 1,072

003pCu2002 CA02 Williams Creek (Carmacks) 15.5 157,000 - 7.5 72

Tract Total 6,437 20,897,000

003pCu2002 CA02 AFTON-AJAX GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Afton (old pit + new block-cave) 96.8 981,958 - 68.6 300

003pCu2002 CA02 Ajax area (JV) 523 1,510,000 5,230 96.8 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Big Onion (Afton) 3.3 23,200 - 1.5 -

003pCu2002 CA02 DM-Audra-Crescent 108.8 221,000 - 10.9 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Galaxy 5.4 31,900 - 1.1 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Iron Mask 2.4 20,200 - 1 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Rainbow 30.7 162,000 - 3.7 -

AFTON-AJAX TOTAL 770.4 2,950,000 - 183.4 300

003pCu2002 CA02 AXE-PRIMER GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe 116.7 501,810 14,004 - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe - South zone (included in Axe) 37.2 179,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Axe - West zone (included in Axe) 5.8 27,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Primer - North zone 23 161,000 - - -

AXE-PRIMER TOTAL 139.7 663,000 13,970

003pCu2002 CA02 COPPER MTN GROUP 0 0

003pCu2002 CA02 Alabama 29 102,000 - 4.6

003pCu2002 CA02 Copper Mountain (Similco-Ingerbelle) 455.7 1,730,000 4,557 118.5 1,393

COPPER MTN TOTAL 484.7 1,830,000 4,847 123.1 1,393

003pCu2002 CA02 POLLEY GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Lloyd-Nordik 7.2 22,300 - 1.7 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Mount Polley (Cariboo-Bell) 204.8 664,000 - 63.5 -

POLLEY TOTAL 212.5 686,000 - 65.2 -

003pCu2002 CA02 LORRAINE GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Jajay (Lorraine) 31.9 210,000 - 5.4 150

003pCu2002 CA02 Misty 3 18,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 TAM 7.2 39,600 - - 30

LORRAINE TOTAL 42.2 268,000 - 5.4 180

003pCu2002 CA02 GALORE CREEK GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - C, J, NJ, SW, WFG 1,382.6 5,670,000 - 304.2 5,543

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - Central (included in Galore) 233.9 1,570,000 - 81.9 1,637

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - Copper Canyon 164.8 575,000 - 89 1,178

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - Junction (included in Galore) 101.6 567,000 - 33 382

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - North Junction (included in Galore) 7.7 116,000 - - -

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - Southwest (included in Galore) 170.6 595,000 - 108 424

003pCu2002 CA02 Galore - West Fork Glacier (included in Galore) 60.8 301,000 - 21.2 299

GALORE CREEK TOTAL 1,547 6,250,000 - 393 6,722

003pCu2002 CA02 SULPHURETS GROUP

003pCu2002 CA02 Kerr 225.3 924,000 - 51.8 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Mitchell 1,509.9 2,720,000 - 966.3 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Sulphurets Gold 87.3 236,000 - 62.9 -

SULPHURETS TOTAL 1,822.5 3,880,000 72,900 1080.7 3,827

003pCu2002 CA02 INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

003pCu2002 CA02 Chuchi 50 105,000 - 10.5 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Minto 34.4 408,000 - 11.1 143

003pCu2002 CA02 Mount Milligan 602.7 1,160,000 - 210.3 -

003pCu2002 CA02 Red Chris 714.8 2,540,000 - 200.9 1,072

003pCu2002 CA02 Williams Creek (Carmacks) 15.5 157,000 - 7.5 72

Tract Total 6,437 20,897,000

(Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au) 003pCu2001 CA01 HIGHLAND VALLEY GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Ann (included in Highmont) 43.4 117,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Bethlehem 677 3,050,000 108,320 3.4 271

003pCu2001 CA01 Getty South (Trojan) 36 169,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Highland Valley Copper (Valley Cu) 1,356 5,020,000 81,336 8.1 1,323

003pCu2001 CA01 Highmont 265 705,000 108,650 1.1 239

003pCu2001 CA01 IDE-AM (included in Highmont) 11.5 31,000 575 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 JA 260 1,120,000 44,200 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Krain (Getty North) 72.1 224,000 8,652 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Lornex 514 2,190,000 77,100 3.1 617

HIGHLAND VALLEY TOTAL 3,179.7 12,500,000 413,361 15.9 2,448

003pCu2001 CA01 GIBRALTER GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Gibraltar 1,297 3,800,000 77,790 - 105

003pCu2001 CA01 Sawmill 68.5 167,000 - - -

GIBRALTAR TOTAL 1,365 3,970,000 81,900 - 105

003pCu2001 CA01 KEMESS GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Kemess North 719.2 1,080,000 - 107.9 -

003pCu2001 CA01 Kemess South 228.8 375,000 - 101.8 -

KEMESS TOTAL 948 1,460,000 - 209.5 -

003pCu2001 CA01 KINASKAN GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Goat 71.2 283,000 - 28.3 157

003pCu2001 CA01 Kinaskan 176 528,000 - 63.5 -

KINASKAN TOTAL 247.2 811,000 92 157

KWANIKA GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Kwanika Central 182.6 530,000 - 52 -

003pCu2001 CA01 Kwanika (South Central) 129.1 387,000 12,900 11.6 227 

KWANIKA TOTAL 311.7 917,000 12,900 63.7 227

SCHAFT CREEK GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 NABS 90.7 306,000 42,629 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Schaft Creek 1,393.3 3,480,000 264,727 250.8 2,160

SCHAFT CREEK TOTAL 1,484 3,790,000 311,640 250.8 -

003pCu2001 CA01 INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

003pCu2001 CA01 Brenda 227 363,000 88,530 3 143

003pCu2001 CA01 Bronson Slope - Red Bluff 129.8 208,000 10,384 57.1 317

003pCu2001 CA01 Eaglehead** 79.5 321,000 3,975 3.5 43

003pCu2001 CA01 Gnat Lake (Gnat Pass) 30.4 119,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 HED* 23 37,000 9,200 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Pine 70 105,000 - 39.9 -

Tract Total 8,095 24,601,000

Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu

Coded_ID User_ID Deposit or Group Tonnage (Mt) Contained Cu (t) Contained Mo (t) Contained Au (t) Contained Ag (t)

003pCu2003 CA03 HUSHAMU GROUP

003pCu2003 CA03 Hushamu 735.4 1,460,000 80,894 181.6 -

003pCu2003 CA03 Red Dog 45 158,000 2,700 19.8 -

HUSHAMU TOTAL 780.4 1,620,000 85,844 201.3 -

003pCu2003 CA03 INDIVIDUAL DEPOSIT

003pCu2003 CA03 Island Copper 377 1,550,000 64,090 71.6 528

Tract Total 1,157 3,170,000

003pCu2004 CA04 DOROTHY-NAK GROUP

003pCu2004 CA04 Dorothy 45 117,000 4,500 - -

003pCu2004 CA04 NAK 271 499,000 - 36 -

DOROTHY-NAK TOTAL 316 616,000 - 36 -

003pCu2004 CA04 HUCKLEBERRY GROUP

003pCu2004 CA04 Huckleberry 177.5 831,000 24,850 4.1 150

003pCu2004 CA04 Ox Lake 21.4 72,800 1,712 - -

HUCKLEBERRY TOTAL 198.9 904,000 25,857 4.2 150

003pCu2004 CA04 OK GROUP

003pCu2004 CA04 OK 143 343,000 12,870 - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Okeover 86.8 269,000 12,152 - -

OK TOTAL 230 612,000 25,300 - -

003pCu2004 CA04 INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

003pCu2004 CA04 Bell Copper 495 1,780,000 24,750 79.2 495

003pCu2004 CA04 Berg 650.6 1,850,000 234,216 11.7 2,342

003pCu2004 CA04 Big Onion (Cimbria) 94.4 396,000 18,880 6 94

003pCu2004 CA04 Cash 36 101,000 7,560 6.1 -

003pCu2004 CA04 Casino 964 2,120,000 192,800 231.4 1,735

003pCu2004 CA04 Catface 308 1,140,000 21,560 15.4

003pCu2004 CA04 Fish Lake (Prosperity) 1,150 2,530,000 23,000 471.5 2,645

003pCu2004 CA04 Gambier Island 114 331,000 20,520 3.4 148

003pCu2004 CA04 Granisle 171.2 488,000 - 24.7 68

003pCu2004 CA04 Hi-Mars* 82 246,000 - - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Jean** 27 81,000 4,050 - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Lexington-Lone Star 19.5 109,000 - 10.7 -

003pCu2004 CA04 Louise Lake 151 359,000 12,080 34.4 -

003pCu2004 CA04 Maggie 181.4 508,000 52,606 -

003pCu2004 CA04 Morrison (Hearne Hill) 206.9 697,000 8,276 36.6 -

003pCu2004 CA04 New Nanik (Nanika) 16.5 71,900 - - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Poison Mountain 808 1,940,000 64,640 97 2,424

003pCu2004 CA04 Poplar 236 873,000 - - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Rey Lake 46.9 80,000 8,442 - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Taseko 15 79,500 1,800 8 -

Tract Total 6,518 17,912,400

003pCu2005 CA05 GIANT COPPER GROUP

003pCu2005 CA05 Giant Copper (AM Breccia) 29.5 192,000 2,065 0.3 11

003pCu2005 CA05 Invermay 15.3 32,200 5.8 121

Cordilleran Continental Arc Porphyry Cu

Late Continental Arc Porphyry Cu

Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc Porphyry Cu
24 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

tract under discussion and invited comments and discussion 

about significant prospects. During such discussions, our 

Canadian experts offered many helpful corrections and 

suggestions regarding tract definition, tract delineation, 

preliminary assignments of deposits and prospects to tracts, 

and relative merits of various prospects in each tract. 

After the presentation and discussion of each tract and 

its known deposits and prospects, Steve Ludington asked 

each participant to write estimations of the numbers of 

undiscovered deposits expected at three levels of subjective 

probability—90-, 50- and 10-percent (or for 50-, 10-, and 

5-percent levels if the number of undiscovered deposits was 

thought to be zero at the 90-percent level, or for 10-, 5-, 

and 1-percent levels if the number of undiscovered deposits 

was thought to be zero at the 90- and 50-percent levels). 

The results were posted and each participant’s estimates 

discussed. To help the group evaluate these results and guide 

us to consensus estimates, we calculated deposit densities and 

the mean expected number of deposits for alternative sets of 

estimates. The density of deposits (per 10,000 km2

) and the 

area of each assessment tract were calculated and compared 

to similar control areas (tracts) from around the world (see 

Singer and Menzie, 2005, and Singer and others, 2005b). 

The mean expected number of deposits (λ) and the 

standard deviation of the estimates (sx) were calculated using 

equations developed by Singer and Menzie (2005):

λ = 0.233 N90 + 0.4 N50 + 0.225 N10 + 0.045 N05 + 0.03 N01

sx= 0.121 – 0.237 N90 - 0.093 N50 + 0.183 N10 + 0.073 N05 

+ 0.123 N01

where Nz is the estimated number of deposits associated with 

the Zth probability level. These equations require a minimum 

of three sequential non-zero estimates to produce a probably 

distribution for calculating quantities of contained metal 

(90-50-10 or 50-10-5 or 10-5-1 probability levels; see Root 

and others, 1992). An estimate of zero is acceptable for the 

90- or the 90- and 50-percent levels provided that non-zero 

estimates are made for at least three of the lower percent 

levels. In instances where the 5- and(or) 1-percent levels are 

not estimated, the method requires that the value of the lowest 

estimated level be used to “backfill” the other lower values 

(for example, the N10 value is used for the N05 and N01 levels 

if they are not estimated, or the N05 value is used for the N01

level if N90 is believed to be zero and estimates are made only 

for N50, N10, and N05). During and after these discussions, we 

negotiated consensus for a best set of estimates for numbers 

of undiscovered deposits at three levels of subjective 

probability. 

After the assessment workshop, we ranked deposits and 

prospects on the basis of known resources and exploration 

results. Such ranking has helped us organize lists of deposits 

and significant prospects for each tract. It also lends support 

to our estimates of numbers of undiscovered deposits in each 

tract. Our criteria for such ranking are as follows:

• Rank 0 is for prospects that are not primarily porphyry copper prospects but may be related to an 

undiscovered porphyry copper system.

• Rank 1 is for porphyry copper deposits estimated to 

contain more than 16,000 t copper (the tonnage of 

copper contained in the smallest deposit included in 

the global grade and tonnage model for porphyry copper deposits by Singer and others, 2008). 

• Rank 2 is for incompletely explored porphyry copper 

prospects with estimated resources containing less 

than 16,000 t copper.

• Rank 3 is for porphyry copper prospects with intercepts of at least 20 m of mineralized rock, containing 

at least 0.2 percent copper. 

• Rank 4 is for porphyry copper prospects with samples 

containing more than 0.1 percent of copper, but less 

than 20 m of 0.2 percent copper. 

• Rank 4.5 is for porphyry Mo-Cu prospects with average molybdenum grade more than three times higher 

than average copper grade. 

• Rank 5 is for porphyry copper prospects with no 

assay data. 

• Rank 6 is for copper showings or anomalies that have 

been explored with negative results. 

Table 7. Identified resources in known porphyry copper deposits listed by permissive tract, porphyry copper assessment of British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.—Continued

003pCu2001 CA01 HIGHLAND VALLEY GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Ann (included in Highmont) 43.4 117,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Bethlehem 677 3,050,000 108,320 3.4 271

003pCu2001 CA01 Getty South (Trojan) 36 169,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Highland Valley Copper (Valley Cu) 1,356 5,020,000 81,336 8.1 1,323

003pCu2001 CA01 Highmont 265 705,000 108,650 1.1 239

003pCu2001 CA01 IDE-AM (included in Highmont) 11.5 31,000 575 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 JA 260 1,120,000 44,200 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Krain (Getty North) 72.1 224,000 8,652 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Lornex 514 2,190,000 77,100 3.1 617

HIGHLAND VALLEY TOTAL 3,179.7 12,500,000 413,361 15.9 2,448

003pCu2001 CA01 GIBRALTER GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Gibraltar 1,297 3,800,000 77,790 - 105

003pCu2001 CA01 Sawmill 68.5 167,000 - - -

GIBRALTAR TOTAL 1,365 3,970,000 81,900 - 105

003pCu2001 CA01 KEMESS GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Kemess North 719.2 1,080,000 - 107.9 -

003pCu2001 CA01 Kemess South 228.8 375,000 - 101.8 -

KEMESS TOTAL 948 1,460,000 - 209.5 -

003pCu2001 CA01 KINASKAN GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Goat 71.2 283,000 - 28.3 157

003pCu2001 CA01 Kinaskan 176 528,000 - 63.5 -

KINASKAN TOTAL 247.2 811,000 92 157

KWANIKA GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 Kwanika Central 182.6 530,000 - 52 -

003pCu2001 CA01 Kwanika (South Central) 129.1 387,000 12,900 11.6 227 

KWANIKA TOTAL 311.7 917,000 12,900 63.7 227

SCHAFT CREEK GROUP

003pCu2001 CA01 NABS 90.7 306,000 42,629 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Schaft Creek 1,393.3 3,480,000 264,727 250.8 2,160

SCHAFT CREEK TOTAL 1,484 3,790,000 311,640 250.8 -

003pCu2001 CA01 INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

003pCu2001 CA01 Brenda 227 363,000 88,530 3 143

003pCu2001 CA01 Bronson Slope - Red Bluff 129.8 208,000 10,384 57.1 317

003pCu2001 CA01 Eaglehead** 79.5 321,000 3,975 3.5 43

003pCu2001 CA01 Gnat Lake (Gnat Pass) 30.4 119,000 - - -

003pCu2001 CA01 HED* 23 37,000 9,200 - -

003pCu2001 CA01 Pine 70 105,000 - 39.9 -

Tract Total 8,095 24,601,000

Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu

Coded_ID User_ID Deposit or Group Tonnage (Mt) Contained Cu (t) Contained Mo (t) Contained Au (t) Contained Ag (t)

p,

003pCu2004 CA04 Hi-Mars* 82 246,000 - - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Jean** 27 81,000 4,050 - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Lexington-Lone Star 19.5 109,000 - 10.7 -

003pCu2004 CA04 Louise Lake 151 359,000 12,080 34.4 -

003pCu2004 CA04 Maggie 181.4 508,000 52,606 -

003pCu2004 CA04 Morrison (Hearne Hill) 206.9 697,000 8,276 36.6 -

003pCu2004 CA04 New Nanik (Nanika) 16.5 71,900 - - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Poison Mountain 808 1,940,000 64,640 97 2,424

003pCu2004 CA04 Poplar 236 873,000 - - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Rey Lake 46.9 80,000 8,442 - -

003pCu2004 CA04 Taseko 15 79,500 1,800 8 -

Tract Total 6,518 17,912,400

003pCu2005 CA05 GIANT COPPER GROUP

003pCu2005 CA05 Giant Copper (AM Breccia) 29.5 192,000 2,065 0.3 11

003pCu2005 CA05 Invermay 15.3 32,200 5.8 121

GIANT COPPER TOTAL 44.8 224,200 2,240 6.1 132

Tract Total 44.8 224,200

Tracts Grand Total 22,253 66,804,600

Late Continental Arc Porphyry Cu
References Cited 25

Prospects of ranks 5 and 6 are not considered significant 

and are not included in the tables of significant prospects that 

accompany the descriptions of permissive tracts.

Summary of Probabilistic Assessment 

Results

Appendixes A through E contain descriptions of 

permissive tracts with maps, tables of resources in known 

deposits, character of significant prospects, and locations and 

types of recent exploration activity. Also included are maps 

of permissive tracts with locations of deposits and significant 

prospects, and graphed results of probabilistic estimation 

of tonnages of copper, molybdenum, gold, silver, and rock 

likely to be contained in undiscovered porphyry copper 

deposits. Assessment results are summarized in tables 5 and 

6. 

Considerations for Users of this 

Assessment 

GMRAP products represent a synthesis of current, 

readily available information. Ideally, assessments are 

done on a recurring basis, at a variety of scales, because 

available data change over time. This assessment is based 

on the descriptive and grade and tonnage data contained 

in published mineral deposit models. Data in the models 

represent average grades of each commodity of possible 

economic interest and tonnages based on the total of 

production, reserves, and resources at the lowest cutoff 

grade for which data were available when the model was 

constructed. The present-day economic viability of the 

deposits used to construct the models varies widely, so care 

must be exercised when using the results of this assessment 

to answer questions that involve economics. Furthermore, 

these estimates are of numbers of deposits that are likely to 

exist, not necessarily those likely to be discovered (Singer, 

2007a, b). In some cases, the assessment team was aware 

of prospects, revealed by past or current exploration efforts, 

that are believed to be significant deposits, but that do not yet 

have a citable grade and tonnage. These probable deposits 

are treated here as undiscovered deposits, albeit ones with a 

high degree of certainty of existence. 

The mineral industry explores for extensions of 

identified resources, as well for greenfields projects in new 

exploration areas. Extensions to identified resources are not 

estimated in this assessment, although they are commonly a 

substantial part of newly discovered copper resources each 

year. This assessment considers the potential for concealed 

deposits within 1 km of the surface. However, exploration 

for, and exploitation of, such deposits may be so expensive 

that deposits, if present, may not be discovered in the near 

term. If they are discovered, the costs and logistics related to 

mining a deeply buried porphyry deposit might prohibit their 

development into mines given current or near-term metal 

prices and technology. Nevertheless, ore bodies throughout 

the world are mined at depths exceeding 1 km.

The estimated numbers of undiscovered deposits 

reported here may be conservative. We estimated numbers 

of undiscovered deposits before we formally ranked them. 

Thus, we may not have been sufficiently aware of the 

relative qualities of some prospects when the estimates were 

made. Also, our use of the average of long axes of alteration 

zones in application of the 2-km rule imposed a conservative 

influence on our estimation of undiscovered deposits. 

Had we known the shape and orientation of the zone of 

mineralized and hydrothermally altered rocks associated 

with each deposit, we could have rigorously applied the 

2-km rule to each deposit. This would have allowed more 

prospects around known deposits to be classified as possible 

undiscovered deposits, rather than as possible extensions 

to identified resources, which are not estimated in this 

assessment. 

Permissive tracts are based on geology, irrespective of 

political boundaries. Therefore, tracts may cross international 

boundaries or include lands that already have been developed 

for other uses, or withdrawn from mineral development as 

protected areas. 

The permissive tracts are presented at a scale of 

1:1,000,000 and are not intended for use at larger scales. For 

additional information about proper usage of the tracts, see 

the completeness and accuracy statements in the metadata of 

the accompanying GIS files.

Acknowledgments

We thank the BCGS and the YGS for providing excellent 

digital geologic maps and digital databases of mineral 

deposits and prospects. We thank Phillipe Erdmer (BCGS) and 

Carolyn Relf (YGS) for recommending and supporting our 

knowledgeable, friendly, and helpful Canadian co-authors. We 

thank Jane Hammarstrom and Michael Zientek, project chiefs 

of the USGS Global Mineral Resource Assessment Project, 

for their guidance and support. We also thank members of the 

USGS Assessment Oversight Committee, technical reviewers 

JoAnne Nelson and Bruce Gamble, and metadata reviewer 

Pamela Cossette for their helpful comments and suggestions. 

Debra Briggs and John Wallis assisted with implementing 

manuscript and figure revisions.

References Cited

Arculus, R.J., 2003, Use and abuse of the terms calcalkaline and calcalkalic: Journal of Petrology, v. 44, no. 5, p. 

929–935.

Bates, R.L., and Jackson, J.A., eds., 1997, Glossary of geol
26 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

ogy, (4th ed.): Alexandria, Virginia, American Geological 

Institute, 769 p.

Bawiec, W.J., and Spanski, G.T., in press, EMINERS–Economic mineral resource simulator, version 3.0: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1057, program files 

and 29-p Quick-Start Guide.

Berger, B.R., Ayuso, R.A., Wynn, J.C., and Seal, R.R., 2008, 

Preliminary model of porphyry copper deposits: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1321, 55 p., accessed 

May 15, 2009, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1321.

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., compilers, 2004a, 

Yukon age 2004—A database of isotopic age determinations for rock units from Yukon Territory: Yukon Geological Survey, CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://

ygsftp.gov.yk.ca/publications/database/yukonage/readme.

htm.)

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., 2004b, BC age 

2004A—A database of isotopic age determinations for rock 

units from British Columbia: British Columbia Ministry of 

Energy and Mines, Geological Survey, Open File 2004-3 

(Release 2.0), accessed May 15, 2009, at http://www.empr.

gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/PublicationsCatalogue/

OpenFiles/2004/Pages/default.aspx.

Briskey, J.A., Schulz, K.J., Mosesso, J.P., Horwitz, L.R., and 

Cunningham, C.G., 2001, It’s time to know the planet’s 

mineral resources: Geotimes, v. 46, no. 3, p. 14–19. (Also 

available online at http://www.geotimes.org/mar01/.)

British Columbia Securities Commission, 2005, National 

instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101), standards for disclosure for 

mineral projects: 17 p., accessed December 2009, at http://

www.bcsc.bc.ca/uploadedFiles/NI43-101(1).pdf. 

Christopher, P.A., and Carter, N.C., 1976, Metallogeny and 

metallogenic epochs for porphyry mineral deposits in 

the Canadian Cordillera with a table of ages of porphyry 

Cu-Au, Cu, Cu-Mo, and Mo deposits in the Canadian 

Cordillera, in Sutherland Brown, A., 1976, ed., Porphyry 

deposits of the Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute 

of Mining and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles 

S. Ney Volume, p. 64–71.

Colpron, M., Nelson, J.L., and Murphy, D.C., 2007, A tectonostratigraphic framework for the pericratonic terranes 

of the northern Cordillera, in Colpron, M., and Nelson, J.L., 

eds., Paleozoic evolution and metallogeny of pericratonic 

terranes at the ancient pacific margin of North America, 

Canadian and Alaskan Cordillera: Geological Association 

of Canada Special Paper 45 (2006), p. 1–23.

Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting 

Standards, 2004, Definition standards on mineral resources 

and mineral reserves: Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Standing Committee on Reserve 

Definition, 10 p.

Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting 

Standards, 2006, International reporting template for the 

reporting of exploration results, mineral resources, and mineral reserves: Committee for Mineral Reserves International 

Reporting Standards, 53 p., accessed December 2009 at 

http://www.crirsco.com/crirsco_template_first_ed_0806.pdf.

Cox, D.F., 1986a, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu (model 

17), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 76–81.

Cox, D.F., 1986b, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Mo 

(model 21a), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

115–119.

Cox, D.F., 1986c, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Au 

(model 20c), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

110–114.

Cox, D.F., 1986d, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu, skarnrelated deposits (model 18a), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., 

eds., Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 82–85.

Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., 1986, Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, 379 p.

Dawson, K.M., Panteleyev, A., Sutherland Brown, A., and 

Woodsworth, G.J., 1991, Regional metallogeny, chap. 19 of

Gabrielse, H., and Yorath, C.J., eds., Geology of the Cordilleran Orogen in Canada, no. 4, p. 707–768. (Also Geological Society of America, v. G-2.)

DeGrace, John, Grant, Brian, Grieve, David, Lefebure, David, 

Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2008, 

British Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 2007: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines 

and Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2008-1, 

30 p. (Also available online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/

MINING/GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

DeGrace, John, Fredericks, Jay, Grieve, David, Lefebure, 

David, Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 

2009, British Columbia mining and mineral exploration 

overview 2008: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, 

Mines and Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 

2009-1, 31 p. (Also available online at http://www.empr.

gov.bc.ca/MINING/GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/

Pages/default.aspx.)

Froese, D.G., Zazula, G.D., Westgate, J.A., Preece, S.J., 

Sanborn, P.T., Reyes, A.V., and Pearce, N.J.G, 2009, The 

Klondike goldfields and Pleistocene environments of 

Beringia: GSA Today, v. 19, no. 8, p. 4–10.

Gabrielse, Hubert, 1985, Major dextral transcurrent displacements along the Northern Rocky Mountain Trench 

and related lineaments in north-central British Columbia: 

Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, v. 96, p. 

1–14. 

Gabrielse, Hubert, Monger, J.W.H., Wheeler, J.O., and Yorath, C.J., 1991, Tectonic framework, chap. 2 of Gabrielse, 

H., and Yorath, C.J., eds., Geology of the Cordilleran Orogen in Canada: Geological Survey of Canada, Geology 

of Canada, no. 4, p. 15–28. (Also at Geological Society of 

America, The Geology of North America, v. G-2.)

Gordey, S.P., and Makepeace, A.J., compilers, 1999, Yukon 
References Cited 27

digital geology: Geological Survey of Canada Open-File 

D3826, and Geological Services Division, Yukon, Indian 

and Northern Affairs Canada, Open-File 1999-1(D), CDROM.

Grunsky, E.C., 1995, Grade and tonnage data for British 

Columbia mineral deposit models: British Columbia Geological Survey Branch, Geological Field Work 1994, Paper 

1995-1, p. 417–423.

Hammarstrom, J.M., Zientek, M.L., Ludington, S.D., Robinson, G.R., Jr., Bookstrom, A., Mihalasky, M.J., Dicken, 

C.L., Mars, J.L., Drenth, B.J., Philipps, J., and Drew L.J., 

in press, Global mineral resource assessment— Porphyry 

copper assessment methods: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report. 

Jackson, E.V., 1976, Generalized geologic map of the Canadian Cordillera, in Sutherland Brown, A., ed., Porphyry 

deposits of the Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the 

Charles S. Ney Volume, Map A, scale 1:250,000,000.

Le Maitre, R.W. (ed.), Streckeisen, A., Zanettin, B., Le 

Bas, M.J., Bonin, B., Bateman, P., Bellieni, G., Dudel, 

A.,Efremova, S., Keller, A.J., Lameyre, J., Sabine, P.A., 

Schmid, R., Sørensen, H. and Woolley, A.R., 2002, Igneous rocks—A classification and glossary of terms, 2nd 

edition: Cambridge University Press, 236 p.

Massey, N.W.D., MacIntyre, D.G., Dejardins, P.J., and 

Cooney, R.T., 2005, Digital geology map of British 

Columbia—Whole Province: B.C. Ministry of Energy 

and Mines, GeoFile 2005-1, compilation scale 1:1,000,000 

(source-map scale 1:250,000).

McMillan, W.J., 1991, Porphyry deposits in the Canadian 

Cordillera, in McMillan, W.J., Höy, T., MacIntyre, D.G., 

Nelson, J.L., Nixon, G.T., Hammack, J.L., Panteleyev, A., 

Ray, G.E., and Webster, I.C.L., Ore deposits, tectonics and 

metallogeny in the Canadian Cordillera: British Columbia, 

Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, Paper 

1991-4, p. 253–276.

McMillan, W.J., Thompson, J.F.H., Hart, C.J.R., and Johnston, S.T., 1995, Regional geological and tectonic setting 

of porphyry deposits in British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, in Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special Volume 

46, p. 40–57.

Menzie, D.W., 2005a, Mineral deposit models and their role 

in resource assessments, in Menzie, W.D., Foose, M.P., 

Schulz, K.J., and Lampietti, Francois, A short-course on 

methodologies for the assessment of undiscovered mineral 

resources: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005-

1146, 53 p. CD-ROM. 

Menzie, D.W., 2005b, Overview of three-part quantitative 

mineral resource assessment method, in Menzie, W.D., 

Foose, M.P., Schulz, K.J., and Lampietti, Francois, A shortcourse on methodologies for the assessment of undiscovered mineral resources: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2005-1146, 30 p. CD-ROM. 

Menzie, W.D., and Singer, D.A., 1993, Grade and tonnage 

model of porphyry Cu deposits in British Columbia, 

Canada, and Alaska, U.S.A.: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 93-275, 8 p. 

Mihalasky, M.J., 2001, Mineral potential modelling of gold 

and silver mineralization in the Nevada Great Basin—A 

GIS based analysis using weights of evidence: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 01-291, 448 p., accessed 

April 2010 at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/of01-291/.

Mihalynuk, M.G., Nelson, JoAnne, and Diakow, L.J., 1994, 

Cache Creek terrane entrapment—Oroclinal paradox 

within the Canadian Cordillera: Tectonics, v. 13, no. 2, p. 

575–595.

MINFILE BC, 2009, MINFILE mineral inventory: Province 

of British Columbia, Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, total records 12,523, accessed December 

2009 at http://MINFILE.gov.bc.ca/.

MINFILE YT, 2009, MINFILE Mineral Inventory: Yukon 

Province, Yukon Geological Survey, accessed December 

2009 at http://servlet.gov.yk.ca/ygsmin/index.do.

Mortensen, J.K., Ghosh, D.K., and Ferri, F., 1995, U-Pb 

geochronology of intrusive rocks associated with coppergold porphyry deposits in the Canadian Cordillera, in

Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry deposits of the Northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute of 

Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, p. 

142–158.

Mustard, D.K., 1976, Porphyry exploration in the Canadian 

Cordillera, in Sutherland Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits 

of the Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney 

Volume, p. 17–20.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008a, Canadian aeromagnetic 

data base: Government of Canada, Geological Survey of 

Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/

index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008b, Canadian gravimetric 

data base: Government of Canada, Geodetic Information 

System, Geoscience Data Repository, Geodetic Survey 

Division, Earth Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 

2009, at http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008c, National geochemical 

reconnaissance (NGR) stream sediment and water geochemical database: Government of Canada, Geological 

Survey of Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth 

Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.

nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Nelson, J., and Colpron, Maurice, 2007, Tectonics and 

metallogeny of the British Columbia, Yukon and Alaskan 

Cordillera, 1.8 Ma to the present, in Goodfellow, W.D., ed., 

Mineral deposits of Canada—A synthesis of major deposittypes, district metallogeny, the evolution of geological 

provinces, and exploration methods: Geological Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special Publication no. 5, p. 755–791.
28 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Nelson, J.L., Colpron, Maurice, Piercey, S.J., Dusel-Bacon, 

Cynthia, Murphy, D.C., and Roots, C.F., 2006, Paleozoic 

tectonic and metallogenetic evolution of pericratonic terranes in Yukon, northern British Columbia and eastern 

Alaska, in Colpron, Maurice, and Nelson, J.L., eds., Paleozoic evolution and metallogeny of pericratonic terranes at 

the ancient pacific margin of North America, Canadian and 

Alaskan Cordillera: Geological Association of Canada, 

Special Paper 45, p. 323–360.

Nesbitt, B.E., and Muehlenbachs, K., 1989, Origins of movement of fluids during deformation and metamorphism in 

the Canadian Cordillera: Science, v. 245, p. 733–736.

Ney, C.S., Cathro, R.J., Panteleyev, A., and Rotherham, D.C., 

1976, Supergene copper mineralization, in Sutherland 

Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 

Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, p. 72–78.

Ney, C.S., and Hollister, V.F., 1976, Geological setting of porphyry deposits in the Canadian Cordillera, in Sutherland 

Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 

Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, p. 21–29.

Panteleyev, Andre, 1995a, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (model L04), 

in Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., Selected British 

Columbia mineral deposit profiles, vol. 1—Metallics and 

coal: British Columbia Ministry of Energy of Employment 

and Investment, Energy and Minerals Division, Open 

File 1995-20, p. 87–92, accessed May 29, 2008, at http://

www.em.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geolsurv/MetallicMinerals/

MineralDepositProfiles; http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/MineralDepositProfiles/.

Panteleyev, Andre, 1995b, Porphyry Cu-Au—Alkalic (model 

L03), in Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., Selected 

British Columbia mineral deposit profiles, vol. 1—Metal

lics and coal: British Columbia Ministry of Employment 

and Investment, Energy and Minerals Division, Open 

File 1995-20, p. 83–86, accessed May 29, 2008, at http://

www.em.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geolsurv/MetallicMinerals/

MineralDepositProfiles: http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/MineralDepositProfiles/. 

Panteleyev, Andre, 2005a, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au L04, in

Fonseca, A., and Bradshaw, G., compilers, Yukon Mineral 

Deposits Profiles, Yukon Geological Survey Open File 

2005-5, 175 p., accessed July 28, 2009, at http://www.geology.gov.yk.ca/mineral_deposit_profiles.html; http://ygsftp.

gov.yk.ca/publications/openfile/2005/of2005_5.pdf; http://

www.geology.gov.yk.ca/pdf/l04_porphyry_cu_mo_au.pdf.

Panteleyev, Andre, 2005b, Porphyry Cu-Au, Alkalic L03, in

Fonseca, A., and Bradshaw, G., compilers, Yukon Mineral 

Deposits Profiles: Yukon Geological Survey Open File 

2005-5, 175 p., accessed July 28, 2009, at http://www.geology.gov.yk.ca/mineral_deposit_profiles.html; http://ygsftp.

gov.yk.ca/publications/openfile/2005/of2005_5.pdf; http://

www.geology.gov.yk.ca/pdf/l03_alkalic_porphyry_cu_

au.pdf.

Pilcher, S.H., McDougall, J.J., Jackson, E.V., Seraphim, R.H., 

and Hollister, V.F., 1976, Faults, porphyry deposits and 

showings, and tectonic belts of the Canadian Cordillera, 

in Sutherland Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining 

and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney 

Volume, map B, scale 1:250,000,000 and accompanying 

table of characteristics of 147 Canadian Cordilleran porphyry prospects (5 sheets in pocket).

Ricketts, B.D., Evenchick, C.A., Anderson, R.G., and Murphy, D.C., 1992, Bowser basin, northern British Columbia—Constraints on the timing of initial subsidence and 

Stikinia-North America terrane interactions: Geology, v. 

20, p. 1119–1122.

Root, D.H., Menzie, W.D., and Scott, W.A., 1992, Computer 

Monte Carlo simulation in quantitative resource estimation: Natural Resources Research, v. 1, no. 2, p. 125–138.

Schroeter, T.G., ed., 1995, Porphyry deposits of the Northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute 

of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, 

888 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Cathro, Michael, Grieve, David, Lane, 

Robert, Pardy, Jamie, and Wojdak, Paul, 2006, British 

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 2005: 

British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2006-1, 20 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Grieve, David, Lane, Robert, Madu, Bruce, 

Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2007, British Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 2006: British 

Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, Information Circular 2007-1, 28 p.

Sillitoe, R.H., and Bonham, H.F., Jr., 1990, Sediments-hosted 

gold deposits—Distal products of magmatic-hydrothermal 

systems: Geology, v. 18, p. 157–161.

Sinclair, W.D., 2007, Porphyry deposits, in Goodfellow, 

W.D., ed., Mineral deposits of Canada—A synthesis of 

major deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of 

geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 223–243.

Singer, D.A., 1993, Basic concepts in three-part quantitative 

assessments of undiscovered mineral resources: Nonrenewable Resources, v. 2, no. 2, p. 69–81.

Singer, D.A., ed., 1996, An analysis of Nevada’s metalbearing mineral resources: Nevada Bureau of Mines and 

Geology Open-File Report 96-2, accessed April 2010 at 

http://www.nbmg.unr.edu/dox/ofr962/.

Singer, D.A., 2007a, Short course introduction to quantitative 

mineral resource assessments: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 2007-1434, accessed May 1, 2010, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1434/. 

Singer, D.A., 2007b, Estimating amounts of undiscovered 

resources, in Briskey, J.A., and Schulz, K.J., eds., Proceedings for a workshop on deposit modeling, mineral resource 

assessment, and their role in sustainable development, 31st 

International Geological Congress, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 

August 18-19, 2000: U.S. Geological 
References Cited 29

Survey Circular 1294, p. 79–84. (Also available online at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2007/1294/.) 

Singer, D.A., and Berger, V.I., 2007, Deposit models and their 

application in mineral resource assessments, in Briskey, 

J.A., and Schulz, K.J., eds., Proceedings for a workshop on 

deposit modeling, mineral resource assessment, and their 

role in sustainable development, 31st International Geological Congress, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, August 18-19, 2000: 

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1294, p. 71–78. (Also 

available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2007/1294/.)

Singer, D.A., and Menzie, W.D., 2005, Statistical guides to 

estimating the number of undiscovered mineral deposits; 

an example with porphyry copper deposits, in Cheng, Qiuming, and Bonham-Carter, Graeme, eds., Proceedings of 

IAMG—The annual conference of the International Association for Mathematical Geology: Geomatics Research 

Laboratory, York University, Toronto, Canada, p. 

1028–1033.

Singer, D.A., Mosier, D.L., and Cox, D.P., 1986, Grade and 

tonnage model of porphyry Cu, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, 

D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey 

Bulletin 1693, p. 77–81.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2002, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world—Database, maps, and preliminary analysis: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 02-268, 62 p. (Also available online at http://geo

pubs.wr.usgs.gov/open-file/of02-268.)

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2005a, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world—Database, map, and grade 

and tonnage models: U.S. Geological Survey Open-file 

Report 2005-1060, 9 p. (Also available online at http://pubs.

usgs.gov/of/2005/1060/.)

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., Menzie, W.D., and Berger, B.R., 

2005b, Porphyry copper density: Economic Geology, v. 

100, no. 3, p. 491–514.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2008, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world—Database, map, and grade 

and tonnage models, 2008: U.S. Geological Survey Openfile Report 2008-1155, 45 p., accessed May 1, 2010, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1155/.

Sutherland Brown, A., 1976, ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and 

Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, 

510 p., 2 pl., scale 1:250,000,000 (in pocket).

Trochim, W.M.K., 2006, Research methods knowledge base, the t-test: Web Center for Social Research 

Methods, accessed December 2009 at http://www.

socialresearchmethods.net/kb/stat_t.php.

UNdata, 2009, Countries or areas, codes and abbreviations: 

United Nations Statistics Division, accessed December 15, 

2009, at http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49alpha.

htm.

U.S. Bureau of Mines and U.S. Geological Survey, 1980, Mineral reserves, resources, resource potential and certainty: 

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 831, 5 p.

U.S. Department of State, 2009, Small-scale digital international land boundaries (SSIB)—Lines, edition 10 and 

Polygons, beta edition 1: Boundaries and Sovereignty 

Encyclopedia (B.A.S.E.), U.S. Department of State, 

Office of the Geographer and Global Issues.

U.S. Geological Survey National Mineral Resource Assessment Team, 2000, 1998 assessment of deposits of gold, 

silver, copper, lead, and zinc in the United States: U.S. 

Geological Survey Circular 1178, 21 p. 

Wallace, A.R., Ludington, S., Mihalasky, M.J., Peters, S.G., 

Theodore, T.G., Ponce, D.A., John, D.A., and Berger, B.R., 

2004, Assessment of metallic mineral resources in the 

Humboldt River Basin, Northern Nevada, with a section 

on PGE potential of the Humboldt mafic complex by M.L. 

Zientek, G.B. Sidder, and R.A. Zierenberg: U.S. Geological 

Survey Bulletin 2218, 1 CD-ROM. (Also available online at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b2218/.)

Wheeler, J.O., and McFeely, P., 1991, Tectonic assemblage 

map of the Canadian Cordillera and adjacent parts of the 

United States of America: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Map 1712A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Wheeler, J.O., Brookfield, A.J, Gabrielse, H., Monger, J.W.H., 

Tipper, H.W., and Woodsworth, G.J., 1991, Terrane map 

of the Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Map 1713A, scale 1:2,000,000.
30 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Appendixes A–I
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 31

Deposit Type Assessed: Porphyry copper

Descriptive model: Porphyry copper (Cox, 1986a; Berger and others, 2008), porphyry Cu-Mo 

(Cox, 1986b), porphyry Cu-Au (Cox, 1986c), porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (Panteleyev, 1995)

Grade and tonnage model: Canadian Cordillera Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (appendix G)

(Table A1 summarizes selected assessment results)

Appendix A. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 

003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

By Mark J. Mihalasky1 , Arthur A. Bookstrom2 , Thomas P. Frost3 , and Steve Ludington4 , with contributions 

from James M. Logan5

 , Andre Panteleyev6 , and Grant Abbott7

1

U.S. Geological Survey, mjm@usgs.gov.

2

U.S. Geological Survey, abookstrom@usgs.gov.

3

U.S. Geological Survey, tfrost@usgs.gov. 

4

U.S. Geological Survey, slud@usgs.gov.

5

British Columbia Geological Survey, Jim.Logan@gov.bc.ca. 

6

XDM Geological Consultants, xdmgeo@shaw.ca.

7

Yukon Geological Survey, grant.abbott@gov.yk.ca. 

[km, kilometers; km2, square kilometers; t, metric tons]

Date of 

assessment

Assessment depth 

(km) Tract area (km2

) Known copper 

resources (t)

Mean estimate of 

undiscovered copper 

resources (t)

Median estimate of 

undiscovered copper 

resources (t)

2009 1 175,250 24,600,000 8,900,000 6,900,000

Table A1. Summary of selected resource assessment results for tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British Columbia

and Yukon Territory, Canada.

Location

This tract is in the Cordilleran region of western Canada. It includes the plateaus, hills, and valleys of the Intermontane belt, 

which is between the Coast Mountains and the inland Rocky Mountains in British Columbia and Yukon (figs. 1, A1).

Geologic Feature Assessed

Calc-alkaline igneous rocks of Middle Triassic to Late Jurassic age in preaccretionary island-arc terranes of the Intermontane belt.
32 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Delineation of the Permissive Tract

Geologic Criteria

The fundamental units for delineation of this permissive 

tract are subduction-related magmatic arcs of Middle Triassic 

to Late Jurassic age that gave rise to the Quesnel and Stikine 

oceanic island-arc terranes before they were accreted to the 

continental margin. Geologic units that define this permissive 

tract are preaccretionary calc-alkaline igneous rocks of the Triassic-Jurassic Quesnel and Stikine terranes. Porphyry copper 

deposits and prospects that are preaccretionary with respect 

to Quesnellia and Stikinia range in age from Late Triassic to 

Middle Jurassic (222 to 168 Ma). Map units that include rocks 

of this age-span also may include older or younger rocks. This 

permissive tract, therefore, includes calc-alkaline igneous 

components of lithologic assemblages represented by map 

units including rocks as old as earliest Middle Triassic (245 

Ma) or as young as latest Late Jurassic (146 Ma).

Criteria for consideration of rock types as permissive 

for the occurrence of calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

deposits are from descriptive models for porphyry copper and 

Cu-Mo deposits by Cox (1986b) and for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of British Columbia by Panteleyev 

(1995). Phaneritic to porphyritic rock types classified as 

permissive for the occurrence of such deposits include quartz 

diorite, tonalite, granodiorite, quartz monzonite, monzogranite, 

and granite of calc-alkaline affinity. Porphyro-aphanitic equivalents are quartz-andesite, dacite, rhyodacite, quartz-latite, and 

rhyolite porphyries of calc-alkaline affinity (see table A2). 

According to McMillan (1991) igneous assemblages 

associated with copper deposits of the calc-alkaline subtype 

consist of I-type igneous rocks, differentiated from magmas 

formed by partial melting of igneous source materials. Such 

calc-alkaline assemblages commonly contain either hornblende or biotite (or both). However, they do not contain 

primary muscovite, which is characteristic of peraluminous 

S-type granites, derived from sedimentary source rocks. 

Relatively low initial 87Sr/ 86Sr ratios of 0.704 to 0.706 indicate 

derivation from mafic source materials with low rubidium 

contents. With increasing proportions of silica, plagioclase 

is increasingly sodic, and proportions of K-feldspar and 

biotite generally increase. Nevertheless, plagioclase generally exceeds K-feldspar, and soda generally exceeds potash. 

Although most of these rocks contain primary igneous quartz, 

they generally contain less than 70 weight percent of silica. 

Accessory magnetite in calc-alkaline rocks indicates crystallization under relatively oxidizing conditions. 

Although porphyry copper deposits commonly are associated with epizonal porphyritic intrusions, some are associated 

with predominantly phaneritic plutons, and some are associated with predominantly aphanitic subvolcanic intrusions and 

breccias. We classify calc-alkaline igneous rocks as permissive 

for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits, whether they 

are plutonic, subvolcanic, volcanic, or volcaniclastic.

This permissive tract includes calc-alkaline igneous rocks 

that formed within the Quesnel and Stikine island arcs before, 

during, and shortly after their amalgamation and accretion to 

the continental margin. As shown in tables A3 and A4, ages 

of known preaccretionary calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

deposits in these terranes range from 222 Ma (Late Triassic) 

to 168 Ma (Middle Jurassic). However, many geologic map 

units that include such rocks also include older and younger 

rocks. Therefore, calc-alkaline rocks included in this tract 

may belong to map units that contain rocks as old as earliest 

Middle Triassic (245 Ma) or as young as latest Late Jurassic 

(146 Ma). 

According to Monger and others (1991), much of 

Quesnellia is characterized by island-arc volcanic rocks of the 

Late Triassic to Early Jurassic Nicola Group in southern British Columbia and the coeval Takla Group to the north. Calcalkaline volcanic rocks of the Nicola and Takla Groups are 

intruded by comagmatic calc-alkaline plutons. Some of these 

plutons produced calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits. 

The Highland Valley and Gibraltar Cu±Mo±Au deposits are 

examples of the plutonic style and are hosted in batholiths (see 

Panteleyev, 1995, for description of deposit subtype styles). 

The Brenda Cu-Mo deposit, of the classic style, is peripheral 

to a stock, emplaced into a batholith. The Kemess deposit is of 

the volcanic style, and is hosted in volcanic rocks of the Takla 

and Hazelton groups, intruded by intermediate to felsic intrusions of Early Jurassic age (Rebagliati and others, 1995). We 

therefore classified calc-alkaline volcanic rocks of the Nicola 

and Takla Groups and associated calc-alkaline intrusions 

as permissive for the occurrence of calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits in Quesnellia.

Similarly, much of Stikinia is characterized by island-arc 

volcanic rocks of the Late Triassic to Early Jurassic Takla and 

Stuhini Groups (Monger and others, 1991). Such rocks in the 

Stikine terrane are separated from similar rocks of Quesnellia by the oceanic Cache Creek terrane (Nelson and Colpron, 

2007). In Stikinia, volcanic rocks of the Takla and Stuhini 

Groups are intruded by many preaccretionary calc-alkaline 

plutons, some of which produced calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits, such as the Schaft Creek deposit (Scott 

and others, 2008). We classified calc-alkaline volcanic rocks 

of the Takla and Stuhini Groups and associated calc-alkaline 

intrusions as permissive for the occurrence of calc-alkaline 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in Stikinia.

The Kemess porphyry Cu-Au deposit is related to calcalkaline porphyries that intrude the volcanic and sedimentary rocks of the Lower to Middle Jurassic Hazelton Group. 

Calc-alkaline volcanic, volcaniclastic, and epiclastic strata 

of the Hazelton Group overlie strata of the Takla and Stuhini 

Groups in much of Stikinia. We include calc-alkaline volcanic 

and volcaniclastic rocks of the Hazelton Group in this permissive tract because they are subduction-related calc-alkaline 

volcanic rocks, and they host the Kemess deposit. We also 

include rocks of the Toodoggone volcanics because they are 

similar to, and probably correlative with, those of the Hazelton 

Group. Felsic rocks of the Cold Fish volcanics could belong to 
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 33

a bimodal volcanic assemblage (though none have been identified). Nevertheless, we regard them as products of the Stikine 

magmatic-arc, and we include them in this permissive tract for 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of Quesnellia and Stikinia.

Tract Delineation Process

We used digital tectonic-assemblage maps by Wheeler 

and McFeely (1991) and by Journeay and Williams (1995) to 

identify the areas of the Quesnel and Stikine terranes. We used 

digital geologic maps of British Columbia by Massey and others (2005) and of the Yukon Territory by Gordey and Makepeace (1999) to identify permissive rocks. Geologic information in attribute tables associated with these maps allowed 

us to identify polygons representing lithologic assemblages 

containing rocks of the appropriate age and composition to 

be included in this permissive tract. We excluded polygons 

representing lithologic assemblages not considered permissive 

by reason of age or composition, and we recorded a reason for 

their exclusion in the attribute table for the tract.

Digital geologic map units that include polygons assigned 

to this permissive tract are listed in table A2 for intrusive and 

volcanic rocks. From each map unit listed, we selected only 

those sets of polygons that represent lithologic assemblages 

containing permissive rock types. Sets of polygons for which 

descriptions include rocks of ages or compositions that are 

permissive for more than one tract are included in each of the 

permissive tracts for which they are permissive.

To identify the area to be included in this permissive 

tract, we applied the following procedures. From descriptive information in the attribute tables that accompany the 

digital geologic maps of British Columbia and the Yukon 

Territory, we classified map units as permissive or nonpermissive, according to the geologic criteria described above (and 

summarized in table A2). The map units classified as permissive for this tract represent the bedrock-surface expressions of 

intermediate to felsic igneous rocks of calc-alkaline affinity 

and of Middle Triassic to Late Jurassic age in the Quesnel and 

Stikine accreted island-arc terranes.

To polygons or groups of polygons that represent the 

bedrock-surface expression of permissive map units, we 

added a 10-km buffer to the mapped margins of permissive 

intrusions. This buffer expanded the area of the permissive 

tract to include all significant porphyry copper prospects, and 

to include possible unexposed permissive rocks and porphyry copper deposits. Examples of permissive rock types 

below the mapped surface would include permissive plutons 

that expand downward, subsurface satellite cupolas of intrusions, and unmapped parts of plutons or porphyry copper 

occurrences that are covered by younger materials (such as 

basalt flows, glacial till, colluvium, alluvium, or basin-fill 

sediments less than 1 km thick) or are structurally covered. 

We also applied a 2-km buffer around the outer margins of 

polygons or groups of polygons representing permissive 

volcanic rocks, the thin edges of which might be discontinuous, covered, or otherwise not mapped at the scale of our 

source maps. For additional information on buffering, see 

the “Permissive Tracts for Porphyry Copper” section in the 

Introduction of this report.

After buffering, we examined aeromagnetic, gravimetric, 

and geochemical anomaly maps for evidence of unmapped 

permissive igneous rocks or hydrothermal systems (Natural 

Resources Canada, 2008a, b, c). Positive aeromagnetic and 

gravity anomalies were interpreted as possible evidence for 

granitoid intrusions, or magnetite-bearing hydrothermal systems (see Clark, 1999, for discussion). Stream-sediment geochemical anomalies for copper associated with molybdenum 

or zinc were interpreted as possible evidence for hydrothermal 

systems, some of which might be related to calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits. Where such anomalies extended 

beyond the margins of the buffered permissive map units, the 

tract was expanded to include them.

A smoothing routine was then applied to the buffered 

tract. A description of the smoothing routine is included in the 

metadata in appendix H. After smoothing, tract-buffer zones 

were trimmed along terrane-bounding faults. Finally, areas of 

postaccretionary intrusions (surrounded by a 250-meter buffer) 

were excluded from the tract-buffer zones. Such intrusions and 

their buffer zones are included in a permissive tract for a later 

time interval. 

Geologic Interpretation

Mihalynuk and others (1994, p. 575) proposed that Early 

Mesozoic Quesnellia and Stikinia “were joined through their 

northern ends as two adjacent arc festoons that faced south 

toward the Cache Creek ocean.” Oceanic plateau remnants 

from the Tethyan realm collided with these island arcs during 

subduction of the Cache Creek oceanic lithosphere, which 

may have underlain a part of the Panthalassic Ocean (the 

expansive global ocean that surrounded Pangaea from Late 

Precambrian to the Jurassic time). Counterclockwise oroclinal 

rotation of the Stikine and Nisling terranes in the Late Triassic to Early Jurassic caused enclosure of the Cache Creek 

terrane. “Rotation continued until these terranes collided with 

Quesnellia in the Middle Jurassic.”

This oroclinal hypothesis explains why volcanic and 

intrusive rocks of the Quesnel and Stikine terranes are so 

similar that volcanic successions in both arcs are assigned 

to the Takla Group. Another point of similarity is that these 

two island-arc terranes contain both calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits and alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits. 

In southern Quesnellia, calc-alkaline volcanic and plutonic rocks of the Nicola magmatic arc occur in the west, and 

calc-alkaline to alkaline rocks occur in the east. Inasmuch as 

alkalinity tends to increase with increasing depth of subduction, this indicates that the Nicola was a west-facing magmatic 

arc (Monger and others, 1991). 

In Stikinia, the Schaft Creek calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposit is east of the Galore Creek alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposit, which indicates that the Stikine magmatic arc now faces east. This is consistent with the hypothesis 
34 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC EJCM Late Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJdg Early Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EJEK Early Jurassic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EJfp Early Jurassic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EJg Early Jurassic intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EJgd Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJGdr Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJGMG Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJGMM Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJGMS Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJgr Early Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EJHgb Early Jurassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJHgd Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJHhy Middle Jurassic intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EJHqd Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJHqm Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC EJMy Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EJqd Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJqm Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EJTCdg Early Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EJTCqd Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJTCS Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJTpgd Late Triassic to Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EMJSPd Early to Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EMJSPgd Early to Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Jdr Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Jgd Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKCL Early Jurassic to Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC JKdr Jurassic to Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKg Jurassic to Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC JKgd Jurassic to Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKPP Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC JKqp Jurassic to Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC JKto Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC JTfp Jurassic to Tertiary feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC JTgr Jurassic to Tertiary granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC JTH Jurassic to Tertiary quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC JTqp Jurassic to Tertiary high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC lJToAdqp Lower Jurassic high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC lJToMqp Lower Jurassic high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrBG Late Triassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrgd Late Triassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJCqm Late Triassic to Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJdr Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJGB Late Triassic to Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJGBe Late Triassic to Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJGBo Late Triassic to Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJgd Late Triassic to Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJGG Late Triassic to Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJGH Late Triassic to Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJGqm Late Triassic to Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJGqp Late Triassic to Early Jurassic high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJto Late Triassic to Early Jurassic tonalite intrusive rocks

a. Intrusive rocks

Table A2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

Canada.

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 2005) 

and Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 35

BC LTrJTpg Late Triassic to Early Jurassic intrusive rocks, undivided

BC LTrJTpgd Late Triassic to Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrqd Late Triassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrqm Late Triassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrSC Late Triassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrSe Late Triassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrStdg Late Triassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC MJBo Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJFO Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJNgd Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJOgd Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJPg Middle Jurassic intrusive rocks, undivided

BC MJqd Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJqm Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MJqp Middle Jurassic high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLB Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLC Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLL Middle to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLM Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLqd Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLSh Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLSqd Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLTi Middle Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC MJSm Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSMqm Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MJSPgd Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSPT Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJTgd Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJTqd Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJTSdg Middle Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC MJTSqm Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MJWdg Middle Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC MLJdr Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLTrqd Middle Triassic to Late Triassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLTrStgb Middle Triassic to Late Triassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Mzfp Mesozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Mzgr Mesozoic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC PTrMgd Permian to Triassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC TrJg Triassic to Jurassic intrusive rocks, undivided

BC TrJqm Triassic to Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC TrTdr Triassic to Tertiary dioritic intrusive rocks

BC TrTg Triassic to Tertiary intrusive rocks, undivided

YT LTrgS Late Triassic granite/granodiorite/orthogneiss/quartz diorite/diorite

YT MJgB mid-Jurassic monzodiorite/quartz monzodiorite/hornblendite/granite/ granodiorite

YT MJqB mid-Jurassic monzonite/syenite/granite/dykes

BC JKca Jurassic to Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC lJG Lower Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC lJH Early Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lJHAm Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJHB Lower Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC lJHCa Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJHCbm Lower Jurassic bimodal volcanic rocks

BC lJHCvc Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJHCvf Lower Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lJHE Lower Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC lJHK Lower Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

b. Volcanic rocks 

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

(a. Intrusive rocks)

Table A2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

Canada.—Continued

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 2005) and 

Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]
36 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

BC lJHL Lower Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lJHMB Lower Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC lJHMBvb Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJHMBvf Lower Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lJHNvc Early Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC lJHNvf Lower Jurassic rhyolitic, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lJHT Lower Jurassic calc-alkaline and andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lJHU Lower Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lJHva Early to Middle Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lJHvc Lower Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC lJToA Lower Jurassic dacitic volcanic rocks

BC lJToAd Lower Jurassic dacitic volcanic rocks

BC lJToAva Lower Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lJToAvc Lower Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC lJToMc Lower Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lJToMvl Lower Jurassic coarse volcaniclastic and pyroclastic volcanic rocks

BC lJToS Lower Jurassic dacitic volcanic rocks

BC lmJH Lower Jurassic to Middle Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC lmJHD Lower Jurassic to Middle Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lmJHEvf Early to Middle Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lmJHSH Early to Middle Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC lmJHSHva Early to Middle Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lmJHSHvb Early to Middle Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lmJHSHvc Early to Middle Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC lmJHSHvf Early to Middle Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lmJHSvb Lower Jurassic to Middle Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lmJHvc Lower Jurassic to Middle Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC lmJHvf Lower Jurassic to Middle Jurassic dacite, rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lmJHvl Early to Middle Jurassic coarse volcaniclastic and pyroclastic volcanic rocks

BC lmJva Lower Jurassic to Middle Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC mJHEvf Middle Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC mJHN Middle Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC mJHNvc Middle Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC mJHNvd Middle Jurassic dacitic volcanic rocks

BC mJHSmvc Middle Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC mJHvb Middle Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC mJHvc Middle Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC muJHca Middle Jurassic to Upper Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC muJHM Middle Jurassic to Upper Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC muJHNa Middle Jurassic to Upper Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC muJHo Middle Jurassic to Upper Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC muJHSvb Middle Jurassic to Upper Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC TrJN Triassic to Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC TrJNO Triassic to Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC uTrJN Upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrJT Upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrJv Upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrMM Upper Triassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrN Upper Triassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrNva Upper Triassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC uTrNvb Upper Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrNW Upper Triassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrSca Upper Triassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC uTrSv Upper Triassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrSva Upper Triassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC uTrSvb Upper Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrSvc Upper Triassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC uTrTca Upper Triassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC uTrTSm Late Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrTv Upper Triassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrTva Late Triassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC uTrTvb Late Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

YT lJN Lower Jurassic sandstone/conglo/dacite/tuff

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

(b. Volcanic rocks)

Table A2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

Canada.—Continued

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 

2005) and Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 37

Table A3. Known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British Columbia 

and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[Ma, million years; NA, not applicable; –, no data; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; Cu-Mo subtype, deposits that have 

Au/Mo ratios <3 or average Mo grades >0.03%; Cu-Au subtype, deposits that have Au/Mo ratios >30 or average Au grades >0.2 g/t. Contained Cu in metric 

tons is computed as (tonnage Mt x 1,000,000) x (percent Cu / 100); gs, coordinates of this site are used for the group location; *, estimated tonnage and grade 

from an unsubstantiated press release (not used in grade and tonnage model); **, partial tonnage and grade for a deposit that is known to be open to extension 

(not used in grade and tonnage model). For group aggregates: the latitude and longitude, subtype, and age is that of the deposit with the largest Cu resources; the 

Cu and Mo grades are tonnage-weighted averages calculated using the computed contained Cu and Mo as (t contained Cu or Mo / (Mt x 1,000,000)) x 100 (note 

that the computed contained Mo is not shown in this table); and the Au and Ag grades are a tonnage-weighted average calculated as g/t x Mt. For sources of age, 

tonnage, and grade information, see appendix F. Resource estimates are through 2009, but include updates for 2010 when available.] 

Name Latitude Longitude Subtype Age (Ma) Tonnage (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t) Contained Cu (t)

HIGHLAND VALLEY GROUP

Ann (included in Highmont) 50.42 -120.99 NA 207.00 43.40 0.27 – – – 117,000

Bethlehem 50.50 -120.99 Cu-Mo 201.00 677.00 0.45 0.02 0.01 0.40 3,050,000

Getty South (Trojan) 50.54 -120.99 NA 207.00 36.00 0.47 – – – 169,000

Highland Valley Copper gs (Valley Cu) 50.49 -121.05 Cu-Mo 208.00 1355.60 0.37 0.01 0.01 0.98 5,020,000

Highmont 50.43 -121.00 Cu-Mo 206.00 265.00 0.27 0.04 0.00 0.90 705,000

IDE-AM (included in Highmont) 50.43 -121.00 NA 207.00 11.50 0.27 0.01 – – 31,000

JA 50.48 -120.98 NA 203.00 260.00 0.43 0.02 – – 1,120,000

Krain (Getty North) 50.57 -121.00 NA 207.00 72.10 0.31 0.01 – – 224,000

Lornex 50.45 -121.04 Cu-Mo 207.00 514.00 0.43 0.02 0.01 1.20 2,190,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 50.49 -121.05 Cu-Mo 207.00 3179.70 0.39 0.01 – – 12,500,000

GIBRALTAR GROUP

Gibraltar gs 52.52 -122.29 NA 210.00 1296.50 0.29 0.01 – 0.08 3,800,000

Sawmill 52.47 -122.27 NA 210.00 68.50 0.24 – – – 167,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 52.52 -122.29 NA 210.00 1365.00 0.29 – – – 3,970,000

KEMESS GROUP

Kemess North gs 57.06 -126.76 NA 202.00 719.20 0.15 – 0.15 – 1,080,000

Kemess South 57.01 -126.75 Cu-Au 201.00 228.80 0.16 – 0.45 – 375,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 57.06 -126.76 NA 202.00 948.00 0.15 – 0.22 – 1,460,000

KINASKAN GROUP

Goat 57.66 -130.26 Cu-Au 205.00 71.20 0.40 – 0.40 2.20 283,000

Kinaskan gs 57.65 -130.24 Cu-Au 205.00 176.00 0.31 – 0.36 – 528,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 57.65 -130.24 Cu-Au 205.00 247.20 0.34 – 0.37 – 811,000

KWANIKA GROUP

Kwanika (Central) gs 55.53 -125.53 Cu-Au 199.00 182.60 0.29 – 0.28 – 530,000

Kwanika (South) 55.51 -125.33 NA 199.00 129.10 0.30 0.01 0.09 1.76 387,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 55.53 -125.53 Cu-Au 199.00 311.70 0.29 – 0.20 – 917,000

SCHAFT CREEK GROUP

NABS 57.38 -131.01 Cu-Mo 222.00 90.70 0.34 0.05 – – 306,000

Schaft Creek gs 57.36 -130.99 NA 222.00 1393.30 0.25 0.02 0.18 1.55 3,480,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 57.36 -130.99 NA 222.00 1484.00 0.26 0.02 – – 3,790,000

INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

Brenda 49.88 -120.01 Cu-Mo 195.00 227.00 0.16 0.04 0.01 0.63 363,000

Bronson Slope - Red Bluff 56.67 -131.09 Cu-Au 195.00 129.80 0.16 0.01 0.44 2.44 208,000

Eaglehead** 58.48 -129.11 NA 190.00 79.50 0.40 0.01 0.04 0.54 321,000

Gnat Lake (Gnat Pass) 58.25 -129.83 NA 200.00 30.40 0.39 – – – 119,000

HED* 49.52 -120.01 Cu-Mo 193.00 23.00 0.16 0.04 – – 37,000

Pine 57.23 -126.73 Cu-Au 200.00 70.00 0.15 – 0.57 – 105,000

INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS TOTAL 559.70 1,153,000

TRACT TOTAL 8095.30 24,601,000

TRACT ROUNDED TOTAL 8100.00 24,600,000
38 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Group Name Rank Latitude Longitude Age (Ma) Comments

Gibraltar Gunn 2 52.503 -122.234 207 Resource: 0.862 Mt ore @ 0.28% Cu (2,410 t Cu)

Highland 

Valley

Highmont 

West 2 50.437 -121.008 207 Resource: 0.8 Mt ore @ 0.15% Cu (1,200 t Cu)

Highland 

Valley Jericho 2 50.445 -120.914 207 Resource: 0.27 Mt ore @ 1% Cu (2,700 t Cu)

Highland 

Valley MER 2 50.503 -121.137 207 Resource: 0.58 Mt ore @ 0.327% Cu (1,900 t Cu)

Highland 

Valley Victor 2 50.462 -121.02 207 Resource: 0.1 Mt ore @ 1.5% Cu (1,500 t Cu)

Highland 

Valley Wiz 2 50.335 -120.861 188 Resource: 0.294 Mt ore @ 1.26% Cu (3,700 t Cu)

Highland 

Valley Yubet 2 50.38 -120.958 207 Resource: 0.04 Mt ore @ 2.1% Cu (874 t Cu); mineralized and altered rocks straddle contact of aplite dike

Highland 

Valley Getty West 3 50.561 -121.016 207 Intercept: 42 m, 0.26% Cu, 0.02% Mo

Highland 

Valley Rateria (Sky) 3 50.366 -120.958 207 Intercept: 177 m, 0.366% Cu, 0.019% Mo, 0.24 g/t Au, 5 g/t Ag; less than 5% outcrop

Highland 

Valley BX 4 50.511 -120.935 207 Intercept: 3.3 m, 0.8% Cu

Kinaskan Wolf 4 57.682 -130.172 205 Intercept: 10.85 m, 0.3% Cu, 0.1 g/t Au

Copper Creek Go gs 4 58.214 -131.794 218 Intercept: 13.7 m, 0.58% Cu, 1.35 g/t Au

Copper Creek Kid gs 4 58.241 -131.884 218 Intercept: interval unavailable; 3.6% Cu, 1.5 g/t Au; soil geochemical and IP anomalies, 4 pack-sack drill holes, 

total 47 m

– Dot 2 50.322 -120.849 207 Resource: 2.93 Mt ore @ 0.5% Cu (14,700 t Cu), (preliminary estimate)

– Turlight 2 50.193 -120.609 188 Resource: 0.001 Mt ore @ 2.38% Cu (26 t Cu)

– Bear 3 56.103 -126.874 200 Intercept: 179 m, 0.3% Cu, 0.083% Mo, 6.1 g/t Au, 8.4 g/t Ag

– Prince 3 49.172 -120.002 168 Intercept: 46 m, 0.48% Cu, 0.05% Mo, 0.69 g/t Au, 13.7 g/t Ag

– QC 3 57.761 -130.294 205 Intercept: 36 m, 0.249% Cu, 0.076% Mo

– AL 4 57.744 -130.335 205 Intercept: 4 m, 0.72% Cu

– Bud - North 

zone 4 49.445 -120.435 193 Intercept: 2 m, 0.22% Cu

– Bud - South 

zone 4 49.425 -120.457 193 Intercept: 10.7 m, 0.184% Cu, 0.33 g/t Au, 8.7 g/t Ag

– Clapper 4 50.292 -120.637 200 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.37% Cu, 3.68 g/t Au

–

Copper Ace 

South 

(Bysouth)

4 52.617 -122.303 188 Intercept: interval unavailable; 7.2% Cu

– King Edward 4 49.107 -119.812 168 Intercept: 6 m, 0.365% Cu, 0.169% Mo

– MEX 4 57.204 -126.669 200 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.146% Cu, 0.001% Mo, 0.007 g/t Au, 2.6 g/t Ag; patchy stockwork and 

disseminated cc, cpy

– Mineral Hill 4 58.399 -131.787 200 Intercept: interval unavailable; 5.03% Cu, 0.54 g/t Au, 20.7 g/t Ag

– Pil (Spartan) 4 57.366 -127.016 197 Intercept: 58 m, 0.128% Cu

– Red 4 56.735 -126.301 200 Intercept: 3 m, 0.28% Cu

– Sofia 4 57.333 -126.802 166 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.05% Cu, 0.22 g/t Au

– TUV 4 61.29 -134.823 214 Intercept: 1.5 m, 0.28% Cu, 0.479 g/t Au, 196 g/t Ag; 9 geochemical anomalies, broad IP anomaly, drill holes in 

weakly mineralized rocks

– Woodjam 4 52.257 -121.381 197 Intercept: 361 m, 0.12% Cu, 0.84 g/t Au, 

Significant porphyry Cu prospects in a group with no known deposit

Significant individual porphyry Cu prospects

Significant porphyry Cu prospects in groups of known porphyry Cu deposits and prospects

Table A4. Significant calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au prospects in tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[Ma, million years; –, not applicable; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; gs, group site-coordinates of this site are used 

for the group location. For sources and additonal information about age, tonnage, grade and comments, see appendix F. For mineral name abbreviations under 

“Comments”, see appendix F.]
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 39

that the Stikine and Quesnel magmatic arcs originally faced 

westward, but oroclinal bending rotated Stikinia nearly 180 

degrees counterclockwise, so that it now faces east.

Within the Lower Jurassic Hazelton Group, which overlies much of Stikinia, volcanic rocks occur in a pair of western 

and eastern volcanic chains, separated by a coeval sedimentary 

basin (the Hazelton trough). Marsden and Thorkelson (1992, 

p. 1266) suggested that the two volcanic chains indicate two 

magmatic arcs generated by subduction zones on opposite 

sides of Stikinia. They also suggested that rollback of these 

opposing subduction zones caused extensional subsidence in 

their shared back-arc region, forming the Hazelton trough, 

which filled with volcanic-derived sediments. 

The Hazelton Group contains a diverse assemblage of 

subaqueous and subaerial volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks 

that range in composition from mafic to felsic and have 

medium to high potassium content. Compositional trends vary 

along both tholeiitic and calc-alkaline trends. The Kemess porphyry Cu-Au deposit is related to calc-alkaline, intermediate 

to felsic, subvolcanic intrusions in volcanic and sedimentary 

rocks of the Upper Triassic Takla and Lower Jurassic Hazelton 

groups (Rebagliati and others, 1995).

Accretion of Quesnellia and Stikinia to the continental 

margin occurred during Early to Middle Jurassic time (about 

185±10 Ma). Murphy and others (1995), reported U-Pb age 

determinations for four intrusive bodies in the Kootenay arc 

that constrain the age of shortening of the sedimentary basin 

between Quesnellia and North America to late Early Jurassic (about 187 to 185 Ma) in southern British Columbia. 

Accretion probably progressed northward from southeastern 

Quesnellia, and then southward from northeastern Stikinia, 

as the orocline tightened. At the oroclinal crest, the YukonTanana terrane became extremely deformed, sheared, and 

metamorphosed. Between the subparallel limbs of the fold, the 

oceanic Cache Creek terrane was reduced to a narrow belt of 

accretionary wedges. The resulting assemblage of the Quesnel, 

Yukon-Tanana, Stikine, and Cache Creek terranes comprises 

the Intermontane superterrane.

Known Deposits

There are 12 known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

deposits in this tract, 6 of which include multiple ore bodies 

that are grouped according to the 2-km rule. For those that 

occur in groups, we list (in table A3) the name of the group, 

followed by the names of the ore bodies in the group. The tonnage, grade, and copper content of each ore body in the group 

are followed by the total tonnage, grade, and copper content of 

the group. The deposits and prospects are shown on figure A1.

These deposits fit descriptive models for porphyry copper deposits by Cox (1986a) and for calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits of British Columbia by Panteleyev 

(1995). According to the criteria of Singer and others (2008), 

some of these ore bodies and deposits are of the porphyry 

Cu-Mo subtype of Cox (1986b), and some are of the Cu-Au 

subtype of Cox (1986c), as noted in table A3. (It is unknown 

how many deposits may be misclassified due to missing information.) In those ore bodies and deposits which contain Mo 

and Au, the copper zone commonly lies between an inner Mo 

zone and an outer Au zone, but such zones may overlap.

Porphyry copper deposits commonly consist of stockworks 

of intersecting veins and veinlets containing various proportions 

of quartz and chalcopyrite±bornite±molybdenite±pyrite±gold. 

Disseminated ore minerals also may occur in hydrothermally 

altered rocks around and between veins and veinlets, as well 

as in breccias. 

Panteleyev (1995, p. 2) described three subtypes of the 

Canadian calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposit type: 

(1) plutonic Cu-Mo, (2) classic Cu±Mo±Au, and (3) volcanic 

Cu±Au±Mo. Deposits of the plutonic subtype occur in large 

plutons and batholiths. Deposits of the classic subtype are 

related to porphyritic stocks, within and around which mineralization occurred at relatively shallow depths. Deposits of 

the volcanic subtype are associated with multiple intrusions in 

subvolcanic settings of small stocks, sills, dikes, and breccias. 

In this tract, the Highland Valley porphyry Cu-Mo and 

Gibraltar porphyry Cu-Mo deposits are examples of the 

plutonic subtype. The Brenda Cu-Mo deposit is transitional 

between the plutonic and classic subtypes. The Schaft Creek 

porphyry copper and Cu-Mo deposits are examples of the 

classic subtype (Scott and others, 2008). The Kemess South 

porphyry Cu-Au deposit is an example of the volcanic 

subtype.

In calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits, the Mo 

zone commonly is in the lower, inner part of the copper zone 

or below it, and the Au zone commonly is in the upper-outer 

part of the copper zone, or above and around it. Potassic 

alteration assemblages, generally consisting of secondary 

K-feldspar and biotite, are common in the Cu-Mo zone. Phyllic alteration assemblages, generally consisting of quartz, 

pyrite, and sericite, are common in the copper zone. Argillic 

alteration assemblages, generally consisting of clay minerals, 

may be peripheral to, or superimposed upon, the phyllic zone, 

especially along late faults and fractures. Propylitic alteration, 

generally consisting of chlorite, epidote, and carbonate minerals, commonly surrounds the phyllic zone, and may overlap 

the Cu-Au zone. However, if the magmatic-hydrothermal 

system expands or collapses, or undergoes multiple pulses of 

intrusion and mineralization, different assemblages of ore and 

alteration minerals can be superimposed. 

According to Panteleyev (1995, p. 3), “Oxidized and 

leached zones are marked by ferruginous cappings with 

supergene clay minerals, limonite (goethite, hematite and 

jarosite) and residual quartz.” Supergene minerals include 

chalcocite, covellite, digenite, chrysocolla, native copper and copper oxide, and carbonate and sulfate minerals. 

However, zones of supergene enrichment generally are not 

well developed or economically important in most Canadian 

Cordilleran deposits. Nevertheless, at the Gibraltar deposit, 

the Gibraltar East and Pollyanna ore bodies have supergene 

blankets that are about 30 m thick with copper-enrichment 

factors of about 1.35, under leached zones 10 to 25 m thick. 
40 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

At the Krain deposit, a supergene zone with malachite, 

chrysocolla, neotocite(?), and traces of cuprite and native 

copper is up to 100 m thick with an enrichment factor of 1.1 

over hypogene ore (Ney and others, 1976).

Many of the known ore bodies and prospects of this tract 

occur in groups, such that the zone of altered rocks around 

each is less than 2 km from that of another known ore body or 

prospect in the group. Table A3 lists the location and characteristics (including estimated tonnage and grade) for each 

ore body included in such a group. For the group locations, 

the largest ore body in the group represents the location on 

the tract maps in figures A1A and A1B. Furthermore, the total 

tonnage and average grade of the known ore bodies in the 

group is represented as a single known deposit in the gradetonnage model.

We estimate that known deposits of this tract contain 

about 24,600,000 metric tons of copper (table A1). Some 

deposits and estimated resources listed in the table are aggregated differently than done by Singer and others (2008), and 

some include resources added as a result of recent drilling in 

extensions to previously known ore zones. 

Large open-pit mines have operated on four calc-alkaline 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in this permissive tract: the 

Highland Valley Copper Cu-Mo deposit, the Gibraltar Cu-Mo 

deposit, the Brenda Cu-Mo deposit (now depleted), and the 

Kemess South Cu-Au deposit. 

The Highland Valley Copper mine, operated by Teck 

Cominco, Inc., is the fifth largest open-pit mine in the world. 

The nearby Highmont East pit is mined for ore with higher 

Mo grades (Schroeter and others, 2007). In 2007, the projected mine life for the Highland Valley Copper mine was 

extended from 2013 to 2019 by expansion and deepening of 

the Valley pit, based on the recent discovery of extensions to 

the known deposit (DeGrace and others, 2008). 

At the Gibraltar open-pit mine, operated by Taseko 

Mines, Ltd., recent drilling around the Pollyana and Granite 

Lake pits resulted in a 40-percent increase in reserves, which 

may extend mine life to more than 21 years (Schroeter and 

others, 2007). 

The Kemess South open pit mine, operated by Northgate Minerals Corp. has been a major producer of copper and 

gold since 2000, and mining is expected to continue until 

late 2010 (DeGrace and others, 2008). The Kemess North 

deposit underwent a feasibility study in 2008, which indicated 

it would support a 12-yr mine life. However, environmental 

concerns may block its development for lack of a good place 

to put tailings.

Estimated copper resources of the Kwanika (central and 

south) deposit have increased by more than an order of magnitude on the basis of recent drilling. Singer and others (2008) 

listed an estimated 72,000 t of contained copper. According 

to tonnage-and-grade estimates reported on the Web site 

of Serengeti Resources, Inc., this increased to an estimated 

587,000 t of contained copper in 2008-2009, and now stands 

at an estimated 917,000 t of contained copper in 2010, with 

associated molybdenum, gold, and silver as listed in table A3.

As reported by Schroeter and others (2006, 2007) and 

DeGrace and others (2008), major drilling projects recently 

have increased the known resources of the Schaft Creek, 

Kinaskan GJ, and Eaglehead deposits. At the Schaft Creek 

deposit, a new round of drilling by Copper Fox Metals 

increased the known resource and led to a new feasibility 

study and an Environmental Analysis. At the Kinaskan GJ 

deposit, Canadian Gold Hunter Corp. drilled 80 holes to better delineate the Donnelly Cu-Au zone, which is mostly covered. At the Eaglehead deposit, Carmax Explorations, Ltd., 

drilled to test IP anomalies along the trend of the Cu-Mo 

zone. In one hole, Carmax reported a 334-m interval grading 

0.257 percent copper, 0.009 percent molybdenum, and 0.059 

grams per metric ton gold. Conversely, at the Bronson Slope 

deposit, Skyline Gold Corp. drilled 4,000 m in 2007, but the 

estimate of contained copper decreased somewhat, relative to 

that reported in Singer and others (2008).

Prospects, Mineral Occurrences, and Related 

Deposit Types

Table A4 lists significant prospects in this tract. These 

are copper-bearing mineral occurrences with characteristics 

that we regard as being largely consistent with the descriptive models for porphyry copper deposits. According to the 

2-km rule, 10 of these prospects are within the Highland Valley group, and 1 is within the Kinaskan group of ore bodies. 

Any resources discovered at these prospects will, therefore, 

be added to the known deposit, so these prospects were not 

counted as possible undiscovered deposits. The Go and Kid 

prospects are in the Copper Creek group of prospects. There 

is no known deposit in the Copper Creek group, so these 

two prospects potentially may represent one undiscovered 

deposit. 

This tract contains 18 significant individual porphyry 

copper prospects, each of which potentially may represent 

an undiscovered deposit. The Dot and Turlight prospects are 

of rank 2, meaning that, although they have been estimated 

to contain less than 16,000 t copper, they are not known 

completely and may represent parts of larger porphyry copper systems. The Bear, Prince, and QC prospects are of rank 

3, meaning that they have intercepts of at least 20 m of at 

least 0.2 percent copper. The AL, Bud North, Bud South, 

Clapper, Copper Ace, King Edward, MEX, Mineral Hill, Pil, 

Red, Sofia, TUV, and Woodjam prospects are of rank 4. They 

have significant intercepts of at least 0.1 percent copper, but 

without more than 20 m of at least 0.2 percent copper (to the 

best of our knowledge). 

Another eight prospects in this tract have no assay data, 

or very low copper assays, and are, therefore, not considered significant. There are also eight prospects of deposit 

types that may be associated with porphyry copper systems. 

These include six subvolcanic Cu-Ag-Au (As-Sb) vein-type 

deposits, one occurrence of podiform Cu-Fe and Fe sulfides 

in quartz monzonite, and one molybdenite-bearing skarn.
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 41

Table A5 lists porphyry copper exploration projects in 

the tract that have been active in British Columbia at any time 

since 2004. The information in this table is from annual British Columbia Mining and Mineral Exploration Overviews by 

Schroeter and others (2006, 2007), and DeGrace and others 

(2008, 2009). During the time interval, total expenditures for 

mineral exploration in British Columbia rose from about $150 

M in 2004 to a record $216 M in 2007.

From 2004 to 2007, about 27 km of core drilling was 

done in this permissive tract (003pCu2001). About 83 percent 

of this drilling was done in and around known deposits, while 

about 3 percent was done on prospects of ranks 2 and 3, and 

14 percent was done on prospects of rank 4. 

Two major projects were under consideration for development: Kemess North and Schaft Creek. A surge in recent 

drilling in the Kwanika group of deposits and prospects has 

led to a recent announcement of 129 Mt of ore, grading 0.3 

percent copper in the South zone.

Major projects also were undertaken to increase and 

improve resource estimates for the following known deposits: 

Bronson Slope, Eaglehead, Gibraltar, Highland Valley Copper, 

Highmont East, Krain (Getty North), Kemess South, Kinaskan 

(GJ), and Kemess Pine. 

Prospects near known groups of ore zones were explored 

at the Rateria prospect near the Highland Valley group, the 

Bysouth (Copper Ace South) prospect near Gibraltar, and at 

the MEX prospect in the Kemess group.

At the Woodjam prospect, nearly 26,000 m of core drilling was done to explore a porphyry copper system beneath 

a system of subvolcanic copper veins. Recent exploration 

projects also occurred at the Bear and Pil prospects, which are 

not near known porphyry copper deposits. The Bear prospect 

is in northwestern British Columbia, about 170 km north of 

Smithers. Previous exploration in the area was for subvolcanic 

Name Rank Operator Activities CD (m)

Bronson Slope 1 Skyline Gold Corp. CD 4,700

Eaglehead 1 Carmax Explorations, Inc. CD 7,176

Gibraltar 1 Taseko Mines, Ltd. CD 59,259

GJ 1 Canadian Gold Hunter Corp. G, CD 34,527

Highland Valley 1 Highland Valley Copper CD 6,482

Highmont East 1 Highland Valley Copper G, MS, FS, EN, 

CD 4,000

Kemess North 1 Northgate Minerals Corp. TR, G, GC, IP, 

FS, EN, CD 19,004

Kemess South 1 Northgate Minerals Corp. CD 2,936

Krain (Getty North) 1 Getty Copper, Inc. G, MS –

Kwanika (Central, 

South) 1 Serengeti Resources, Inc. G, GC, IP, MS, CD 78,889

Pine 1 Cascadero Copper Corp. G, CD 3,980

Schaft Creek 1 Copper Fox Minerals, Inc. MS, EN, CD 3,161

Dot 2 Dot Resources, Ltd. CD –

Bear 3 Northgate Minerals Corp. G, CD 5,786

Rateria 3 Happy Creek Minerals, Ltd. CD 3,341

Copper Ace 4 Copper Ridge Explorations, Inc. G, CD 4,110

Pil 4 Finlay Minerals, Ltd. TR, G, GC, CD 7,443

Woodjam, 

(Megabuck) 4 Fjordland Exploration Inc/Cariboo Rose Resources, Ltd. CD 25,722

Table A5. Readily available recent exploration activities for deposits and prospects in tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), 

Intermontane Island-Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[This information was compiled from Schroeter and others (2006, 2007) and DeGrace and others (2008, 2009). Website addresses of “Operators” 

are listed in the table in appendix F; AGP, airborne geophysics; AMG, airborne magnetic; ARAD, airborne radiometrics; CD, core drilling; EN, 

environmental baseline studies, monitoring, or remediation work; FS, feasibility studies; G, geologic mapping; GC, geochemical sampling (rock, 

soil, silt, etc.); IP, Induced Polarization; MG, magnetic surveys; MS, metallurgical studies; PD, percussion drilling; PFS, prefeasibility studies; 

TR, trenching; m, meters;–, no data.]

Exploration History
42 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Cu-Ag-Au (As-Sb) veins. Now the Bear prospect is being 

explored for porphyry Cu-Mo by Imperial Metals. They 

reported a drill hole that returned a 179 m interval grading 0.3 

percent copper and 0.083 percent molybdenum within a 379 m 

interval grading 0.25 percent copper and 0.054 percent molybdenum. Another drill hole returned 296 m of 0.27 percent 

copper and 0.059 percent molybdenum. 

The Pil prospect is in the Toodoggone region of northern British Columbia. Previous exploration was mostly for 

polymetallic epithermal veins, but Cominco has explored 

large zones of pervasively altered rock for porphyry copper. 

Finlay Minerals, Ltd., now holds the Pil claims, where they 

have done geologic mapping, geochemical, IP, and magnetic 

surveys. They report widespread quartz veins and veinlets, 

containing various combinations of copper, gold, zinc, lead, 

and silver values, and disseminated sulfides, mostly pyrite 

and traces of copper minerals. Although the disseminated ore 

minerals do not approach ore-grade concentrations, they are 

regarded as an indication that a porphyry-copper system may 

exist beneath Pil South. 

The Bear and Pil prospects are difficult to classify 

because they have both epithermal-vein and porphyry-Custyle stockworks. Both alkaline and calc-alkaline igneous 

rocks are present at the Pil and Sofia prospects, and we found 

no description of igneous rocks at the Bear prospect. We 

tentatively classify these prospects as possible calc-alkaline 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au systems. Their owners compare them to 

deposits of the Kemess cluster, which we classify as the Aurich part of a calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au system of the 

subvolcanic subtype.

In addition to porphyry copper prospects listed in table 

A4, the Atty, Bud 522, Porphyry Pearl, STU, and Willa 

prospects, which we classify as subvolcanic Cu-Au (As-Sb) 

vein systems, have been classified alternatively as porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au systems. The Kenallan prospect, which is classified as a Mo-Cu-Au skarn prospect, may indicate potential for 

an associated porphyry copper system.

Sources of Information

Principal sources of information used by the assessment 

team for delineation of 003pCu2001 are listed in table A6.

Grade and Tonnage Model Selection

As discussed in the Introduction and as shown in 

appendix G, a new grade and tonnage model for Canadian 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits was constructed due to the lower copper 

grades present in Canadian examples compared to all Singer 

and others (2008) grade and tonnage models. 

Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au

The deposits and prospects of permissive tract 

003pCu2001 (CA01), as well as those of tracts 003pCu2003 

(CA03), 003pCu2004 (CA04), and 003pCu2005 (CA05), fit 

the descriptive model for porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of 

British Columbia (Panteleyev, 1995) and the Yukon Territory 

(Panteleyev, 2005). After spatial grouping according to the 

2-km rule, 38 known deposits of this subtype are present in 

the Canadian Cordillera (12 of which occur in this tract). In 

aggregate, when compared to the Singer and others (2008) 

grade and tonnage models, the Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits appear on average lowest in tonnage, lowest in copper 

grade, higher in molybdenum grade (except for model 21a), 

higher in gold grade (except for model 20c), and highest in 

Ag grade.

Statistical tests at a 1-percent screening level on these 

deposits (as a group) indicate that their molybdenum grade 

and gold grade distribution means are not statistically different from the general (models 17, 20c, and 21a combined) or 

Cu subtype (model 17) porphyry copper grade and tonnage 

models of Singer and others (2008) (see tables G2a and b). 

Neither is their tonnage distribution mean statistically different from the general, Cu subtype, or Cu-Au subtype (model 

20c) porphyry copper grade and tonnage models of Singer 

and others (2008) (see tables G2a, b, and c). However, the 

copper grade distribution mean is statistically different from 

the general model and all the individual subtype models (see 

tables G2a, b, c, and d). For this reason, a grade and tonnage model for the porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tracts 

003pCu2001 (CA01), 003pCu2003 (CA03), 003pCu2004 

(CA04) and 003pCu2005 (CA05) was constructed. 

The complete model, which contains data current 

through December 2009, is described in appendix G. For 

deposits in tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), the formal group 

according to the 2-km rule, and the name of the independent 

or groups used, along with the tonnages and grades used in 

the development of the grade and tonnage model, are listed 

in table A7.

Estimate of the Number of 

Undiscovered Deposits

Rationale for the Estimate

Given the availability of MINFILE records for known 

porphyry copper prospects in British Columbia and Yukon, 

and knowing that the MINFILE data sets are quite complete 

and up-to-date, our rationale for estimation of numbers of 

undiscovered deposits was to estimate numbers of undiscovered deposits based largely on the distributions and qualities 

of those prospects within each permissive tract. We estimated 

numbers of undiscovered porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in 

tract 003pCu2001(CA01) at 90-, 50-, and 10-percent levels 

of subjective probability. We did this after a review of the 

geology of the tract, the distribution of known deposits of this 

type, and the number, distribution, and relative qualities of 

documented prospects. We considered the area of the tract, and 
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 43

Theme Name or Title Scale Citation

GeoFile 2005-1: Digital Geology Map of British 

Columbia - Whole Province 1:250,000 Massey and others (2005)

Yukon Digital Geology 1:250,000 Gordey and Makepeace (1999)

Geoscience Map 2005-3: Geology of British Columbia 1:1,000,000 Massey and others (2005)

Terrane Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and others (1991)

Tectonic Assemblage Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and McFeely (1991); Journeay and Williams (1995); GIS vector 

representation of Wheeler and McFeely (1991)

Metamorphic Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Read and others (1991)

YukonAge 2004: A database of isotopic-age 

determinations for rock units from Yukon Territory NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004a)

BC Age 2004A-1: A database of isotopic-age 

Determinations for Rock Units from British Columbia NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004b)

Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB); National 

Geochronological Data Base (NGDB) NA Zartman and others (1976); Marshall (1993)

Porphyry Deposits NA Sinclair (2007)

Porphyry Copper Deposits of the World NA Singer and others (2008)

Lode mineral deposits NA Nokleberg and others (1998)

MINFILE (British Columbia) Mineral Occurrences 

Database NA MINFILE BC (2009)

MINFILE (Yukon) Mineral Occurrences Database NA MINFILE YT (2009)

Porphyry Deposits of the Canadian Cordillera NA CIM SV 15 (Sutherland Brown, 1976)

Porphyry Deposits of the Northwestern Cordillera of 

North America NA CIM SV 46 (Schroeter, 1995)

National Geochemical Reconnaissance (NGR) Stream 

Sediment, Lake Sediment and Water Geochemical Data 

Base

NA Natural Resources Canada (2008c)

Yukon Regional Geochemical Database 2003 - Stream 

sediment analyses NA Heon (2003)

Canadian Geodetic Information System – Gravity (2km 

grid) – Bouguer anomaly, free-air anomaly, isostatic 

residual anomaly, observed gravity, vertical gradient, and 

horizontal gradient

~1:2,000,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008b)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base – 1 km and 200 m 

grid – Residual total field

~1:1,000,000 and 

~1:200,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008a)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base – 500 m grid – 

Residual total field, reduced to pole ~1:500,000 B.J. Drenth (unpub. data, 2009)

Exploration

BC Mines and Mineral Exploration Overviews, Yukon 

Mineral Deposits, Natural Resources Canada, Top 100 

Exploration and Deposit Appraisal Projects, 2008, 

websites of Mineral Exploration companies

NA Schroeter and others (2006, 2007), DeGrace and others (2008, 2009)

Geochemistry

Geophysics

Geology

Mineral occurrences

Table A6. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada.

[ NA, not applicable]

GROUP NAME Ore (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t)

Independent Brenda 227 0.16 0.039 0.013 0.63

Independent Bronson Slope - Red Bluff 129.8 0.16 0.008 0.44 2.44

Gibraltar Gibraltar (Total) 1,365 0.291 0.006 – 0.077

Independent Gnat Lake (Gnat Pass) 30.4 0.39 – – –

Highland Valley Highland Valley (Total) 3,180 0.392 0.013 0.005 0.77

Kemess Kemess (Total) 948 0.153 – 0.221 –

Kinaskan Kinaskan (Total) 247.2 0.337 – 0.372 0.634

Kwanika Kwanika (Total) 211.2 0.278 – 0.269 –

Independent Pine 70 0.15 – 0.57 –

Schaft Creek Schaft Creek (Total) 1,484 0.255 0.021 0.169 –

Table A7. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in tonnage and grade models for Canadian Cordilleran calc-alkaline 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au for tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[Groups include all deposits and prospects with well-defined grades and tonnages that meet the 2-km rule. Independent indicates that a deposit is not in a 

group. Mt, million metric tons; %, percent; g/t, grams per metric ton; –, no data. Resource estimates available in 2008-2009 have not been updated to include 

information added to appendix F after 2009.] 
44 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

we qualitatively observed spatial density-distribution patterns 

of known deposits. We also considered history, patterns of 

exploration, and patterns of exposure versus cover, as experienced by our Canadian coworkers. We were influenced to various degrees by geochemical anomalies for copper, indicated 

by data from regional stream-sediment surveys and geophysical data (Natural Resources Canada, 2008a, b, c). 

Porphyry-Cu style stockworks of chalcopyrite-bearing 

veinlets have been discovered recently in areas that are mostly 

covered. This indicates that a limited number of undiscovered 

deposits probably remain. Future discoveries probably will be 

made in association with known prospects or in areas that are 

largely covered, either by younger sedimentary or volcanic 

deposits, or by surficial deposits, such as glacial till, colluvium 

or alluvium. 

Based on these considerations, each member of the 

assessment team independently estimated the number of 

undiscovered porphyry copper deposits that might exist in 

this tract at three levels of subjective probability. Estimates by 

every team member were then compiled and revealed to the 

team. Reasons for high and low estimates were elicited and 

discussed. On the basis of these discussions, team members 

were allowed to adjust their estimates until consensus (agreement on an estimate acceptable to the group) was reached. 

Individual and consensus estimates are shown in table A8. 

We calculated the spatial density of deposits by dividing 

the total number of known plus estimated undiscovered deposits (12+6.9=18.9 deposits) by the tract area of 175,250 km2

, 

yielding a density of 0.00011 deposits/ km2. We compared this 

spatial density to spatial densities of porphyry copper deposits 

in an area-based deposit density model by Singer and others 

(2005, 2008). This showed that our estimated deposit density 

of about 0.00011 deposits per km2

 is just slightly below the 

slope of the central tendency for spatial densities of porphyry 

copper deposits from thoroughly documented control areas 

used in their model. Based on this comparison, and the mean 

estimate of about 7 undiscovered deposits in a tract with 12 

known deposits, the assessment team believed exploration in 

the this tract to be fairly mature, with most of the undiscovered 

deposits probably being concealed or in remote areas.

Probabilistic Assessment Simulation 

Results

Undiscovered resources for the tract were modeled using 

the consensus estimates for numbers of undiscovered porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits and the grade and tonnage models presented in appendix G of this report for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au 

porphyry copper deposits as input for the EMINERS Monte 

Carlo simulator program (Root and others, 1992; Bawiec and 

Spanski, in press). Selected simulation results are reported in 

table A9. Results of the Monte Carlo simulation are presented 

as cumulative frequency plots (fig. A2). The cumulative frequency plots show the estimated resource amounts associated 

with cumulative probabilities of occurrence, as well as the 

mean, for each commodity and for total mineralized rock. 

N90 N50 N10 N05 N01 Nund s Cv% Nknown Ntotal

3 5 14 14 14 6.9 4.3 62 12 18.9 175,250 0.00011

Estimator N90 N50 N10 N05 N01

Individual 1 3 6 12 12 12

Individual 2 3 6 13 13 13

Individual 3 3 5 10 10 10

Individual 4 3 5 10 10 10

Individual 5 5 8 10 10 10

Individual 6 3 7 12 12 12

Individual 7 3 7 20 20 20

Consensus 3 5 14 14 14

Estimated number of undiscovered deposits

Consensus undiscovered deposit estimates Summary statistics Tract area 

(km2

)

Deposit 

density 

(Ntotal/km2

)

Table A8. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit density for tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane 

Island-Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Nxx, estimated number of deposits associated with the xxth percentile; Nund, expected number of undiscovered deposits; s, standard deviation; Cv%, coefficient

of variance; Nknown, number of known deposits in the tract that are included in the grade and tonnage model; Ntotal, total of expected number of deposits plus 

known deposits; area, area of permissive tract in square kilometers; density, deposit density reported as the total number of deposits per km2. Nund, s, and Cv% 

are calculated using a regression equation (Singer and Menzie, 2005). In cases where individual estimates were tallied in addition to the consensus estimate, 

individual estimates are listed.] 
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 45

References Cited

Bawiec, W.J., and Spanski, G.T., in press, EMINERS–Economic mineral resource simulator, version 3.0: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1057, program files 

and 29-p. Quick-Start Guide.

Berger, B.R., Ayuso, R.A., Wynn, J.C., and Seal, R.R., 2008, 

Preliminary model of porphyry copper deposits: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1321, 55 p., accessed 

May 15, 2009, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1321.

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., compilers, 2004a, 

YukonAge 2004— A database of isotopic age determinations for rock units from Yukon Territory: Yukon Geological Survey, CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://ygsftp.gov.yk.ca/publications/database/yukonage/readme.htm.)

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., 2004b, BCAge 

2004A—A database of isotopic age determinations for rock 

units from British Columbia: British Columbia Ministry of 

Energy and Mines, Geological Survey, Open File 2004-3 

(Release 2.0), 7,766 records, 9.3 Mb, accessed December 

15, 2009, at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/PublicationsCatalogue/OpenFiles/2004/Pages/default.

aspx.

Clark, D.A., 1999, Magnetic petrology of igneous intrusions—Implications for exploration and magnetic interpretation: Exploration Geophysics, v. 30, p. 5–26.

Cox, D.F., 1986a, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu (model 

17), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 76–81.

Cox, D.F., 1986b, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Mo 

(model 21a), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

115–119.

Cox, D.F., 1986c, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Au 

(model 20c), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

110–114.

DeGrace, John, Grant, Brian, Grieve, David, Lefebure, 

David, Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 

2008, British Columbia mining and mineral exploration 

overview 2007: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, 

Mines and Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 

2008-1, 30 p. (Also available online at http://www.empr.

gov.bc.ca/MINING/GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/

Pages/default.aspx.)

DeGrace, John, Fredericks, Jay, Grieve, David, Lefebure, 

David, Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 

2009, British Columbia mining and mineral exploration 

overview 2008: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, 

Mines and Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 

2009-1, 31 p. (Also available online at http://www.empr.gov.

bc.ca/MINING/GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/

default.aspx.)

Gordey, S.P., and Makepeace, A.J., compilers, 1999, Yukon 

digital geology: Geological Survey of Canada Open-File 

D3826, and Geological Services Division, Yukon, Indian 

and Northern Affairs Canada, Open-File 1999-1(D), CDROM.

Heon, D., compiler, 2003, Yukon regional geochemical database 2003—Stream sediment analyses: Exploration and 

Geological Services Division, Yukon Region, Indian and 

Northern Affairs Canada, accessed December 15, 2009, at 

http://geomaticsyukon.ca/data_download.html.

Journeay, J.M., and Williams, S.P., 1995, GIS map library, 

a window on Cordilleran geology: Geological Survey, 

Canada Open-File 2948, CD-ROM.

Marshall, Brian D., 1993, Conversion of the Radiometric Age 

Data Bank (RADB) to the National Geochronological Data 

Base (NGDB): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 

93-336, 76 p.

Marsden, Henry, and Thorkelson, D.J., 1992, Geology of the 

Hazelton volcanic belt in British Columbia—Implications 

for the Early to Middle Jurassic evolution of Stikinia: Tectonics, v. 11, no. 6, p. 1266–1287.

Massey, N.W.D., MacIntyre, D.G., Dejardins, P.J., and 

Cooney, R.T., 2005, Digital geology map of British 

0.95 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.05 Mean Mean or 

greater None

Cu 690,000 1,500,000 6,900,000 20,000,000 24,000,000 8,900,000 0.4 0.03

Mo 7,300 36,000 270,000 850,000 1,100,000 370,000 0.39 0.04

Au 13 54 350 1,000 1,300 460 0.4 0.04

Ag 0 46 1,800 7,800 11,000 3,100 0.36 0.09

Rock 230 520 2,700 7,100 8,600 3,300 0.42 0.03

Material

Probability of at least the indicated amount Probability of

Table A9. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island-Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Cu, copper; Mo, molybdenum; Au, gold; and Ag, silver; in metric tons; Rock, in million metric tons] 
46 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Columbia—Whole Province: British Columbia Ministry 

of Energy and Mines, GeoFile 2005-1, compilation scale 

1:1,000,000 (source-map scale 1:250,000).

McMillan, W.J., 1991, Porphyry deposits in the Canadian 

Cordillera, in McMillan, W.J., Höy, T., MacIntyre, D.G., 

Nelson, J.L., Nixon, G.T., Hammack, J.L., Panteleyev, A., 

Ray, G.E., and Webster, I.C.L., Ore deposits, tectonics and 

metallogeny in the Canadian Cordillera: British Columbia, 

Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, Paper 

1991-4, p. 253–276.

Mihalynuk, M.G., Nelson, JoAnne, and Diakow, L.J., 1994, 

Cache Creek terrane entrapment—Oroclinal paradox 

within the Canadian Cordillera: Tectonics, v. 13, no. 2, p. 

575–595.

MINFILE BC, 2009, MINFILE Mineral inventory—Province 

of British Columbia: Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, total records 12,523, accessed December 

2009 at http://minfile.gov.bc.ca/.

MINFILE YT, 2009, MINFILE Mineral inventory—Yukon 

Province: Yukon Geological Survey, accessed December 

2009 at http://servlet.gov.yk.ca/ygsmin/index.do.

Monger, J.W.H., Wheeler, J.O., Tipper, H.W., Gabrielse, H., 

Harms, T., Struik, L.C., Campbell, R.B., Dodds, C.J., Gehrels, G.E., and O’Brien, J., 1991, Part B., Cordilleran terranes, in Upper Devonian to Middle Jurassic assemblages, 

chap. 8 of Geology of the Cordilleran Orogen in Canada, 

in Gabrielse, H., and Yorath, C.J., eds., Geological Survey 

of Canada, Geology of Canada, no. 4, p. 281–327. (Also 

Geological Society of America, The Geology of North 

America, v. G-2.) 

Murphy, D.C., van der Heyden, Peter, Parrish, R.R., Klepacki, 

D.W., McMillan, W., Struik, L.C., and Gabites, J., 1995, 

New geochronological constraints on Jurassic deformation of the western edge of North America, southeastern 

Canadian Cordillera, in Miller, D.M., and Busby, C., eds., 

Jurassic magmatism and tectonics of the North American 

Cordillera: Geological Society of America Special Paper 

299, p. 159–171.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008a, Canadian aeromagnetic 

data base: Government of Canada, Geological Survey of 

Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/

index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008b, Canadian gravimetric 

data base: Government of Canada, Geodetic Information 

System, Geoscience Data Repository, Geodetic Survey 

Division, Earth Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 

2009, at http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008c, National geochemical 

reconnaissance (NGR) stream sediment and water geochemical database: Government of Canada, Geological 

Survey of Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth 

Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.

nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Nelson, J., and Colpron, Maurice, 2007, Tectonics and metallogeny of the British Columbia, Yukon and Alaskan 

Cordillera, 1.8 Ma to the present, in Goodfellow, W.D., 

ed., Mineral Deposits of Canada—A synthesis of major 

deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 755–791.

Ney, C.S., Cathro, R.J., Panteleyev, A., and Rotherham, D.C., 

1976, Supergene copper mineralization, in Sutherland 

Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 

Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, p. 72–78.

Nokleberg, W.J., West, T.D., Dawson, K.M., Shpikerman, V.I., 

Bundtzen, T.K., Parfenov, L.M., Monger, J.W.H., Ratkin, 

V.V., Baranov, B.V., Byalobzhesky, S.G., Diggles, M.F., 

Eremin, R.A., Fujita, K., Gordey, S.P., Gorodinskiy, M.E., 

Goryachev, N.A., Feeney, T.D., Frolov, Y.F., Grantz, A., 

Khanchuk, A.I., Koch, R.D., Natalin, B.A., Natapov, L.M., 

Norton, I.O., Patton, W.W. Jr., Plafker, G., Pozdeev, A.I., 

Rozenblum, I.S., Scholl, D.W., Sokolov, S.D., Sosunov, G.M., 

Stone, D.V., Tabor, R.W., Tsukanov, N.V., and Vallier, T.L., 

1998, Summary terrane, mineral deposit, and metallogenic 

belt maps of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian 

Cordillera: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 98-136, 

CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

of/1998/of98-136/.)

Panteleyev, Andre, 1995, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (model L04), in

Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., Selected British Columbia mineral deposit profiles, vol. 1—Metallics and coal: 

British Columbia Ministry of Energy of Employment and 

Investment, Energy and Minerals Division, Open File 1995-

20, p. 87-92, accessed May 29, 2008, at http://www.em.gov.

bc.ca/Mining/Geolsurv/MetallicMinerals/MineralDepositProfiles; http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/

MineralDepositProfiles/.

Panteleyev, Andre, 2005, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au L04., accessed 

July 28, 2009, www.geology.gov.yk.ca/l04_porphyry_cu_

mo_au.pdf.

Read, P.B., Woodsworth, G.J., Greenwood, H.J., Ghent, E.D., 

and Evanchick, C.A., 1991, Metamorphic map of the Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 1714A, 

scale 1:2,000,000.

Rebagliati, C.M., Bowen, B.K., Copeland, D.J., and Niosi, 

D.W.A., 1995, Kemess South and Kemess North porphyry gold-copper deposits, northern British Columbia, in

Schroeter T.G. ed., Porphyry deposits of the Northwestern 

Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute of Mining 

and Metallurgy, Special Volume 46, p. 377–396.

Root, D.H., Menzie, W.D., and Scott, W.A., 1992, Computer 

Monte Carlo simulation in quantitative resource estimation: 

Natural Resources Research, v. 1, no. 2, p. 125–138.

Schroeter, T.G., ed., 1995, Porphyry deposits of the northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute 

of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, 

888 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Cathro, Michael, Grieve, David, Lane, Robert, Pardy, Jamie, and Wojdak, Paul, 2006, British 
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 47

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 2005: 

British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, Information Circular 2006-1, 20 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Grieve, David, Lane, Robert, Madu, Bruce, 

Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2007, British Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 2006: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, Information Circular 2007-1, 28 p.

Scott, J.E., Richards, J.P., Heaman, L.M., Creaser, R.A., and 

Salazar, G.S., 2008, The Schaft Creek porphyry Cu-Mo-

(Au) deposit, northwestern British Columbia: Canadian 

Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Exploration 

and Mining Geology, v. 17, nos. 3-4, p. 163–196.

Sinclair, W.D., 2007, Porphyry Deposits, in Goodfellow, 

W.D., ed., Mineral deposits of Canada—A synthesis of 

major deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of 

geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 223–243.

Singer, D.A., and Menzie, W.D., 2005, Statistical guides to 

estimating the number of undiscovered mineral deposits: an 

example with porphyry copper deposits, in Cheng, Qiuming 

and Bonham-Carter, Graeme, eds., Proceedings of IAMG—

The annual conference of the International Association for 

Mathematical Geology: Geomatics Research Laboratory, 

York University, Toronto, Canada, p. 1028–1033.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., Menzie, W.D., and Berger, B.R., 

2005, Porphyry copper density: Economic Geology, v. 100, 

no. 3, p. 491–514.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2008, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world—Database, map, and grade 

and tonnage models, 2008: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 2008-1155, 45 p., accessed May 1, 2009, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1155/.

Singer, D.A., and Menzie, W.D., 2005, Statistical guides to 

estimating the number of undiscovered mineral deposits; an 

example with porphyry copper deposits, in Cheng, Qiuming, 

and Bonham-Carter, Graeme, eds., Proceedings of IAMG—

The annual conference of the International Association for 

Mathematical Geology: Geomatics Research Laboratory, 

York University, Toronto, Canada, p. 1028–1033.

Sutherland Brown, A., 1976, ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and 

Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, 

510 p., 2 pl., scale 1:250,000,000 (in pocket).

Wheeler, J.O., Brookfield, A.J., Gabrielse, H., Monger, J.W.H., 

Tipper, H.W., and Woodsworth, G.J., 1991, Terrane map 

of the Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Map 1713A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Wheeler, J.O., and McFeely, P., 1991, Tectonic assemblage map 

of the Canadian Cordillera and adjacent parts of the United 

States of America: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 

1712A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Zartman, R.E., Cole, J.C., and Marvin, R.F., 1976, User’s guide 

to the Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 76-674, 77 p.
48 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada













Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

Gibraltar

Highland Valley

Kemess

Kinaskan

Schaft

Creek

Brenda

HED

Bronson

Slope

Pine

Eaglehead

Gnat Lake (Gnat Pass)

Kwanika

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 with names

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2001

Porphyry copper prospect;

 (see figure A1B for names)

A

0 500 1,000 1,500 KILOMETERS

Figure A1. Maps showing tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

Canada. (A) Locations of known preaccretionary calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits (named) and prospects 

(not named) in the Quesnel and Stikine accreted terranes, Canada. (B) Locations of significant calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au prospects (named) and deposits (not named) in the Quesnel and Stikine accreted terranes, Canada.
Appendix A—Tract 003pCu2001 49













Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

Copper Ace South (Bysouth)

Dot

Prince

Turlight

Bud - North

Bud - South

Clapper

King Edward

Bear

MEX

Pil (Spartan)

QC

AL

Mineral

Hill

Red

Sofia

TUV

Woodjam

Kid

Go

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 (see figure A1A for names)

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2001

Porphyry copper prospect;

 with names

B

0 500 1,000 1,500 KILOMETERS

Figure A1.—Continued
50 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Mean Au

Mean Ag

Mean Rock

Mean Cu

Mean Mo

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

Material, metric tons

Probability

Cu

Mo

Au

Ag

Rock

Mean

Cu

Mean

Mo

Mean

Au

Mean

Ag

Mean

Rock

 0.1 1 10 100 1T 10T 100T 1M 10M 100M 1B 10B 100B 1Tr

Figure A2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer simulation of undiscovered resources in Tract 003pCu2001 (CA01), Intermontane Island Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

Canada. (T=thousands, M=millions, B=billions, Tr=trillions.)
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 51

Deposit Type Assessed: Porphyry Copper, Copper-Gold (Cu-Au) Subtype 

Descriptive model: Porphyry Cu-Au (Cox, 1986b), alkalic porphyry Cu-Au (Panteleyev, 1995)

Grade and tonnage model: Porphyry Cu-Au (Singer and others, 2008)

(Table B1 summarizes selected assessment results)

Location

This tract is in the Cordilleran region of western Canada. It includes the plateaus, hills, and valleys of the Intermontane belt, 

which is between the Coast Mountains and the inland Rocky Mountains in British Columbia and Yukon (figs. 1, B1).

Geologic Feature Assessed

Calc-alkaline igneous rocks of Middle Triassic to Late Jurassic age in preaccretionary island-arc terranes of the Intermontane belt. 

Delineation of the Permissive Tract

Appendix B. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 

003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry 

Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada 

By Mark J. Mihalasky1 , Arthur A. Bookstrom2 , Thomas P. Frost3 , and Steve Ludington4 , with contributions 

from James M. Logan5

 , Andre Panteleyev6 , and Grant Abbott7

1

U.S. Geological Survey, mjm@usgs.gov.

2

U.S. Geological Survey, abookstrom@usgs.gov.

3

U.S. Geological Survey, tfrost@usgs.gov. 

4

U.S. Geological Survey, slud@usgs.gov.

5

British Columbia Geological Survey, Jim.Logan@gov.bc.ca. 

6

XDM Geological Consultants, xdmgeo@shaw.ca.

7

Yukon Geological Survey, grant.abbott@gov.yk.ca. 

Table B1. Summary of selected resource-assessment results for tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—

British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[km, kilometers; km2, square kilometers; t, metric tons]

Geologic Criteria

The fundamental units for delineation of this permissive tract are subduction-related magmatic arcs of Middle Triassic to 

Late Jurassic age that gave rise to the Quesnel and Stikine oceanic island-arc terranes before they were accreted to North America. 

Date of 

assessment

Assessment depth 

(km)

Tract area 

(km2

)

Known copper 

resources (t)

Mean estimate of 

undiscovered copper 

resources (t)

Median estimate of 

undiscovered copper 

resources (t)

2009 1 109,290 20,900,000 22,000,000 13,000,000
52 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Geologic units that define this permissive tract are 

preaccretionary alkaline igneous rocks of the TriassicJurassic Quesnel and Stikine terranes. Alkaline porphyry 

Cu-Au deposits and prospects that are preaccretionary with 

respect to Quesnellia and Stikinia range in age from Late 

Triassic to Early Jurassic (212 to 183 Ma). Map units that 

include rocks of this age-span also may include older or 

younger rocks, in this case rocks as old as earliest Middle 

Triassic (245 Ma) or as young as latest Late Jurassic (146 

Ma).

Criteria for consideration of rock types as permissive 

for the occurrence of alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits 

are from descriptive models for porphyry copper and 

Cu-Au deposits by Cox (1986a, b) and for alkalic porphyry 

Cu-Au deposits of British Columbia by Panteleyev (1995). 

Phaneritic to porphyritic rock types associated with such 

deposits, and therefore considered permissive, are gabbro, 

diorite, monzodiorite, monzonite, syenite, and foidal 

syenite. Microcrystalline equivalents are microdiorite, 

micromonzonite, and microsyenite. Porphyro-aphanitic 

equivalents are porphyritic basalt, andesite, trachyandesite, 

latite, trachyte, and foidal trachyte porphyries. Pyroxene 

phenocrysts and a lack of primary quartz are particularly 

characteristic of alkaline volcanic rocks in Quesnellia and 

Stikinia, which are generally moderately potassic, according 

to Barrie (1993). 

Although porphyry copper deposits commonly are 

associated with epizonal porphyritic intrusions, some are 

associated with predominantly phaneritic plutons, and some 

are associated with predominantly aphanitic subvolcanic 

intrusions and breccias. We therefore classify alkaline 

igneous rocks as permissive for alkaline porphyry Cu-Au 

deposits, whether they are plutonic, subvolcanic, volcanic, or 

volcaniclastic.

According to Monger and others (1991), much of 

Quesnellia is characterized by island-arc volcanic rocks of 

the Late Triassic to Early Jurassic Nicola Group in southern 

British Columbia and the coeval Takla Group in central 

to northern British Columbia. Alkaline volcanic strata of 

the Nicola and Takla groups are intruded by comagmatic 

alkaline plutons, some of which produced alkaline porphyry 

Cu-Au deposits, such as the Copper Mountain, Afton, 

Ajax, Mt. Polley, and Milligan deposits. Therefore, we 

classified alkaline volcanic rocks of the Nicola and Takla 

groups and associated alkaline intrusions as permissive 

for the occurrence of alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits in 

Quesnellia.

Similarly, much of Stikinia is characterized by island-arc 

volcanic rocks of the Late Triassic to Early Jurassic Takla and 

Stuhini groups (Monger and others, 1991). Such rocks in the 

Stikine terrane are separated from similar rocks of Quesnellia 

by the oceanic Cache Creek terrane (Nelson and Colpron, 

2007). In the Takla and Stuhini groups of Stikinia, alkaline 

volcanic strata are intruded by comagmatic alkaline plutons, 

some of which produced alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits, 

such as the Galore Creek and Copper Canyon deposits. We 

therefore classified volcanic rocks of the Takla and Stuhini 

groups and their related intrusions as permissive for the 

occurrence of alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits in Stikinia.

Tract Delineation Process

We used digital tectonic-assemblage maps by Wheeler 

and McFeely (1991) and Journeay and Williams (1995) to 

identify the areas of the Quesnel and Stikine terranes. We 

identified permissive rocks of appropriate age and composition 

from descriptions of map units on digital geologic maps 

of British Columbia (Massey and others, 2005) and Yukon 

Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999), and we recorded a 

reason for their inclusion or exclusion in the attribute table for 

the tract.

Digital geologic-map units that include polygons 

assigned to this permissive tract are listed in table B2 for 

intrusive and volcanic rocks. From each map unit listed, we 

selected only those sets of polygons that represent lithologic 

assemblages containing permissive rock types. Polygons 

representing rocks of ages or compositions that are permissive 

for more than one permissive tract are included in each of the 

permissive tracts for which they are considered permissive.

To define the area included in this permissive tract, 

we applied the following procedures. From descriptive 

information in the attribute tables that accompany the digital 

geologic maps of British Columbia and the Yukon Territory, 

we classified map units as permissive or nonpermissive (table 

B2). The map units classified as permissive for this tract 

represent the bedrock-surface expressions of mafic to felsic 

igneous rocks of alkaline affinity and of Middle Triassic to 

Late Jurassic age in the Quesnel and Stikine accreted islandarc terranes.

To polygons or groups of polygons that represent the 

bedrock-surface expression of permissive map units, we 

added a 10-km buffer to the mapped margins of permissive 

intrusions. This buffer expanded the area of the permissive 

tract to include all significant porphyry copper prospects and 

to include possible unexposed permissive rocks and porphyry 

copper deposits. Examples of permissive rock types below the 

mapped surface would include permissive plutons that expand 

downward, subsurface satellite cupolas of intrusions, and 

unmapped parts of plutons or porphyry copper occurrences 

that are covered by younger materials (such as basalt flows, 

glacial till, colluvium, alluvium, or basin-fill sediments less 

than 1 km thick) or are structurally covered. We also applied 

a 2-km buffer around the outer margins of polygons or groups 

of polygons representing permissive volcanic rocks, the thin 

edges of which might be discontinuous, covered, or otherwise 

not mapped at the scale of our source maps. For additional 

information on buffering, see the “Permissive Tracts for 

Porphyry Copper” section in the Introduction of this report.

After buffering, we examined aeromagnetic, gravimetric, 

and geochemical anomaly maps for evidence of unmapped 

permissive igneous rocks or hydrothermal systems (Natural 

Resources Canada, 2008a, b, c). Positive aeromagnetic and 
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 53

Table B2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada. 

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 2005) and Yukon

Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC EJAC Middle Jurassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJdr Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJE Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJgb Early Jurassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJHCsy Early Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EJHD Early Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EJHdg Early Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EJHhy Middle Jurassic intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EJHqm Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC EJMLM Early Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EJMy Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EJqd Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EJqm Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EJRo Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EJSK Early Jurassic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EJsy Early Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EJTCdg Early Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EJTpfp Late Triassic to Early Jurassic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EJZ Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EMJdr Early to Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Jdr Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Jsy Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrBgb Late Triassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrdr Late Triassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrgb Late Triassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJAgb Late Triassic to Early Jurassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJCsy Late Triassic to Early Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJdr Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJgb Late Triassic to Early Jurassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJgd Late Triassic to Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJHgb Late Triassic to Early Jurassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJIC Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJIH Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJIP Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJIS Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJqm Late Triassic to Early Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJsy Late Triassic to Early Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJTe Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJTpgd Late Triassic to Early Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrJTpT Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrSMK Late Triassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrStdg Late Triassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC MJD Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJfp Middle Jurassic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC MJKrsy Middle Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MJKx Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MJNCgb Middle Jurassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJOlsy Middle Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MJPdr Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJPg Middle Jurassic intrusive rocks, undivided

BC MJqm Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MJSPsy Middle Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MJTSdg Middle Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC MJTSdr Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJTSqm Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MLTrdr Middle Triassic to Late Triassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLTrqd Middle Triassic to Late Triassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLTrStgb Middle Triassic to Late Triassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Mzfp Mesozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC PJdr Permian to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC PTrMdr Permian to Triassic dioritic intrusive rocks

a. Intrusive rocks
54 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

gravity anomalies were interpreted as possible evidence 

for granitoid intrusions, or magnetite-bearing hydrothermal 

systems (see Clark, 1999, for discussion). Stream-sediment 

geochemical anomalies for copper associated with nickel were 

interpreted as evidence for mafic igneous rocks. Anomalies 

for copper not associated with nickel were interpreted as 

possible evidence of hydrothermal systems, some of which 

might be related to alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits. Where 

such anomalies extended beyond the margins of the buffered 

permissive map units, the tract was expanded to include them. 

A smoothing routine was then applied to the buffered 

tract. A description of the smoothing routine is included in 

Table B2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada.—Continued 

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 2005) and 

Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

BC MLTrqd Middle Triassic to Late Triassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLTrStgb Middle Triassic to Late Triassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Mzfp Mesozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC PJdr Permian to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC PTrMdr Permian to Triassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Trdg Triassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC TrJB Early Triassic to Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC TrJdr Late Triassic to Early Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC TrJIk Triassic to Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC TrJJ Triassic to Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC TrJqm Triassic to Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC TrJsy Late Triassic to Early Jurassic syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

YT EJgA (Minto pluton only) Early Jurassic granodiorite/diorite/monzodiorite

YT EJyL Early Jurassic syenite

YT MJgB mid-Jurassic monzodiorite/quartz monzodiorite/hornblendite/granite/granodiorite

YT MJqB mid-Jurassic monzonite/syenite/granite/dykes

BC EJTpN Early Jurassic coarse volcaniclastic and pyroclastic volcanic rocks

BC EMJSPdb Early to Middle Jurassic diabase, basaltic subvolcanic rocks

BC lJC Early Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC lJGvb Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJHCvc Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJHT Early Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJNvc Lower Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC lJR Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJRE Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJTo Lower Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC lJToMva Lower Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lmJHvb Lower Jurassic to Middle Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC mJHvb Middle Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC muTrTvb Middle Triassic to Late Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC PTrva Permian to Triassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC TrJTvb Triassic to Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrJN Upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrJNvc Upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic volcaniclastic rocks

BC uTrJvk Upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic alkaline volcanic rocks

BC uTrNE Upper Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrNvb Upper Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrS Upper Triassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrSva Upper Triassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC uTrSvb Upper Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrTSa Upper Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrTSh Upper Triassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrTSm Late Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrTv Upper Triassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC uTrTva Late Triassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC uTrTvb Late Triassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC uTrTW Late Triassic volcaniclastic rocks

YT mTrJ Middle Triassic basalt/andesite/microdiorite/flows/ diamictite/gabbro/diorite

YT uTrP Upper Triassic argillite/sandstone/basalt/flows/breccia/ tuff/schist/amphibolite/gneiss

YT uTrP? Upper Triassic argillite/sandstone/basalt/flows/breccia/ tuff/schist/amphibolite/gneiss

b. Volcanic rocks

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

(a. Intrusive rocks)
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 55

the metadata in appendix H. After smoothing, tract-buffer 

zones were trimmed along terrane-bounding faults. Finally, 

areas of post-accretionary intrusions (surrounded by a 250- 

meter buffer) were excluded from the tract-buffer zones. Such 

intrusions and their buffer zones are included in a permissive 

tract for a later time interval.

Geologic Interpretation

Mihalynuk and others (1994, p. 575) proposed that early 

Mesozoic Quesnellia and Stikinia “were joined through their 

northern ends as two adjacent arc festoons that faced south 

toward the Cache Creek ocean.” Oceanic plateau remnants 

from the Tethyan realm collided with these island arcs during 

subduction of Cache Creek oceanic lithosphere, which may 

have underlain a part of the Panthalassic Ocean (the expansive 

global ocean that surrounded Pangaea from Late Precambrian 

to Jurassic time). Counterclockwise oroclinal rotation of 

the Stikine and Nisling terranes in the Late Triassic to Early 

Jurassic caused enclosure of the Cache Creek terrane. Rotation 

continued until these terranes collided with Quesnellia in the 

Middle Jurassic (Mihalynuk and others, 1994).

This oroclinal hypothesis explains why volcanic and 

intrusive rocks of the Quesnel and Stikine terranes are so 

similar that volcanic successions in both arcs are assigned to 

the Takla Group. In Yukon, similar porphyries occur in both 

terranes, and the line of Triassic-Jurassic intrusions clearly 

bends in an acute angle around the hinge of the orocline. 

Furthermore, the Quesnel and Stikine island-arc terranes 

contain both calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits, as 

well as alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits.

 In southern Quesnellia, calc-alkaline volcanic and 

plutonic rocks of the Nicola magmatic arc occur in the west, 

and calc-alkaline to alkaline rocks occur in the east. Inasmuch 

as alkalinity tends to increase with increasing depth of 

subduction, this indicates that the Nicola was a west-facing 

magmatic arc (Monger and others, 1991). 

In Stikinia, the Schaft Creek calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposit is east of the Galore Creek alkaline 

porphyry Cu-Au deposit, which indicates that the Stikine 

magmatic arc now faces east. This is consistent with the 

hypothesis that the Stikine and Quesnel magmatic arcs 

originally faced westward, but oroclinal bending rotated 

Stikinia nearly 180 degrees counterclockwise, so that it now 

faces east.

Alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits of Quesnellia and 

Stikinia formed during a relatively short time interval that 

lasted from about 212 to 183 Ma and peaked at about 205±5 

Ma (Mortensen and others, 1995). This suggests that these 

deposits formed in response to a plate-tectonic reorganization, 

such as oroclinal bending of the Quesnel, Yukon-Tanana, and 

Stikine terranes around the Cache Creek oceanic plate. 

Accretion of Quesnellia and Stikinia to the continental 

margin occurred during Early to Middle Jurassic time (about 

185±10 Ma). Murphy and others (1995) reported U-Pb age 

determinations for four intrusive bodies in the Kootenay 

arc that constrain the age of shortening of the sedimentary 

basin between Quesnellia and North America to late Early 

Jurassic (about 187 to 185 Ma) in southern British Columbia. 

Accretion probably progressed northward from southeastern 

Quesnellia, and then southward from northeastern Stikinia, 

as the orocline tightened. At the oroclinal crest, the YukonTanana terrane became extremely deformed, sheared, and 

metamorphosed. Between the subparallel limbs of the fold, the 

oceanic Cache Creek terrane was reduced to a narrow belt of 

accretionary wedges. The resulting assemblage of the Quesnel, 

Yukon-Tanana, Stikine, and Cache Creek terranes forms the 

Intermontane superterrane.

Known Deposits

There are 12 known alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits 

in this tract, 7 of which include multiple ore bodies that are 

grouped according to the 2-km rule (table B3). These deposits 

fit descriptive models for porphyry Cu-Au deposits by Cox 

(1986b) and for alkalic porphyry Cu-Au deposits of British 

Columbia by Panteleyev (1995). However, most of the 33 

individual ore bodies or deposits that make up these 12 

grouped deposits cannot be classified according to Cox’s goldto-molybdenum ratio criterion (ppm Au / percent Mo > 30 in 

the ore zone) because they lack data for molybdenum and (or) 

contain less than 0.2 g/t gold. 

Ore bodies generally are within or near alkaline igneous 

intrusions. Common types of ore-related intrusions are 

upward-branching tops of stocks, dike swarms, igneous 

intrusive breccias, volcanic-vent breccias, and hydrothermalexplosion breccias. Ore commonly occurs along or near 

igneous contacts—either internal contacts between intrusive 

phases, or external contacts between intrusions and host 

rocks. Ore also may occur along fracture zones in host 

rocks, which are commonly volcanic rocks that are generally 

comagmatic with ore-related intrusions. At the Williams 

Creek and Minto deposits, ore occurs in raft-like pendants, 

screens, and inclusions of mafic-alkaline metavolcanic and 

metasedimentary rocks in granodioritic post-ore plutons. 

Most alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits are of the 

volcanic subtype, as described by McMillan (1991) and 

Panteleyev (1995). These are commonly associated with 

multiple high-level intrusions, such as small stocks, sills, 

dikes, and breccias. Alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits of the 

Galore Creek cluster apparently formed in the throat of a Late 

Triassic volcano (McMillan, 1991; Logan and Panteleyev, 

1991). The Mount Polley deposit is transitional between the 

volcanic and classic stock-centered subtypes. It is above 

and around the upward-branching cupola of an alkaline 

composite stock (Fraser and others, 1995). The Afton deposits 

are within the composite Iron Mask batholith and may be of 

the plutonic subtype. However, the main deposit at Afton is 

hosted in brecciated, late-stage Cherry Creek micromonzonite 

and microsyenite (McMillan, 1991). It probably formed in 

association with late intrusions into the uppermost part of the 

batholith. 
56 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Table B3. Known alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits in tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Ma, million years; NA, not applicable; –, no data; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; Cu-Mo subtype, deposits that have 

Au/Mo ratios <3 or average Mo grades >0.03%; Cu-Au subtype, deposits that have Au/Mo ratios >30 or average Au grades >0.2 g/t. Contained Cu in metric 

tons is computed as (tonnage Mt x 1,000,000) x (percent Cu / 100); gs, coordinates of this site are used for the group location; *, estimated tonnage and grade 

from an unsubstantiated press release (not used in grade and tonnage model); **, partial tonnage and grade for a deposit that is known to be open to extension 

(not used in grade and tonnage model). For group aggregates: the latitude and longitude, subtype, and age is that of the deposit with the largest Cu resources; the 

Cu and Mo grades are tonnage-weighted averages calculated using the computed contained Cu and Mo as (t contained Cu or Mo / (Mt x 1,000,000)) x 100 (note 

that the computed contained Mo is not shown in this table); and the Au and Ag grades are a tonnage-weighted average calculated as g/t x Mt. For sources of age, 

tonnage, and grade information, see appendix F. Resource estimates are through 2009, but include updates for 2010 when available.] 

Name Latitude Longitude Subtype Age (Ma) Tonnage (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t) Contained Cu (t)

AFTON-AJAX GROUP

Afton (old pit + new block-cave) 50.661 -120.515 Cu-Au 202 96.8 1.014 – 0.709 3.099 981,958

Ajax area (JV) gs 50.608 -120.404 Cu-Au 205 523 0.288 0.001 0.185 – 1,510,000

Big Onion (Afton) 50.663 -120.437 Cu-Au 205 3.3 0.71 – 0.44 – 23,200

DM-Audra-Crescent 50.665 -120.486 NA 204 108.8 0.203 – 0.1 – 221,000

Galaxy 50.643 -120.423 Cu-Au 205 5.4 0.59 – 0.21 – 31,900

Iron Mask 50.655 -120.438 Cu-Au 205 2.4 0.84 – 0.4 – 20,200

Rainbow 50.636 -120.465 NA 205 30.7 0.528 – 0.119 – 162,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 50.608 -120.404 Cu-Au 205 770.4 0.382 – 0.238 – 2,950,000

AXE-PRIMER GROUP

Axe gs 49.648 -120.526 NA 205 116.7 0.43 0.012 – – 501,810

Axe - South zone (included in Axe) 49.641 -120.526 NA 205 37.2 0.48 – – – 179,000

Axe - West zone (included in Axe) 49.655 -120.542 NA 205 5.8 0.47 – – – 27,000

Primer - North zone 49.768 -120.475 NA 197 23 0.7 – – – 161,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 49.648 -120.526 NA 205 139.7 0.474 – – – 663,000

COPPER MTN GROUP

Alabama 49.343 -120.519 NA 195 29 0.35 – 0.16 – 102,000

Copper Mountain gs (Similco-Ingerbelle) 49.339 -120.556 Cu-Au 204 455.7 0.38 0.001 0.26 3.056 1,730,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 49.339 -120.556 Cu-Au 204 484.7 0.378 – 0.254 – 1,830,000

POLLEY GROUP

Lloyd-Nordik 52.571 -121.645 Cu-Au 205 7.2 0.31 – 0.243 – 22,300

Mount Polley gs (Cariboo-Bell) 52.554 -121.642 Cu-Au 205 204.8 0.324 – 0.31 – 664,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 52.554 -121.642 Cu-Au 205 212.5 0.323 – 0.307 – 686,000

LORRAINE GROUP

Jajay gs (Lorraine) 55.928 -125.441 NA 178 31.9 0.66 – 0.17 4.7 210,000

Misty 55.916 -125.514 NA 178 3 0.6 – – – 18,000

TAM 55.972 -125.504 NA 178 7.2 0.55 – – 4.11 39,600

GROUP AGGREGATE 55.928 -125.441 NA 178 42.2 0.635 – – – 268,000

GALORE CREEK GROUP

Galore - C, J, NJ, SW, WFG 57.136 -131.456 Cu-Au 211 1,382.6 0.41 – 0.22 4.009 5,670,000

Galore – Central gs (included in Galore) 57.136 -131.456 Cu-Au 211 233.9 0.67 – 0.35 7 1,570,000

Galore - Copper Canyon 57.116 -131.347 Cu-Au 205 164.8 0.35 – 0.54 7.15 575,000

Galore - Junction (included in Galore) 57.141 -131.485 Cu-Au 211 101.6 0.548 – 0.325 3.758 567,000

Galore - North Junction (included in Galore) 57.144 -131.486 NA 211 7.7 1.5 – – – 116,000

Galore - Southwest (included in Galore) 57.123 -131.476 Cu-Au 211 170.6 0.349 – 0.633 2.485 595,000

Galore - West Fork Glacier (included in Galore) 57.114 -131.465 Cu-Au 211 60.8 0.495 – 0.348 4.916 301,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 57.136 -131.456 Cu-Au 211 1,547 0.404 – 0.254 4.344 6,250,000

SULPHURETS GROUP

Kerr 56.468 -130.269 Cu-Au 196 225.3 0.41 – 0.23 – 924,000

Mitchell gs 56.531 -130.25 Cu-Au 196 1,509.9 0.18 – 0.64 – 2,720,000

Sulphurets Gold 56.504 -130.268 Cu-Au 196 87.3 0.27 – 0.72 – 236,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 56.531 -130.25 Cu-Au 196 1,822.5 0.213 – 0.593 – 3,880,000

INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

Chuchi 55.263 -124.545 Cu-Au 183 50 0.21 – 0.21 – 105,000

Minto 62.609 -137.238 Cu-Au 200 34.4 1.187 – 0.323 4.165 408,000

Mount Milligan 55.124 -124.028 Cu-Au 183 602.7 0.192 – 0.349 – 1,160,000

Red Chris 57.7 -129.805 Cu-Au 204 714.8 0.356 – 0.281 1.5 2,540,000

Williams Creek (Carmacks) 62.349 -136.694 Cu-Au 200 15.5 1.01 – 0.483 4.62 157,000

INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS TOTAL 1417.4 4,370,000

TRACT TOTAL 6,436.8 20,897,000

TRACT ROUNDED TOTAL 6,440 20,900,000
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 57

According to Panteleyev (1995), sodic, potassic 

and propylitic alteration-mineral assemblages are typical 

of alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits. Ore is commonly 

cospatial with central, early, high-temperature hydrothermal 

K-feldspar and biotite±anhydrite. Deep in the central zone, a 

sodic assemblage of albite±minerals such as epidote, pyrite, 

diopside, garnet, actinolite, scapolite, or prehnite may occur. 

Chalcopyrite and bornite grade outward to pyrite, and biotite 

grades outward to chlorite in an extensive propylitic zone. 

Phyllic assemblages of sericite and pyrite±siderite and clay 

minerals generally are lacking, but may be superimposed 

locally along fracture zones. 

Most alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits do not have 

well-developed zones of supergene leaching or enrichment. 

Production of acidic groundwater required for supergene 

solution and transport of copper probably is hampered by a 

dominance of propylitic relative to phyllic alteration products. 

At Afton, however, there is a supergene-enriched zone that 

extends to an average depth of 500 m. According to Ney and 

others (1976) this supergene zone contains native copper, 

subordinate chalcocite, minor cuprite, tenorite, malachite, 

azurite and minor relict chalcopyrite. Supergene enrichment 

probably occurred at Afton during Early Eocene time, when 

the climate was warm and wet. The Afton supergene zone was 

then down-faulted and buried by Upper Eocene sediments, 

which protected it from later erosion.

Alkaline porphyry Cu-Au ore bodies generally are 

smaller than calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au ore bodies 

but have higher concentrations of both copper and gold. 

Furthermore, they commonly occur in groups of ore bodies 

that are less than 2 km from one another. Thus, the total 

tonnages of grouped Cu-Au ore bodies are similar to those of 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits. In table B3, we list the group 

name, followed by the ore-body name. The Afton-Ajax group 

contains 7 ore bodies, the Axe-Primer group 4, the Copper 

Mountain group 2, the Polley group 2, the Lorraine group 3, 

the Galore group 7, and the Sulphurets group 3. The Red Chris 

and Minto deposits are not known to be composite.

We estimate that known deposits of this tract contain 

about 20,900,000 metric tons of copper (table B1). Some of 

the tonnages and grades listed in tables B2 and B3 do not 

match those of Singer and others (2008). Some estimates listed 

here include recently published additions to known resources, 

and some may have been calculated using different cutoff 

grades. In some cases our grouping of ore bodies may differ 

from that done by Singer and others (2008).

In the Yukon Territory, the Minto deposit was put into 

production in 2007 by Sherwood Copper Corp. Meanwhile, 

drilling continued to expand the known resource of Area 2, 

which is between 100 and 500 m southeast of the planned 

limit of the Minto open-pit mine. About 168,000 t copper and 

4,790 kg gold will be recovered during the projected 8-year 

life of the Minto mine. The Minto deposit is in the Yukon 

cataclastic belt of the Stikine terrane. The ore zones are in 

flat, tabular, raft-like inclusions of gneiss in a weakly foliated 

granodiorite batholith. The gneissic inclusions appear to have 

been partially assimilated by granodiorite, and locally the 

granodiorite contains ore minerals near the inclusions. Its 

ore-mineral assemblage (chalcopyrite, bornite, pyrite, and 

magnetite) is similar to those of alkaline porphyry Cu-Au 

deposits. However, it also has potassic and propylitic alteration 

assemblages, resembling those of alkaline Cu-Au deposits, 

and phyllic alteration that resembles that of calc-alkaline 

porphyry-Cu systems. 

In southeastern British Columbia, the Mount Polley 

open-pit copper-gold mine was reopened in 2005 by Imperial 

Metals Corp. From 2005 through 2007 the mine produced 

25,000 to 34,000 ton/yr of copper, 1,060 to 1,560 kg/yr 

gold, and 6,600 to 12,600 kg/yr silver (Schroeter and others, 

2007; DeGrace and others, 2008). A test heap was operated 

in 2007 to test feasibility of leaching metal from the copper 

oxide cap above the sulfide zone in the Springer pit (DeGrace 

and others, 2009). According to Fraser and others (1995, p. 

609), “The Mount Polley deposit is characterized by multiple 

intrusions that vary from diorite to crowded plagioclase 

porphyry to monzonite.” Abundant hydrothermal breccias, 

which occur on the margins and above plagioclase porphyry 

intrusions, contain the highest concentrations of copper 

and gold. In the core of the deposit, actinolite, biotite, and 

K-feldspar alteration assemblages contain a chalcopyritemagnetite-bornite ore-mineral assemblage. This passes 

outward to a magnetite-pyrite-chalcopyrite assemblage. The 

core alteration assemblage is overprinted by discontinuous 

zones of calc-silicate minerals, which grade outward to a 

propylitic zone.

Prospects, Mineral Occurrences, and Related 

Deposit Types

Table B4 lists 87 significant prospects with characteristics 

of alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits in this permissive tract. 

Of these, 30 are within 6 groups of alkaline porphyry Cu-Au 

deposits and prospects. These 30 prospects are regarded as 

possible additions to the known resources of the respective 

6 groups in which they occur. They are not counted as 

potential undiscovered deposits. Six of these prospects are in 

the Afton-Ajax group, 5 in the Axe-Primer group, 14 in the 

Copper Mountain group, 2 in the Galore Creek group, 2 in the 

Lorraine group, and 1 in the Sulphurets group. Additionally, 3 

significant prospects (Peach-Melba, Peach 3, and Ann North) 

are within a single group (Lac La Heche) that does not include 

a known deposit.

There are 54 other significant alkaline porphyry 

Cu-Au prospects in this permissive tract. There are 3 rank-2 

prospects, which are prospects on small but incompletely 

known ore bodies, which may belong to larger porphyry 

copper systems. There are 12 rank-3 prospects, each of which 

has at least one intercept of 20 m or more of at least 0.2 

percent copper. Two of these are in the Lac La Heche group 

of prospects and can be counted only as one possible deposit. 

There are 39 rank-4 prospects, with samples containing more 
Group Name Rank Latitude Longitude Age (Ma) Comments Afton-Ajax Crescent 2 50.6647 -120.4683 205 Past producer (Sinclair, 2007); 1.448 Mt ore @ 0.44% Cu (6,371t C

Afton-Ajax Kimberly 2 50.628 -120.354 205 Resource: 0.363 Mt ore @ 0.35% Cu (1,270t Cu) Afton-Ajax Python 2 50.644 -120.398 205 Resource: 0.848 Mt ore @ 0.875% Cu (7,420t Cu) Afton-Ajax Ace 3 50.585 -120.318 205 Intercept: 52 m, 0.38% Cu Afton-Ajax Admiral Dewy 4 50.589 -120.327 205 Intercept: 18 m, 0.19% Cu Afton-Ajax Fargo 4 50.584 -120.352 205 Intercept: 15 m, 0.223% Cu Axe-Primer Coke (Ketchan Creek) 3 49.746 -120.533 197 Intercept: 83 m, 0.23% Cu Axe-Primer Log 3 49.78 -120.554 197 Intercept: 86 m, 0.3786% Cu Axe-Primer Man 3 49.751 -120.483 197 Intercept: 120 m, 0.21% Cu, 0.92 g/t Au Axe-Primer Primer - South zone 3 49.756 -120.46 197 Intercept: 207 m, 0.25% Cu; 12 km NE of Axe Axe-Primer Rum (Ketchan) 4 49.734 -120.533 197 Intercept: 183 m, 0.16% Cu Copper Mountain Oriole 2 49.319 -120.514 199 Resource: 2.65 Mt ore @ 0.437% Cu (11,600t Cu) Copper Mountain Virginia (in Similco) 2 49.341 -120.512 200 Resource: 1.305 Mt ore @ 0.42% Cu (5,480t Cu) Copper Mountain Voigt 2 49.34 -120.501 193 Resource: 0.2204 Mt ore @ 1.21% Cu (2,670t Cu) Copper Mountain Duke of York 3 49.347 -120.544 204 Intercept: 90 m, 0.37% Cu Copper Mountain Friday Creek 3 49.3 -120.561 199 Intercept: 42.6 m, 0.28% Cu Copper Mountain Jennie Silkman 3 49.313 -120.508 204 Intercept: 66 m, 0.58% Cu Copper Mountain Deep Gulch 4 49.314 -120.557 199 Intercept: 15 m, 0.79% Cu, 1.37 g/t Au; in trenches and core holes Copper Mountain Fraser 4 49.332 -120.549 204 Intercept: interval unavailable; 2.8% Cu, 0.69 g/t Au, 34 g/t Ag Copper Mountain ILK 4 49.294 -120.556 204 Intercept: 6.1 m, 2.16% Cu Copper Mountain June Bug 4 49.345 -120.516 204 Intercept: interval unavailable; 1.5% Cu (grab sample; two shafts a

Copper Mountain Marquis of Lorne 4 49.292 -120.514 199 Intercept: 5 m, 0.563% Cu, 3.6 g/t Ag Copper Mountain Oronoco 4 49.346 -120.536 200 Intercept: 12 m, 0.32% Cu Copper Mountain Ray 4 49.35 -120.549 200 Intercept: 261 m, 0.18% Cu Copper Mountain Reco 4 49.285 -120.545 204 Intercept: 1 m, 0.4% Cu, 0.88 g/t Au, 2.9 g/t Ag Galore Ck Galore - North Rim 4 57.151 -131.472 211 Intercept: 7 m, 2.37% Cu, 9.26 g/t Au Galore Ck Galore - Saddle 4 57.11 -131.432 211 Intercept: 12 m, 2.49% Cu, 3.98 g/t Au

Lorraine All Alone Dome 4 55.939 -125.465 178 Intercept: 12 m, 0.13% Cu; net veins and migmatite (deep emplacem

Lorraine Jeno 4 55.907 -125.421 175 Intercept: interval unavailable; 10% Cu, 14 g/t Au, 276 g/t Ag; 1.86 

sulfides

Sulphurets Bornite 4 56.486 -130.277 196 Intercept: interval unavailable; 1.86% Cu, 2.74 g/t Au; in epitherma

Lac La Heche Ann North 3 51.974 -121.313 200 Intercept: 107.3 m, 0.29% Cu, 0.33 g/t Au

Lac La Heche Peach-Melba 3 51.981 -121.337 214 Intercept: 77.4 m, 0.23% Cu, 0.23 g/t Au

Lac La Heche Peach 3 4 51.961 -121.295 214 Intercept: 1 m, 1% Cu, 0.07 g/t Au

– COL 2 55.249 -124.759 183 Resource: 1.8 Mt ore @ 0.6% Cu (10,800t Cu)– G.E. 2 49.486 -120.458 197 Resource: 0.54 Mt ore @ 0.27% Cu (1,460t Cu)– Joker 2 50.575 -120.3 205 Resource: 0.068 Mt ore @ 0.6% Cu (408t Cu)

– ATO (Rhondah) 3 55.913 -125.292 183 Intercept: 55 m, 0.51% Cu– Dick Creek 3 58.234 -131.733 214 Intercept: 52 m, 0.8% Cu, 0.73 g/t Au– Eagle 3 55.184 -124.863 183 Intercept: 27.3 m, 0.87% Cu, 0.32 g/t Au, 3.85 g/t Ag

– Grizzly 3 57.129 -130.639 211 Intercept: 38 m, 0.74% Cu, 1.1 g/t Au in altered rocks (drilling faile– Lucky 3 49.544 -120.433 214 Intercept: 24.4 m, 0.42% Cu

Significant individual porphyry Cu prospects

Significant porphyry Cu prospects in groups of known porphyry Cu deposits and prospects

Significant porphyry Cu prospects in a group with no known deposit

Table B4. Significant alkalic porphyry Cu-Au prospects in tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Y[Ma, million years; –, not applicable; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; gs, group site-coordinates of this site are used for the group locainformation about age, tonnage, grade and comments, see appendix F. For mineral name abbreviations under “Comments”, see appendix F.]
Table B4. Significant alkalic porphyry Cu-Au prospects in tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia aCanada.—Continued[Ma, million years; –, not applicable; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; gs, group site-coordinates of this site are used for the group additonal information about age, tonnage, grade and comments, see appendix F. For mineral name abbreviations under “Comments”, see appendix F.]

– Mouse Mountain 3 53.05 -122.321 205 Intercept: 24.3 m, 0.333% Cu, 0.03 g/t Au– Murphy Lake 3 52.029 -121.264 187 Intercept: 41.7 m, 0.41% Cu– Pine (Axe-Primer) 3 49.698 -120.598 200 Intercept: 48.8 m, 0.2% Cu– Redgold (Shiko) 3 52.464 -121.484 196 Intercept: 28.5 m, 0.39% Cu, 1 g/t Au; IP survey and 2295 m in 11 core h– Siwash 3 49.822 -120.394 197 Intercept: 21.3 m, 0.42% Cu– Tim #1 3 51.937 -121.249 214 Intercept: 42.7 m, 2.76% Cu, 0.6 g/t Au– Wood GP 3 50.614 -120.531 214 Intercept: 275 m, 0.3% Cu in one drill hole, but several others with little – Aplite Creek 4 55.324 -124.879 183 Intercept: 6 m, 0.098% Cu, 6.4 g/t Au– Auddie 4 55.74 -125.43 200 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.213% Cu; encouraging results at early s– Aurizon Gold zone 4 51.958 -121.286 214 Intercept: 4 m, 0.22% Cu, 11.4 g/t Au– Big Bulk 4 55.663 -129.349 188 Intercept: 16 m, 1.22% Cu– Big Kidd 4 49.943 -120.596 214 Intercept: 14 m, 0.9% Cu, 0.141 g/t Au, 13.66 g/t Ag

– Blue Jay 4 49.981 -120.599 200 Intercept: 97.6 m, 0.19% Cu, 0.204 g/t Au– Camp 4 55.083 -124.585 183 Intercept: 127 m, 0.18% Cu– Clay 4 51.88 -120.922 200 Intercept: interval unavailable; 25% Cu, 102.9 g/t Au– Copper Creek 4 58.219 -131.706 199 Intercept: interval unavailable; 1.04% Cu, 3.4 g/t Au, 30.8 g/t Ag– Discovery 4 55.828 -125.303 183 Intercept: interval unavailable; 12.54% Cu– Dorothy 4 55.885 -125.338 183 Intercept: 15 m, 0.75% Cu– Falcon 4 55.204 -125.095 183 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.44% Cu, 0.013% Mo– Grey Mask 4 50.581 -120.298 205 Intercept: 2.35 m, 1.1% Cu, 3.28 g/t Au– Hat 4 56.74 -126.327 200 Intercept: 3 m, 0.93% Cu, 0.4 g/t Au– Heath #1 4 55.271 -125.163 183 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.76% Cu, 4.97 g/t Au, 1419.4 g/t Ag– Hilltop 4 50.748 -120.632 205 Intercept: 45 m, 0.16% Cu– Hoey 4 58.19 -131.577 218 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.17% Cu, 6.1 g/t Au, 5.1 g/t Ag; three ar

anomalies

– HU 4 58.345 -130.191 200 Intercept: interval unavailable; 1.14% Cu, 1.3 g/t Au; geologic map, soil – Katie 4 49.148 -117.337 188 Intercept: 6 m, 0.24% Cu, 0.2 g/t Au– MacKenzie 4 55.831 -125.333 183 Intercept: 1.6 m, 2.68% Cu, 0.4 g/t Au, 16.1 g/t Ag

– Maxine 4 50.758 -120.658 205 Intercept: interval unavailable; 4.1% Cu, 74.4 g/t Ag– MFJ 4 57.796 -129.873 198 Intercept: 15 m, 1.07% Cu, 0.04 g/t Au– Miner 4 49.476 -120.474 214 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.295% Cu– Miracle 4 51.947 -121.311 214 Intercept: 6 m, 1.38% Cu, 5.1 g/t Au– Moss 4 55.137 -124.531 183 Intercept: 56 m, 0.12% Cu, 1.6 g/t Au– Osilinka (Cat) 4 56.063 -125.36 200 Intercept: 5.15 m, 5.7% Cu, 3.1 g/t Au, 4.6 g/t Ag; in 97 m, 0.12% Cu.

– Phil 4 50.554 -120.299 205 Intercept: 8 m, 0.17% Cu, 0.5 g/t Au– Pip 4 49.645 -120.513 197 Intercept: 3.05 m, 0.185% Cu– Rats 4 49.561 -120.466 214 Intercept: 51.8 m, 0.17% Cu, 3.4 g/t Ag

– Rayfield Copper 4 51.313 -121.089 173 Intercept: 33.9 m, 0.18% Cu– Skook 4 55.2 -124.528 183 Intercept: 1 m, 0.49% Cu, 0.022 g/t Au, 11.7 g/t Ag

– SRM 4 55.234 -124.523 183 Intercept: 5 m, 0.7% Cu, 0.97 g/t Au

– Star 4 49.449 -117.364 176 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.0944% Cu, 0.66 g/t Au

– TAK 4 55.704 -125.246 183 Intercept: interval unavailable; 1.53% Cu, 1.8 g/t Au, 40.5 g/t Ag– Thalia 4 49.837 -120.567 197 Intercept: 32 m, 0.14% Cu– Timber 4 55.831 -125.323 183 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.44% Cu, 2.385 g/t Au, 64.5 g/t Ag

– Vector 4 55.202 -124.889 183 Intercept: 17.9 m, 0.82% Cu, 0.47 g/t Au, 4.11 g/t Ag

– Wolverine 4 58.12 -131.678 199 Intercept: 8 m, 1.8% Cu, 94 g/t Au

– Worldstock 4 51.531 -120.287 214 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.78% Cu; EM and mag amomalies

Group Name Rank Latitude Longitude Age (Ma) Comments

(Significant individual porphyry Cu prospects)
60 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

than 0.1 percent of Cu but less than 20 m of 0.2 percent 

copper. 

In addition to the 87 significant alkaline porphyry Cu-Au 

prospects in this tract, there are also at least 14 prospects and 

showings that are not primarily porphyry copper prospects but 

could be associated with alkaline porphyry Cu-Au systems 

(see appendix F). There are 3 prospects on Au veins, 1 on 

Au-Ag veins, 1 on Au-Cu veins, and 1 on Cu-Fe-Au-Ag veins. 

There also are prospects on Fe-Au-, Au-, and Au-Ag-bearing 

skarns and 1 on an Au-Ag-Cu-bearing roof pendant.

Exploration History

During the 1980s, porphyry Cu-Au deposits became 

very profitable because of high gold prices. In British 

Columbia, the discovery of the Mount Milligan porphyry 

Cu-Au deposit also spurred exploration for more porphyry 

Cu-Au deposits (McMillan and others, 1995). 

Table B5 summarizes recent exploration activities on 

alkaline porphyry Cu-Au prospects in British Columbia 

from 2004 to 2007. The information in this table is from 

annual British Columbia Mining and Mineral Exploration 

Overviews by Schroeter and others (2006, 2007), and 

DeGrace and others (2008, 2009). During this time interval 

total expenditures for mineral exploration in British 

Columbia rose from about $150 M in 2004 to a record $216 

M in 2007. 

In this permissive tract, about 430 km of core drilling 

was done from 2004 to 2007. About 96 percent of this 

drilling was done in and around previously known deposits 

or groups of known ore zones, while 3 percent was done 

on rank 3 prospects, and 1 percent was done on rank 4 

prospects. 

 The New Afton, Copper Mountain, and Lorraine-Jajay 

projects are under consideration to be reopened, and the Red 

Chris deposit, Galore Creek, and Sulphurets groups of ore 

bodies are under consideration for development.

At the New Afton project, New Gold, Inc., completed 

about 30,000 m of drilling in support of a feasibility 

study for an underground block-caving mine that may be 

developed soon. The Afton deposit is at the northwestern 

edge of the northwest-elongate Iron Mask batholith, which is 

a composite alkaline intrusion of Early Jurassic age, hosted 

by mafic volcanic rocks of the Nicola Group (Lang and 

Stanley, 1995). According to Stakiw (2004) and the mine 

operators (New Gold Inc., 2011), the top of the New Afton 

deposit is directly beneath the Afton open pit, which was 

mined from 1977 to 1987. The underground deposit is much 

larger than the upper part of the deposit, which was mined 

from the open pit. At a cutoff grade of 0.5 percent copper, the 

New Afton deposit is about 1 km long and extends from the 

bottom of the pit, at an elevation of about 400 m above sea 

level, to about 350 m below sea level. Other past-producers 

in the Iron Mask batholith include the Crescent, Pothook, 

and DM ore bodies, which were mined from open pits. These 

ore bodies, and the grounds between and around them, are 

currently being explored as a joint venture between the 

Abacus Mining and Exploration Corp. and New Gold, Inc. 

At Copper Mountain (Similco-Ingerbelle), which has 

been on standby since 1996, Copper Mountain Mining 

Corp. did a major drilling campaign in 2007. The purpose 

of this drilling was to confirm and expand known resources 

by exploring the saddle zones between pits 1, 2, and 3 in 

preparation for a new feasibility study (DeGrace and others, 

2008).

At Lorraine-Jajay, Teck Cominco, Ltd., drilled 17 holes in 

2005. The purpose of this drilling was to explore for additional 

resources, which might support reopening the mine. 

In the Galore Creek-Copper Canyon area, NovaGold 

Resources expanded the previously known resources and 

discovered additional zones of mineralized rocks (Schroeter 

and others, 2006). East of a proposed pit, they found the new 

Bountiful zone at depth (Schroeter and others, 2007). In 2007 

they drilled on the Butte zone in the Copper Canyon area. 

They also announced a 50-50 joint venture with Teck Cominco 

to form the Galore Creek Mining Corporation (DeGrace and 

others, 2008). According to Enns and others (1995), the Galore 

Creek alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits are hosted by alkaline 

volcanic rocks, related syenitic intrusions, and breccias of 

Upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic age. The Central, Southwest, 

and Junction zones are the most important of 12 identified 

Cu-Au ore zones.

In the Sulphurets area, Seabridge Gold, Inc., drilled 

15,000 m in 2007 at the Mitchell, Kerr, and Sulphurets Gold 

deposits. This drilling was done to upgrade and increase the 

resource estimates, to bring the Kerr and Sulphurets data into 

compliance with NI 43-101 requirements, and to support a 

preliminary economic assessment.

At Mount Milligan, Terrane Metals Corp. did a 

preliminary economic assessment based on a proposed annual 

production of 44,000 t/yr copper and 7,748 kg/yr gold for the 

first 6 years of a 14.5-year mine life. They also drilled 11,444 

m in support of a feasibility study, scheduled for completion in 

2008 (DeGrace and others, 2008). According to Sketchley and 

others (1995) the Main deposit is centered on the intersection 

of a monzonitic stock and a protruding dike. The Southern 

Star deposit is around another nearby monzonitic stock. The 

core of the deposit is in a biotite-rich subzone of the potassic 

zone, which is surrounded by a propylitic zone.

At the Red Chris deposit, bcMetals Corp. did a feasibility 

study in 2005, which indicated potential for a production rate 

of 47,000 t/yr copper and 2,200 kg/yr gold during a 25-year 

mine life (Schroeter and others, 2007). At the end of 2006, 

Imperial Metals Corp. acquired the deposit. Confirmation 

drilling was done on the Main and East zones, and exploration 

drilling was done on the nearby Gully zone. Six deep holes 

were drilled, one of which intersected 1,024 m grading 1.01 

percent copper, 1.26 g/t gold, and 3.92 g/t silver. This indicates 

a high-grade zone that extends 700 m below the current 

pit design (DeGrace and others, 2008). McMillan (1991) 

classified the Red Chris deposit as an alkaline porphyry Cu-Au 

deposit, but it has mixed characteristics. Its associated igneous 
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 61

rocks include mildly alkaline monzodiorite and monzonite, 

as well as calc-alkaline quartz diorite, quartz monzonite, and 

granodiorite. Its high gold values and lack of molybdenite 

are characteristic of alkaline Cu-Au deposits, but its phyllic 

alteration is more typical of calc-alkaline porphyry copper 

deposits (Newell and Peatfield, 1995). 

At the Williams Creek (or Carmacks) deposit, Western 

Copper Corp. did engineering studies to plan development 

of an open-pit mine with associated heap-leach and solventextraction/electrowinning facilities. The Williams Creek 

deposit is about 50 km southeast of the Minto deposit and is 

in the Yukon cataclastic belt of the Stikine terrane. The ore 

bodies at Williams Creek are in raft-like tabular inclusions 

of mafic gneiss in post-ore granodiorite. The Williams Creek 

deposit is, therefore, interpreted to be a volcanic-style alkaline 

porphyry Cu-Au deposit that underwent dynamothermal 

metamorphism, and was then intruded by and incorporated 

into a post-ore granodiorite batholith. After uplift and 

exposure, the upper part of the deposit was oxidized, and the 

oxide zone is preserved, because most of the deposit was not 

glaciated.

Recent exploration activities also were recorded at four 

prospects that are not parts of known deposits or groups of 

ore bodies and prospects. The Friday Creek prospect, near 

Table B5. Readily available recent exploration activities for deposits and prospects in tract 003pCu2002.

(CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[This information was compiled from Schroeter and others (2006, 2007) and DeGrace and others (2008, 2009). Web-site addresses of “Operators” 

are listed in the table in appendix F; AGP, airborne geophysics; AMG, airborne magnetic; ARAD, airborne radiometrics; CD, core drilling; EN, 

environmental baseline studies, monitoring, or remediation work; FS, feasibility studies; G, geologic mapping; GC, geochemical sampling (rock, 

soil, silt, or other); IP, Induced Polarization; MG, magnetic surveys; PD, percussion drilling; PFS, pre-feasibility studies; TR, trenching; m, meters.] 

Name Rank Operator Activities CD (m)

Ajax JV 1 JV: Abacus Mining and Exploration Corp./New 

Gold, Inc. CD 69,940

Axe, West 1 Westar Resources Corp., Bearclaw Capital 

Corp. CD 1,700

Copper Canyon 1 NovaGold Resources, Inc. CD 4,990

Galaxy 1 Discovery Corp. Enterprises, Inc. G, GC, CD 286

Galore Creek 1 NovaGold Resources, Inc. FS, EN 89,409

Jajay 1 Teck Cominco, Ltd. G, GC, IP, CD 7,300

JTM, Misty, Slide 1 Teck Cominco, Ltd. G, GC, CD 3,070

Kerr (KSM) 1 Seabridge Gold, Inc.. CD 9,129

Lloyd-Nordik 1 Valley High Ventures, Ltd. CD 5,600

Man/Prime 1 Candorado Operating Co., Ltd. CD, IP 2,209

Misty 1 Teck Cominco, Ltd. IP, MG, CD 1,200

Mitchell (KSM) 1 Seabridge Gold, Inc. CD 15,000

Mount Milligan 1 Terrane Metals Corp. CD 8,500

Mount Polley 1 Imperial Metals, Corp. TR, G, GC, PFS, 

FS, CD, PD, FS 78,693

New Afton 1 New Gold, Inc. AGP, CD 50,000

Red Chris 1 Imperial Metals Corp. CD 4,675

Similco-Ingerbelle 1 Copper Mountain Mining Corp. CD 60,000

Ann North 3 GWR Resources, Inc. TR, AGP 7,788

Friday Creek 

(Princeton) 3 Anglo Canadian uranium Corp. CD 1,500

Mouse Mountain 3 Richfield Ventures Corp., Oak Point Capital 

Corp.

TR, G, GC, IP, 

FS, EN, CD 2,842

Murphy Lake 3 Candorado Operating Co., Ltd. GC, IP, ARAD, 

AMG, CD 800

All Alone Dome 4 Teck Cominco, Ltd. GC, IP, CD 1,000

Copper Creek 4 Firesteel Resources CD 1,524

Osilinka 4 Lysander Minerals Corp. TR 1,447

Redton (TAK) 4 Geoinformatics Exploration, Inc. CD 2,060
62 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Princeton, British Columbia, was explored by Anglo Canadian 

Uranium Corp. The Mouse Mountain prospect was explored 

by Richfield Ventures Corp. and Oak Point Capital Corp. The 

Murphy Lake prospect was explored by Candorado Operating 

Co., and the Osilinka prospect was explored by Lysander 

Minerals Corp.

Sources of Information

Principal sources of information used by the assessment 

team for delineation of 003pCu2002 are listed in table B6.

Grade and Tonnage Model Selection

Alkaline Porphyry Cu-Au

The deposits of permissive tract 003pCu2002 (CA02) 

fit the descriptive model for alkalic porphyry Cu-Au of 

Panteleyev (1995). For the statistical testing against worldwide Cu-Au porphyries, the grade and tonnage reported by 

Singer and others (2008) for porphyry Cu-Au (20c) were used 

as that is the most complete dataset we are aware of for similar 

deposits. Following the spatial grouping exercise discussed in 

the Introduction, 12 deposits are present in tract 003pCu2002 

(CA02) (table B7). 

Students t-test at a 1-percent screening level on deposits 

from the tract indicate that they are not distinguishable in 

tonnage or grade from the Cu-Au model (20c) of Singer 

and others (2008). For this reason, we used the model 20c 

tonnage and grade distributions to estimate the endowment of 

undiscovered porphyry Cu-Au deposits for tract CA02.

Estimate of the Number of 

Undiscovered Deposits

Rationale for the Estimate

Our rationale for estimation of undiscovered alkaline 

porphyry Cu-Au deposits in this tract was based on the 

Table B6. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[ NA, not applicable]

Theme Name or title Scale Citation

GeoFile 2005-1: Digital Geology Map of British 

Columbia-Whole Province 1:250,000 Massey and others (2005)

Yukon Digital Geology 1:250,000 Gordey and Makepeace (1999)

Geoscience Map 2005-3: Geology of British Columbia 1:1,000,000 Massey and others (2005)

Terrane Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and others (1991)

Tectonic Assemblage Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and McFeely (1991); Journeay and Williams (1995; GIS vector 

representation of Wheeler and McFeely, 1991)

Metamorphic Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Read and others (1991)

YukonAge 2004: A database of isotopic age 

determinations for rock units from Yukon Territory NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004a)

BC Age 2004A-1: A database of Isotopic Age 

Determinations for Rock Units from British Columbia NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004b)

Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB); National 

Geochronological Data Base (NGDB) NA Zartman and others (1976); Marshall (1993)

Porphyry Deposits NA Sinclair (2007)

Porphyry Copper Deposits of the World NA Singer and others (2008)

Lode mineral deposits NA Nokleberg and others (1998)

MINFILE (British Columbia) Mineral Occurrences 

Database NA MINFILE BC (2009)

MINFILE (Yukon) Mineral Occurrences Database NA MINFILE YT (2009)

Porphyry Deposits of the Canadian Cordillera NA CIM SV 15 (Sutherland Brown, 1976)

Porphyry Deposits of the Northwestern Cordillera of 

North America NA CIM SV 46 (Schroeter, 1995)

National Geochemical Reconnaissance (NGR) Stream 

Sediment, Lake Sediment and Water Geochemical Data 

Base

NA Natural Resources Canada (2008c)

Yukon Regional Geochemical Database 2003 - Stream 

sediment analyses NA Heon (2003)

Canadian Geodetic Information System – Gravity (2km 

grid) – Bouguer anomaly, free-air anomaly, isostatic 

residual anomaly, observed gravity, vertical gradient, and 

horizontal gradient

~1:2,000,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008a)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base – 1 km and 200 m 

grid – Residual total field

~1:1,000,000 and 

~1:200,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008b)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base – 500 m grid – 

Residual total field, reduced to pole ~1:500,000 B.J. Drenth (unpub. data, 2009)

Exploration

BC Mines and Mineral Exploration Overviews, Yukon 

Mineral Deposits, Natural Resources Canada, Top 100 

Exploration and Deposit Appraisal Projects, 2008, 

Web sites of Mineral Exploration companies

NA Schroeter and others (2006, 2007), DeGrace and others (2008, 2009)

Geochemistry

Geophysics

Geology

Mineral occurrences
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 63

Table B7. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in comparing Canadian Cordilleran 

alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits to the world model of Singer and others (2008) for porphyry Cu-Au 

deposits (model 20c) for tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[Groups include all deposits and prospects with well-defined grades and tonnages that meet the 2-km rule. Independent 

indicates that a deposit is not in a group. Mt, million metric tons; %, percent; g/t, grams per metric ton; –, no data. Resource estimates available in 2008-2009 have not been updated to include information added to appendix F after 2009.] 

Group Name Ore (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t)

Afton-Ajax Afton-Ajax (Total) 770.4 0.382 – 0.238 0.39

Axe-Primer Axe-Primer (Total) 139.7 0.474 0.01 – –

Independent Chuchi 50 0.21 – 0.21 –

Copper Mtn Copper Mtn (Total) 484.7 0.378 0.001 0.254 2.873

Galore Galore (Total) 1,547.40 0.404 – 0.254 4.344

Lorraine Lorraine (Total) 42.2 0.635 – 0.129 4.254

Independent Minto 34.4 1.187 – 0.323 4.165

Independent Mount Milligan 602.7 0.192 – 0.349 –

Polley Polley (Total) 212.5 0.323 – 0.307 –

Independent Red Chris 714.8 0.356 – 0.281 1.5

Sulphurets Sulphurets (Total) 1,822.50 0.213 0.004 0.593 2.1

Independent Williams Creek 19.3 0.95 – 0.376 3.592

[Nxx, estimated number of deposits associated with the xxth percentile; Nund, expected number of undiscovered deposits; s, standard deviation; Cv%, coefficient

of variance; Nknown, number of known deposits in the tract that are included in the grade and tonnage model; Ntotal, total of expected number of deposits plus 

known deposits; area, area of permissive tract in square kilometers; density, deposit density reported as the total number of deposits per km2. Nund, s, and Cv% 

are calculated using a regression equation (Singer and Menzie, 2005). In cases where individual estimates were tallied in addition to the consensus estimate, 

individual estimates are listed.]

N90 N50 N10 N05 N01 Nund s Cv% Nknown Ntotal

3 6 13 13 13 7 3.8 54 12 19 109,290 0.00017

Estimator N90 N50 N10 N05 N01

Individual 1 2 5 7 7 7

Individual 2 3 5 12 12 12

Individual 3 4 8 15 15 15

Individual 4 2 5 12 12 12

Individual 5 3 6 10 10 10

Individual 6 3 7 15 15 15

Individual 7 2 6 14 14 14

Consensus 3 6 13 13 13

Estimated number of undiscovered deposits

Consensus undiscovered deposit estimates Summary statistics Tract area 

(km2

)

Deposit 

density 

(Ntotal/km2

)

Table B8. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit density for tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane 

Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Cu, copper; Mo, molybdenum; Au, gold; and Ag, silver; in metric tons; Rock, in million metric tons]

0.95 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.05 Mean Mean or 

greater None

Cu 860,000 2,200,000 13,000,000 55,000,000 74,000,000 22,000,000 0.34 0.03

Mo 0 0 44,000 380,000 590,000 130,000 0.26 0.14

Au 88 210 1,100 3,600 4,700 1,600 0.37 0.03

Ag 0 130 2,700 20,000 36,000 7,400 0.24 0.08

Rock 200 510 2,900 11,000 13,000 4,400 0.36 0.03

Material

Probability of at least the indicated amount Probability of

Table B9. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry 

Cu-Au—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.
64 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

distribution and relative qualities of known deposits and 

prospects in the Quesnel and Stikine accreted island-arc 

terranes. Our knowledge of this was based mostly on 

information in the British Columbia and Yukon MINFILE 

databases (MINFILE BC, 2009; MINFILE YT, 2009). In 

MINFILE records, deposits and prospects generally are 

classified in terms of mineral deposit models, such as the 

model for alkalic porphyry Cu-Au deposits by Panteleyev 

(1995), which is appropriate to this tract. Table B6 lists the 

sources of information used to define the tract and estimates.

Our estimates for undiscovered deposits in this tract are 

supported by an inventory of porphyry copper prospects and 

show a large inventory of 54 significant prospects that are not 

in any group with a known deposit, and they are, therefore, 

eligible to be counted as possible undiscovered deposits. Of 

these 40 significant prospects, 3 are of rank 2 (with small 

estimated resources), 12 are of rank 3 (with intercepts of at 

least 20 m of 0.2 percent copper), and 39 are of rank 4 (with 

intercepts of at least 0.1 percent copper).

Our estimates are constrained by the spatial density 

of known deposits in Quesnellia and Stikinia and by the 

perception that these terranes are well explored for porphyry 

copper. That is why Singer and others (2005) used these 

terranes as examples of well-explored areas in their model of 

deposit densities to be expected in relatively unexplored areas. 

Nevertheless, there are large areas in this permissive tract 

where bedrock exposures mostly are covered by glacial till. 

Although glacial till is not shown on maps of bedrock geology, 

it is widely distributed and can mostly to completely hide 

features the size of a porphyry copper deposit.

There are enough promising independent prospects in this 

tract that we were able to estimate numbers of undiscovered 

deposits at subjective probability levels of 90 percent and 

50 percent. However, there is enough uncertainty about the 

qualities of the many other prospects with little or no assay 

data to indicate the possibility of many more undiscovered 

deposits at the 10-percent level of subjective probability. 

The first round of balloting was private, so we cannot 

know exactly how each panel member weighed the available 

information. Our Canadian panel members could draw on 

the most knowledge and experience, which they generously 

shared during the presentations and discussions that preceded 

estimation. 

Estimates by each team member were compiled and 

revealed to the team. Reasons for high and low estimates 

were elicited and discussed. On the basis of these discussions, 

team members were allowed to adjust their estimates until 

consensus (agreement on an estimate acceptable to the group) 

was reached. Individual and consensus estimates are shown in 

table B8. 

We calculated the spatial density of deposits indicated 

by the 12 known deposits plus our mean estimate of 7 

undiscovered deposits for a total expected number of 19 

deposits, divided by the tract area of 109,290 km2

, yielding 

a density of 0.00017 deposits/km2

. We compared this spatial 

density to spatial densities of porphyry copper deposits 

in well-studied permissive tracts of the world according 

to Singer and others (2005, 2008). This showed that our 

estimated deposit density of about 0.00017 deposits per km2

is just slightly above the slope of the central tendency for 

spatial densities of porphyry copper deposits in well-explored 

areas used to define the deposit density model. Based on this 

comparison, and the mean estimate of 7 undiscovered deposits 

in a tract with 12 known deposits, the assessment team believed 

exploration in the this tract to be fairly mature, with most of the 

undiscovered deposits being concealed or in remote areas.

Probabilistic Assessment Simulation 

Results

Undiscovered resources for the tract were modeled 

using the consensus estimates for numbers of undiscovered 

alkaline porphyry Cu-Au deposits with the porphyry Cu-Au 

model (model 20c; Singer and others, 2008) as input for the 

EMINERS Monte Carlo simulator program (Root and others, 

1992; Bawiec and Spanski, in press). Selected simulation 

results are reported in table B9, and results of the Monte 

Carlo simulation are presented as cumulative frequency plots 

(fig. B2). The cumulative frequency plots show the estimated 

resource amounts associated with cumulative probabilities of 

occurrence, as well as the mean, for each commodity and for 

total mineralized rock. 

References Cited

Barrie, C.T., 1993, Petrochemistry of shoshonitic rocks 

associated with porphyry copper-gold deposits of central 

Quesnellia, British Columbia, Canada: Amsterdam, Elsevier 

Science Publishers B.V., Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 

v. 48, p. 225–228.

Bawiec, W.J., and Spanski, G.T., in press, EMINERS–Economic 

mineral resource simulator, version 3.0: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 2009-1057, program files and 29-p 

Quick-Start Guide.

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., compilers, 2004a, 

YukonAge 2004— A database of isotopic age determinations 

for rock units from Yukon Territory: Yukon Geological 

Survey, CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://ygsftp.gov.

yk.ca/publications/database/yukonage/readme.htm.)

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., 2004b, BCAge 

2004A—A database of isotopic age determinations for rock 

units from British Columbia: British Columbia Ministry of 

Energy and Mines, Geological Survey, Open File 2004-3 

(Release 2.0), 7766 records, 9.3 Mb, accessed December 15, 

2009, at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/

PublicationsCatalogue/OpenFiles/2004/Pages/default.aspx.

Clark, D.A., 1999, Magnetic petrology of igneous intrusions—

Implications for exploration and magnetic interpretation: 

Exploration Geophysics, v. 30, p. 5–26.
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 65

Cox, D.F., 1986a, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu (model 

17), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: 

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 76–81.

Cox, D.F., 1986b, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Au 

(model 20c), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

110–111.

DeGrace, John, Grant, Brian, Grieve, David, Lefebure, 

David, Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, 

Paul, 2008, British Columbia mining and mineral 

exploration overview 2007: British Columbia 

Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, 

Information Circular 2008-1, 30 p. (Also available 

online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/MINING/

GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

DeGrace, John, Fredericks, Jay, Grieve, David, Lefebure, 

David, Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, 

Paul, 2009, British Columbia mining and mineral 

exploration overview 2008: British Columbia 

Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, 

Information Circular 2009-1, 31 p. (Also available 

online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/MINING/

GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

Enns, S.G., Thompson, J.F.H., Stanley, C.R., and Yarrow, 

E.W., 1995, The Galore Creek porphyry copper-gold 

deposits, northwestern British Columbia, in Schroeter, 

T.G., ed., Porphyry deposits of the Northwestern 

Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute of 

Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, p. 

630–649.

Fraser, T.M., Stanley, C.R., Nikic, Z.T., Pesalj, R., and Gorc, 

D., 1995, The Mount Polley alkalic porphyry copper-gold 

deposit, south-central British Columbia, in Schroeter, T.G., 

ed., Porphyry deposits of the Northwestern Cordillera of 

North America: Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy 

and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, p. 609–629.

Gordey, S.P., and Makepeace, A.J., compilers, 1999, Yukon 

digital geology: Geological Survey of Canada Open-File 

D3826, and Geological Services Division, Yukon, Indian 

and Northern Affairs Canada, Open-File 1999-1(D), 

CD-ROM.

Heon, D., compiler, 2003, Yukon regional geochemical 

database 2003—Stream sediment analyses: Exploration 

and Geological Services Division, Yukon Region, Indian 

and Northern Affairs Canada, accessed December 15, 

2009, at http://geomaticsyukon.ca/data_download.html.

Journeay, J.M., and Williams, S.P., 1995, GIS map library, 

a window on Cordilleran geology: Geological Survey 

Canada Open-File 2948, CD-ROM.

Lang, J.R., and Stanley, C.R., 1995, Contrasting styles of 

alkalic porphyry copper-gold deposits in the northern part 

of the Iron Mask batholith, Kamloops, British Columbia, in

Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry deposits of the Northwestern 

Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute of Mining, 

Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, p. 581–592.

Logan, J.M., and Panteleyev, A., 1991, Late Triassic Early 

Jurassic alkaline magmatism and Cu-Au mineralization, 

Galore Creek, northwest British Columbia [abs]: Canadian 

Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, 93rd 

Annual General Meeting, Vancouver, B.C., April, 1991, 

59 p.

Marshall, Brian D., 1993, Conversion of the Radiometric Age 

Data Bank (RADB) to the National Geochronological Data 

Base (NGDB): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 

93-336, 76 p.

Massey, N.W.D., MacIntyre, D.G., Dejardins, P.J., and 

Cooney, R.T., 2005, Digital geology map of British 

Columbia—Whole Province: British Columbia Ministry 

of Energy and Mines, GeoFile 2005-1, compilation scale 

1:1,000,000 (source-map scale 1:250,000).

McMillan, W.J., 1991, Porphyry deposits in the Canadian 

Cordillera, in McMillan, W.J., Höy, T., MacIntyre, D.G., 

Nelson, J.L., Nixon, G.T., Hammack, J.L., Panteleyev, A., 

Ray, G.E., and Webster, I.C.L., Ore deposits, tectonics and 

metallogeny in the Canadian Cordillera: British Columbia, 

Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, Paper 

1991-4, p. 253–276.

McMillan, W.J., Thompson, J.F.H., Hart, C.J.R., and 

Johnston, S.T., 1995, Regional geological and tectonic 

setting of porphyry deposits in British Columbia and 

Yukon Territory, in Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry deposits 

of the Northwestern Cordillera of North America: 

Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, 

Special Volume 46, p. 40–57.

Mihalynuk, M.G., Nelson, JoAnne, and Diakow, L.J., 1994, 

Cache Creek terrane entrapment; Oroclinal paradox within 

the Canadian Cordillera: Tectonics, v. 13, no. 2, p. 575–595.

MINFILE BC, 2009, MINFILE mineral inventory: Province 

of British Columbia, Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, total records 12,523, accessed 

December 2009 at http://MINFILE.gov.bc.ca/.

MINFILE YT, 2009, MINFILE mineral inventory: Yukon 

Province, Yukon Geological Survey, accessed December 

2009 at http://servlet.gov.yk.ca/ygsmin/index.do.

Monger, J.W.H., Wheeler, J.O., Tipper, H.W., Gabrielse, H., 

Harms, T., Struik, L.C., Campbell, R.B., Dodds, C.J., 

Gehrels, G.E., and O’Brien, J., 1991, Part B., Cordilleran 

terranes, in Upper Devonian to Middle Jurassic 

assemblages, chap. 8 of Geology of the Cordilleran 

Orogen in Canada, in Gabrielse, H., and Yorath, C.J., eds., 

Geological Survey of Canada: Geology of Canada, no. 

4, p. 281–327 (Also Geological Society of America, The 

Geology of North America, v. G-2). 

Mortensen, J.K., Ghosh, D.K., and Ferri, F., 1995, U-Pb 

geochronology of intrusive rocks associated with coppergold porphyry deposits in the Canadian Cordillera, in

Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry Deposits of the Northwestern 

Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute of Mining, 

Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, p. 142–158.
66 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Murphy, D.C., van der Heyden, Peter, Parrish, R.R., Klepacki, 

D.W., McMillan, W., Struik, L.C., and Gabites, J., 1995, 

New geochronological constraints on Jurassic deformation 

of the western edge of North America, southeastern 

Canadian Cordillera, in Miller, D.M., and Busby, C., eds, 

Jurassic magmatism and tectonics of the North American 

Cordillera: Geological Society of America Special Paper 

299, p. 159–171.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008a, Canadian aeromagnetic 

data base: Government of Canada, Geological Survey 

of Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth Sciences 

Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.nrcan.

gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008b, Canadian gravimetric 

data base: Government of Canada, Geodetic Information 

System, Geoscience Data Repository, Geodetic Survey 

Division, Earth Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 

2009, at http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008c, National geochemical 

reconnaissance (NGR) stream sediment and water 

geochemical database: Government of Canada, Geological 

Survey of Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth 

Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.

nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Nelson, J., and Colpron, Maurice, 2007, Tectonics and 

metallogeny of the British Columbia, Yukon and Alaskan 

Cordillera, 1.8 Ma to the present, in Goodfellow, W.D., 

ed., Mineral deposits of Canada—A synthesis of major 

deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of 

geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 755–791.

Newell, J.M., and Peatfield, G.R., 1995, The Red-Chris 

porphyry copper-gold deposit, northwestern British 

Columbia, in Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry deposits of 

the Northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian 

Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special 

Volume 46, p. 674–688.

New Gold Inc., 2011, New Gold Inc., A clear direction—2010 

mine tour, New Afton project, Kamloops, British 

Columbia, September 22-23, 2010: New Gold Inc., 

accessed January 25, 2011 at http://www.newgold.com/

Theme/NewGold/files/newgoldpresafton.PDF, and http://

www.newgold.com/Properties/Projects/NewAfton.

Ney, C.S., Cathro, R.J., Panteleyev, A., and Rotherham, 

D.C., 1976, Supergene copper mineralization, in

Sutherland Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining 

and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney 

Volume, p. 72–78.

Nokleberg, W.J., West, T.D., Dawson, K.M., Shpikerman, 

V.I., Bundtzen, T.K., Parfenov, L.M., Monger, J.W.H., 

Ratkin, V.V., Baranov, B.V., Byalobzhesky, S.G., Diggles, 

M.F., Eremin, R.A., Fujita, K., Gordey, S.P., Gorodinskiy, 

M.E., Goryachev, N.A., Feeney, T.D., Frolov, Y.F., Grantz, 

A., Khanchuk, A.I., Koch, R.D., Natalin, B.A., Natapov, 

L.M., Norton, I.O., Patton, W.W. Jr., Plafker, G., Pozdeev, 

A.I., Rozenblum, I.S., Scholl, D.W., Sokolov, S.D., 

Sosunov, G.M., Stone, D.V., Tabor, R.W., Tsukanov, N.V., 

and Vallier, T.L., 1998, Summary terrane, mineral deposit, 

and metallogenic belt maps of the Russian Far East, 

Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 98-136, CD-ROM. (Also 

available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1998/of98-136/.)

Panteleyev, Andre, 1995, Porphyry Cu-Au—Alkalic (model 

L03), in Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., Selected 

British Columbia mineral deposit profiles, vol. 1—

Metallics and coal: British Columbia Ministry of 

Employment and Investment, Energy and Minerals 

Division, Open File 1995-20, p. 83–86, accessed 

May 29, 2008, at http://www.em.gov.bc.ca/Mining/

Geolsurv/MetallicMinerals/MineralDepositProfiles; 

http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/

MineralDepositProfiles/. 

Pilcher, S.H., and McDougall, J.J., 1976, Characteristics 

of some Canadian Cordilleran porphyry prospects: in

Sutherland Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining 

and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney 

Volume, p. 79–82.

Read, P.B., Woodsworth, G.J., Greenwood, H.J., Ghent, 

E.D., and Evanchick, C.A., 1991, Metamorphic map of the 

Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 

1714A, scale, 1:2,000,000.

Root, D.H., Menzie, W.D., and Scott, W.A., 1992, Computer 

Monte Carlo simulation in quantitative resource 

estimation: Natural Resources Research, v. 1, no. 2, p. 

125–138.

Schroeter, T.G., ed., 1995, Porphyry deposits of the 

Northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian 

Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special 

Volume 46, 888 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Cathro, Michael, Grieve, David, Lane, 

Robert, Pardy, Jamie, and Wojdak, Paul, 2006, British 

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 

2005: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2006-1, 20 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Grieve, David, Lane, Robert, Madu, Bruce, 

Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2007, British 

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 

2006: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2007-1, 28 p.

Sinclair, W.D., 2007, Porphyry Deposits, in Goodfellow, 

W.D., ed., Mineral deposits of Canada; A synthesis of 

major deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of 

geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 223–243.

Singer, D.A., and Menzie, W.D., 2005, Statistical guides to 

estimating the number of undiscovered mineral deposits: 

an example with porphyry copper deposits, in Cheng, 

Qiuming and Bonham-Carter, Graeme, eds., Proceedings 
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 67

of IAMG—The annual conference of the International 

Association for Mathematical Geology: Geomatics Research 

Laboratory, York University, Toronto, Canada, p. 1028-1033.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., Menzie, W.D., and Berger, B.R., 

2005, Porphyry copper density: Economic Geology, v. 100, 

no. 3, p. 491–514.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2008, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world—Database, map, and grade and 

tonnage models, 2008: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2008-1155, 45 p., accessed December 15, 2009, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1155/.

Sketchley, D.A., Rebagliati, C.M., and DeLong, C., 1995, 

Geology, alteration and zoning patterns of the Mt. Milligan 

copper-gold deposits, in Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry 

deposits of the northwestern Cordillera of North America: 

Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, 

Special Volume 46, p. 650–665. 

Stakiw, Stephen, 2004, Getting active on Afton—A new 

project in an old camp: The Northern Miner, v. 90, no. 31, 

accessed January 25, 2011 at http://web.viu.ca/earle/

geol390/northern-miner-afton.pdf.

Sutherland Brown, A., 1976, ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining 

and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney 

Volume, 510 p., 2 pl., scale 1:250,000,000 (in pocket).

Wheeler, J.O., and McFeely, P., 1991, Tectonic assemblage map 

of the Canadian Cordillera and adjacent parts of 

the United States of America: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Map 1712A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Wheeler, J.O., Brookfield, A.J, Gabrielse, H., Monger, J.W.H., 

Tipper, H.W., and Woodsworth, G.J., 1991, Terrane map of 

the Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 

1713A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Zartman, R.E., Cole, J.C., and Marvin, R.F., 1976, Users guide 

to the Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB): U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report, 76-674, 77 p.
68 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada













Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

Afton-Ajax

Axe-Primer

Copper Mtn

Polley

Lorraine

Galore Ck

Chuchi

Mount Milligan

Red Chris 

Sulphurets 

Minto

Williams Creek (Carmacks)

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 with names

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2002

Porphyry copper prospect;

 (see figure B1B for names)

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

0 500 1,000 1,500 KILOMETERS

A

Figure B1. Maps showing permissive tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia 

and Yukon Territory, Canada. A, Locations of known preaccretionary alkalic porphyry Cu-Au deposits (named) and significant 

prospects (not named). B, Locations of preaccretionary alkalic porphyry Cu-Au deposits (not named) and significant prospects (named).
Appendix B—Tract 003pCu2002 69















Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

Redgold

Katie

Rayfield Copper

Star

Worldstock

Mouse Mountain

Big Bulk

Grizzly

Hat

HU

MFJ

Murphy Lake

Tim #1

Aurizon Gold

Clay

Miracle

Dorothy

MacKenzie

Auddie

TAK

Discovery

Timber

Osilinka

ATO

Moss

COL

Eagle

SRM

Skook

Vector

Camp

Heath

Aplite Creek

Falcon

Wood GP

Joker

Hilltop

Maxine

Phil

Grey Mask

Ann North

Hoey

Wolverine

Dick Creek 

Copper Creek

Siwash

Thalia

Lucky

Blue Jay

Rats

Miner

Big Kidd

G.E.

Pine (Axe-Primer)

Pip

Peach 3

Peach-Melba

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 (see figure B1A for names)

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2002

Porphyry copper prospect;

 with names

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

0 500 1,000 1,500 KILOMETERS

B

Figure B1.—Continued
70 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Mean Au

Mean

 Ag

Mean Rock

Mean Cu

Mean Mo

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

Material, metric tons

Probability

Cu

Mo

Au

Ag

Rock

Mean

Cu

Mean

Mo

Mean

Au

Mean

Ag

Mean

Rock

0.1 1 10 100 1T 10T 100T 1M 10M 100M 1B 10B 100B 1Tr

Figure B2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer simulation of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2002 (CA02), Intermontane Island-Arc Porphyry Cu-Au—British Columbia and 

Yukon Territory, Canada. (T=thousands, M=millions, B=billions, Tr=trillions).
Appendix C—Tract 003pCu2003 71

Deposit Type Assessed: Porphyry Copper

Descriptive model: Porphyry copper (Cox, 1986a, Berger and others, 2008), porphyry Cu-Mo (Cox, 

1986b), porphyry Cu-Au (Cox, 1986c), porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (Panteleyev, 1995)

Grade and tonnage model: Canadian Cordillera Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (appendix G)

(Table C1 summarizes selected assessment results)

Location

This tract is in the Cordilleran region of western Canada. It is in the Insular belt, which includes the westernmost margin 

and offshore islands of western British Columbia and southwestern Yukon (figs. 1, C1). 

Geologic Feature Assessed

Calc-alkaline igneous rocks of mainly Jurassic (Late Triassic to Early Cretaceous) age in accreted and synaccretionary 

terranes of mixed island-arc and continental arc affinities.

Delineation of the Permissive Tract

Geologic Criteria

The fundamental units for delineation of this permissive tract are Mesozoic calc-alkaline igneous rocks of the Insular belt, 

which is outboard from (west of) the Coast belt of batholithic and metamorphic rocks (fig. 1). The Insular belt consists of the

Appendix C. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 

003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island-and Continental 

Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada 

By Mark J. Mihalasky1 , Arthur A. Bookstrom2 , Thomas P. Frost3 , and Steve Ludington4 , with contributions 

from James M. Logan5

 , Andre Panteleyev6 , and Grant Abbott7

1

U.S. Geological Survey, mjm@usgs.gov.

2

U.S. Geological Survey, abookstrom@usgs.gov.

3

U.S. Geological Survey, tfrost@usgs.gov. 

4

U.S. Geological Survey, slud@usgs.gov.

5

British Columbia Geological Survey, Jim.Logan@gov.bc.ca. 

6

XDM Geological Consultants, xdmgeo@shaw.ca.

7

Yukon Geological Survey, grant.abbott@gov.yk.ca. 

[km, kilometers; km2, square kilometers; t, metric tons]

Table C1. Summary of selected resource assessment results for tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

Date of 

assessment

Assessment 

depth (km)

Tract area 

(km2

)

Known copper 

resources (t)

Mean estimate of 

undiscovered 

copper resources (t)

Median estimate of 

undiscovered copper 

resources (t)

2009 1 58,360 3,170,000 3,000,000 1,900,000
72 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Wrangellia terrane in its southern part and the Alexander 

terrane in its northern part (fig. 2). Wrangellia was connected 

to the Alexander terrane by Pennsylvanian time and accreted 

to the Intermontane terranes of the North American margin 

by the mid-Jurassic (see Nelson and Colpron, 2007). Both of 

these terranes consist of volcanic island arcs, oceanic plateaus, 

and associated rock assemblages that are superimposed on 

older fragments of continental crust. Thus, arc magmatism in 

these terranes had mixed continental and oceanic influences. 

Furthermore, the known porphyry copper deposits and 

prospects in this tract formed as Wrangellia collided with 

Stikinia, during the accretion of Quesnellia, Stikinia, and 

Wrangellia to the western margin of North America. Thus, the 

formation of porphyry copper deposits in Wrangellia involved 

magmatism related to a subduction zone that extended beneath 

both the island arcs and the continental margin to which they 

were accreting.

Criteria for consideration of rock types as permissive 

for the occurrence of porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits are from 

descriptive models for porphyry copper and Cu-Mo deposits 

by Cox (1986a, b) and for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

deposits of British Columbia by Panteleyev (1995). Permissive 

rock types include phaneritic to porphyritic quartz diorite, 

tonalite, granodiorite, quartz monzonite, monzogranite, and 

granite of calc-alkaline affinity. Equivalent porphyro-aphanitic 

rock types are quartz-andesite, dacite, rhyodacite, quartz-latite, 

and rhyolite porphyries of calc-alkaline affinity. 

According to Gehrels and others (2009), a western 

magmatic belt of the Coast Mountains batholith was active 

in the Alexander and Wrangellia terranes from 177 to 162 

Ma, and from 157 Ma (Early Jurassic) to 142 Ma (Early 

Cretaceous). Calc-alkaline igneous rocks of the Insular 

terranes that range in age from the beginning of Early Jurassic 

to the end of Early Cretaceous time (200 to 100 Ma) are, 

therefore, considered permissive and included in this Insular 

permissive tract. 

As represented on digital geologic maps of British 

Columbia by Massey and others (2005), and of the Yukon by 

Gordey and Makepeace (1999), igneous rocks of permissive 

compositions are included in map units that contain rocks 

ranging in age from Triassic to Cretaceous (251 to 65 Ma). 

In order to capture all permissive rocks of Jurassic to Early 

Cretaceous age, it was necessary to include some rocks of 

older and younger ages. Thus, the Insular permissive tract is 

artificially large, and therefore its predicted spatial density 

of deposits is lower than would be expected. Nevertheless, 

we decided that a larger-than-intended permissive tract 

was necessary to include all permissive areas. Given more 

complete dating of igneous rock units, the tract could be made 

smaller and internally consistent.

Tract Delineation Process

We used digital tectonic-assemblage maps by Wheeler 

and McFeely (1991) and by Journeay and Williams (1995) 

to identify the areas of the Insular Superterrane and its 

constituent Wrangel and Alexander terranes. We used digital 

geologic maps of British Columbia by Massey and others 

(2005) and the Yukon Territory by Gordey and Makepeace 

(1999) to identify areas of permissive rocks. Geologic 

information in attribute tables associated with those maps 

allowed us to identify polygons representing lithologic 

assemblages containing rocks of the appropriate age and 

composition to be included in this permissive tract. We 

excluded polygons representing lithologic assemblages not 

considered permissive by reason of age or composition, and 

we recorded a reason for their exclusion in the attribute table 

for the tract.

Table C2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 2005) and Yukon 

Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC JKdr Jurassic to Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKg Jurassic to Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC JKgd Jurassic to Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC TrKgr Triassic to Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EMJIfp Early Jurassic to Middle Jurassic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EMJIgd Early Jurassic to Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSC Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBI Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

YT JKS Late Jurassic to earliest Cretaceous granodiorite/tonalite

BC lJvf Lower Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lJBca Lower Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

a. Intrusive rocks

b. Volcanic rocks
Appendix C—Tract 003pCu2003 73

Digital geologic-map units that include polygons 

assigned to this permissive tract are listed in table C2 for 

intrusive rocks and volcanic rocks. From each map unit 

listed, we selected only those sets of polygons that represent 

lithologic assemblages containing permissive rock types. 

Sets of polygons for which descriptions include rocks of 

ages or compositions that are permissive for more than one 

tract are included in each of the tracts for which they are 

permissive. 

To define the area included in this permissive tract, 

we applied the following procedures. From descriptive 

information in the attribute tables that accompany the digital 

geologic maps of British Columbia and the Yukon Territory, 

we classified map units as permissive or nonpermissive, 

according to the geologic criteria described above and 

summarized in table C2. The map units classified as 

permissive for this tract represent the bedrock-surface 

expressions of intermediate to felsic igneous rocks of calcalkaline affinity and of Late Triassic to Early Cretaceous age 

in the Wrangel and Alexander accreted island-arc terranes.

To polygons or groups of polygons that represent the 

bedrock-surface expression of permissive map units, we 

added a 10-km buffer to the mapped margins of permissive 

intrusions. This buffer expanded the area of the permissive 

tract to include all significant porphyry copper prospects, and 

to include possible unexposed permissive rocks and porphyry 

copper deposits. Examples of permissive rock types below the 

mapped surface would include permissive plutons that expand 

downward, subsurface satellite cupolas of intrusions, and 

unmapped parts of plutons or porphyry copper occurrences 

that are covered by younger materials (such as basalt flows, 

glacial till, colluvium, alluvium, or basin-fill sediments less 

than 1 km thick) or are structurally covered. We also applied 

a 2-km buffer around the outer margins of polygons or groups 

of polygons representing permissive volcanic rocks, the thin 

edges of which might be discontinuous, covered, or otherwise 

not mapped at the scale of our source maps. For additional 

information on buffering, see the “Permissive Tracts for 

Porphyry Copper” section in the Introduction of this report.

After buffering, we examined aeromagnetic, gravimetric, 

and geochemical anomaly maps for evidence of unmapped 

permissive igneous rocks or hydrothermal systems (Natural 

Resources Canada, 2008a, b, c). Positive aeromagnetic and 

gravity anomalies were interpreted as possible evidence 

for granitoid intrusions, or magnetite-bearing hydrothermal 

systems (see Clark, 1999, for discussion). Particular caution 

was exercised in the Yukon Territory, because magnetic highs 

also correlated with nonpermissive flood basalts of the Nikolai 

greenstone belt. We trimmed the northeastern part of the 

northern segment of this permissive tract in order to exclude 

probable Nikolai greenstones in the subsurface. West of that, 

we interpreted a large gravity low (Natural Resources Canada, 

2008b) to represent a large, low-density, probably granitoid 

subsurface intrusion. Although this anomaly is based on 

widely spaced data points, we extended the permissive tract to 

include it. 

A smoothing routine was then applied to the buffered 

tract. A description of the smoothing routine is included in 

the metadata in appendix H. After smoothing, tract-buffer 

zones were trimmed along terrane-bounding faults. Finally, 

areas of post-accretionary intrusions (surrounded by a 250- 

meter buffer) were excluded from the tract-buffer zones. Such 

intrusions and their buffer zones are included in a permissive 

tract for a later time interval.

Geologic Interpretation

According to Nelson and Colpron (2007), the Insular 

terranes originated in the Arctic regime in latest Proterozoic to 

early Paleozoic time. By Late Triassic time, they had migrated 

around the northwest end of Pangea, and in Late Triassic time, 

they passed over a hot spot. This caused widespread NikolaiKarmutsen basaltic volcanism in Wrangellia and rifting with 

basaltic volcanism and formation of volcanic massive sulfide 

deposits in the Alexander terrane. In Middle Jurassic time, 

the Insular terranes collided with Stikinia during the accretion 

of the Intermontane terranes to the western margin of North 

America. 

As the Insular terranes approached the Stikinia in Early 

Jurassic time, eastward subduction beneath the western 

edge of Wrangellia produced andesitic volcanic strata of the 

Bonanza Group, which hosts most of the porphyry copper 

deposits of Vancouver Island. As Wrangellia collided with 

Stikinia, syncollisional plutonism produced calc-alkaline 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au systems in southern Wrangellia. 

Although all of the known porphyry copper deposits and 

significant prospects are on or near Vancouver Island, the 

Insular terranes contain relatively widespread occurrences of 

permissive calc-alkaline igneous rocks on the Queen Charlotte 

Islands and further north. 

Known Deposits

The Hushamu and Island Copper deposits (table C3) are 

the only porphyry copper deposits in this tract (after grouping 

using the 2-km rule).

The Island Copper mine is in the northern part of 

Vancouver Island. It was mined from 1971 to 1994, from 

an open pit that began near sea level, and bottomed at 380 

m below sea level. According to Perello and others (1995) 

it was a porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposit in and around a 

Middle Jurassic dike-like composite intrusion of rhyodacite 

porphyries with marginal and interior hydrothermal breccias. 

This intrusion was emplaced into andesitic volcanic rocks of 

the Lower Jurassic Bonanza Group. The intrusion strikes westnorthwest and dips steeply northeast. It is about 1.2 km long 

and 100 to 300 m thick. Ore, consisting of several generations 

of chalcopyrite- and molybdenite-bearing veins, occurs as 

an annulus around a low-grade to barren core of relatively 

unaltered rock. This core is surrounded by a quartz-amphibolemagnetite zone, which grades progressively outward to 
74 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

biotite-magnetite, chlorite-magnetite, and epidote zones. Most 

of the ore is in the biotitic zones. Chalcopyrite is the main 

copper-bearing mineral. Bornite occurs in marginal breccias.

The Hushamu deposit is about 26 km west-northwest 

of the Island Copper mine, in the northern part of Vancouver 

Island. Like the Island Copper deposit, the Hushamu deposit is 

elongate west-northwest. It is exposed along the northeastern 

slope of McIntosh Mountain. According to Dasler and others 

(1995), ore is characterized by multistage quartz-magnetitechalcopyrite-pyrite stockworks and disseminations. Early 

potassic alteration assemblages are overprinted by chlorite 

and minor albite. A deep Cu-Au zone coincides with Middle 

Jurassic quartz diorite and feldspar porphyry intrusions into 

andesitic volcanic host rocks of the Lower Jurassic Bonanza 

Group. Intermediate exposures are dominated by a large multistage hydrothermal breccia complex containing mineralized 

fragments cut by moderately mineralized feldspar porphyry 

intrusions, pebble breccias and late rhyolite dikes. Uppermost 

exposures consist of silicified hydrothermal breccias and 

vuggy silica rock with an epithermal alteration assemblage of 

clay minerals. 

Prospects, Mineral Occurrences, and Related 

Deposit Types

The Island Copper deposit is the central deposit in a 

west-northwest-trending group of at least 5 porphyry copper 

occurrences that is about 14 km long. From the southeast 

to northwest, these include the Rupert prospect at Rupert 

Inlet, the Yankee Girl prospect at Red Island, the Island 

Copper deposit, the Bay prospects near Bay Lake, and the 

Northwest zone of copper and molybdenum anomalies. These 

occurrences are listed in table C4, and shown in figure 4 of 

Perello and others (1995, p. 218). They are considered part 

of the Island Copper group. Therefore, they are not shown 

individually in figures C1A and C1B. Similarly, the HEP 

prospect is considered part of the Hushamu group.

The Rupert, Road, and Yankee Grid prospects are eastsoutheast of the Island Copper pit, and the Bay prospects 

are to the west-northwest. Perello and others (1995) also 

mentioned a copper skarn zone, called the NW zone, which 

is about 1 km northwest of the Bay prospects. Their zones of 

altered rocks are less than about 2 km apart, thus ore found 

in them will be considered part of the Island Copper deposit. 

Four have characteristics of both epithermal and porphyry 

copper deposits, and the NW zone has characteristics of both 

skarn and porphyry copper deposits. Each is associated with 

intrusions that are elongate west-northwest, and they are 

arranged in an en-echelon pattern. Perello and others (1995) 

suggested that they formed in dilational jogs along a rightlateral fault zone.

The HEP prospect is within the Hushamu group, and the 

Lois prospect also is in the northern part of Vancouver Island. 

The Camp and Tex (Dude) prospects are in the east-central 

part of the island. 

The Camp, Lois, and Dude prospects are classified as 

significant independent, rank 4 prospects. Grab-sample assays 

from these prospects indicate more than 0.1 percent copper, 

but significantly long intercepts of higher-grade copper 

concentrations have not been reported. 

No other prospects in the Insular terrane are known to be 

significant porphyry copper prospects.

Table C3. Known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—

British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Ma, million years; NA, not applicable; –, no data; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; Cu-Mo subtype, deposits that have 

Au/Mo ratios <3 or average Mo grades >0.03%; Cu-Au subtype, deposits that have Au/Mo ratios >30 or average Au grades >0.2 g/t. Contained Cu in metric 

tons is computed as (tonnage Mt x 1,000,000) x (percent Cu / 100); gs, coordinates of this site are used for the group location; *, estimated tonnage and grade 

from an unsubstantiated press release (not used in grade and tonnage model); **, partial tonnage and grade for a deposit that is known to be open to extension 

(not used in grade and tonnage model). For group aggregates: the latitude and longitude, subtype, and age is that of the deposit with the largest Cu resources; the 

Cu and Mo grades are tonnage-weighted averages calculated using the computed contained Cu and Mo as (t contained Cu or Mo / (Mt x 1,000,000)) x 100 (note 

that the computed contained Mo is not shown in this table); and the Au and Ag grades are a tonnage-weighted average calculated as g/t x Mt. For sources of age, 

tonnage, and grade information, see appendix F. Resource estimates are through 2009, but include updates for 2010 when available.]

Name Latitude Longitude Subtype Age (Ma) Tonnage (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t) Contained Cu (t)

HUSHAMU GROUP

Hushamu gs 50.675 -127.858 NA 170 735.4 0.198 0.011 0.247 – 1,460,000

Red Dog 50.711 -127.972 Cu-Au 172 45 0.35 0.006 0.44 – 158,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 50.675 -127.858 NA 780.4 0.207 0.011 0.258 – 1,620,000

INDIVIDUAL DEPOSIT

Island Copper 50.6 -127.475 NA 167 377 0.41 0.017 0.19 1.4 1,550,000

INDIVIDUAL DEPOSIT TOTAL 377 1,550,000

TRACT TOTAL 1,157.40 3,170,000

TRACT ROUNDED TOTAL 1,160 3,170,000
Appendix C—Tract 003pCu2003 75

Exploration History

Aeromagnetic surveys by the British Columbia 

Department of Mines sparked interest in the Island Copper 

and Hushamu areas. Exploration in the area of the Island 

Copper group began in 1965, and the discovery hole was 

drilled at Island Copper in 1967. By 1969, the Island Copper 

deposit had been defined on the basis of 35,600 m of drilling 

in 185 core holes. The Expo claim block, which contains the 

Hushamu deposit, was staked in 1966. By 1975, the Hushamu 

deposit had been identified as the best prospect in the Expo 

claim block, and a preliminary estimate of the Hushamu 

resource had been made. 

Table C5 summarizes recent porphyry-copper exploration 

activities in this tract. These exploration activities have all 

occurred on Vancouver Island in the Wrangel terrane of the 

Insular Superterrane. From 2004 to 2007 there was about 8.9 

km of drilling in and around known ore zones of the Hushamu 

group and about 1.27 km of drilling on the rank-4 Tex (or 

Dude) prospect. Thus, about 87 percent of this drilling has 

been done in or around a known group of ore zones, and 

about 13 percent has been done on a single rank-4 prospect. 

This information is from annual British Columbia Mines and 

Mineral Exploration overviews by Schroeter and others (2006, 

2007) and DeGrace and others (2008, 2009).

Sources of Information

Principal sources of information used by the assessment 

team for delineation of tract 003PCu2003 are listed in table 

C6. 

Grade and Tonnage Model Selection

As discussed in the Introduction, and as shown in 

appendix G, a new grade and tonnage model for Canadian 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits was constructed due to the lower copper 

grades present in Canadian examples compared to global 

models (Singer and others 2008).

Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au

The deposits and prospects of permissive tract 

003pCu2003 (CA03), as well as those of tracts 003pCu2001 

(CA01), 003pCu2004 (CA04), and 003pCu2005 (CA05), fit 

the descriptive model for Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of 

British Columbia (Panteleyev, 1995) and the Yukon Territory 

(Panteleyev, 2005). After spatial grouping according to the 

2-km rule, 34 known deposits of this subtype are present in 

the Canadian Cordillera (2 of which occur in this tract). In 

aggregate, when compared to the Singer and others (2008) 

grade and tonnage models, the Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits 

are on average lowest in tonnage, lowest in copper grade, 

higher in molybdenum grade (except for model 21a), higher in 

gold grade (except for model 20c), and highest in Ag grade.

Statistical tests at a 1-percent screening level on these 

deposits (as a group) indicate that their molybdenum grade 

and gold grade distribution means are not statistically different 

from the general (models 17, 20c, and 21a combined) or 

Cu subtype (model 17) porphyry copper grade and tonnage 

models of Singer and others (2008) (see tables G2a and 

b). Neither is their tonnage distribution mean statistically 

different from the general, Cu subtype, or Cu-Au subtype 

Table C4. Significant porphyry Cu±Mo±Au prospects in tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[Ma, million years; –, not applicable; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; g/t, gram per metric ton; gs, group site-coordinates of this site are used for the group 

location. For sources and additonal information about age, tonnage, grade and comments, see appendix F. For mineral name abbreviations under “Comments”, 

see appendix F.]

Group Name Rank Latitude Longitude Age (Ma) Comments

Hushamu HEP 3 50.694 -127.893 172 Resource: 0.046 Mt ore @ 0.8% Cu (362t Cu); with porphyry-Cu and epithermal 

features

Island Bay 21 4 50.611 -127.512 165 Intercept: 1.4 m, 4.17% Cu, 0.34 g/t Au, 34.3 g/t Ag; with porphyry-Cu and 

epithermal features

Island Bay 29 5 50.596 -127.456 165 Intercept: interval unavailable; with porphyry-Cu and epithermal features

Island Bay 56 5 50.631 -127.522 165 Intercept: interval unavailable; with porphyry-Cu and epithermal features

Island Road 5 50.597 -127.463 167 Intercept: interval unavailable; with porphyry-Cu and epithermal features

Island Rupert 5 50.588 -127.39 165 Intercept: interval unavailable; with porphyry-Cu and epithermal features

Island Yankee Girl 5 50.593 -127.456 165 Intercept: interval unavailable; with porphyry-Cu and epithermal features

– Camp Lake 4 49.907 -125.616 168 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.439% Cu, 0.0019% Mo, 0.163 g/t Au, 2.5 g/t Ag; 

hand trenching, geochem, ground mag, 576 m drilled, 7 holes

– Lois 4 50.259 -127.616 154 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.15% Cu; several styles and locations of weak 

mineralization; erratic cpy and mo in biotite-altered zone

– Tex (Dude) 4 49.63 -124.312 168 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.147% Cu, 0.006%Mo

Significant individual porphyry Cu prospects

Significant porphyry Cu prospects in groups of known porphyry Cu deposits and prospects
76 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Table C5. Readily available recent exploration activities for deposits and prospects in tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), 

Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[This information was compiled from Schroeter and others (2006, 2007) and DeGrace and others (2008, 2009). Web-site addresses 

of “Operators” are listed in the table in appendix F; AMG, airborne magnetic; CD, core drilling; EM, electromagnetic surveys; G, 

geologic mapping; GC, geochemical sampling (rock, soil, silt, etc.); PR, prospecting; RCD, reverse-circulation drilling; m, meters.] 

Name Rank Operator Activities CD (m)

Hushamu 1 Lumina Resource Corp, Western Copper Corp. PR, G, GC, 

AMG, EM, CD 8,900

Tex (Dude) 4 Pathfinder Resources, Ltd. RCD, GC, CD 1,270

Table C6. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[NA, not applicable]

Theme Name or title Scale Citation

GeoFile 2005-1: Digital Geology Map of British 

Columbia-Whole Province 1:250,000 Massey and others (2005)

Yukon Digital Geology 1:250,000 Gordey and Makepeace (1999)

Geoscience Map 2005-3: Geology of British Columbia 1:1,000,000 Massey and others (2005)

Terrane Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and others (1991)

Tectonic Assemblage Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and McFeely (1991); Journeay and Williams (1995); GIS vector 

representation of Wheeler and McFeely, 1991)

Metamorphic Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Read and others (1991)

YukonAge 2004: A database of isotopic age 

determinations for rock units from Yukon Territory NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004a)

BC Age 2004A-1: A database of Isotopic Age 

Determinations for Rock Units from British Columbia NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004b)

Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB); National 

Geochronological Data Base (NGDB) NA Zartman and others (1976); Marshall (1993)

Porphyry Deposits NA Sinclair (2007)

Porphyry Copper Deposits of the World NA Singer and others (2008)

Lode mineral deposits NA Nokleberg and others (1998)

MINFILE (British Columbia) Mineral Occurrences 

Database NA MINFILE BC (2009)

MINFILE (Yukon) Mineral Occurrences Database NA MINFILE YT (2009)

Porphyry Deposits of the Canadian Cordillera NA CIM SV 15 (Sutherland Brown, 1976)

Porphyry Deposits of the Northwestern Cordillera of 

North America NA CIM SV 46 (Schroeter, 1995)

National Geochemical Reconnaissance (NGR) Stream 

Sediment, Lake Sediment and Water Geochemical Data 

Base

NA Natural Resources Canada (2008c)

Yukon Regional Geochemical Database 2003 - Stream 

sediment analyses NA Heon (2003)

Canadian Geodetic Information System – Gravity (2 km 

grid) – Bouguer anomaly, free-air anomaly, isostatic 

residual anomaly, observed gravity, vertical gradient, and 

horizontal gradient

~1:2,000,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008b)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base–1 km and 200 m 

grid–Residual total field

~1:1,000,000 and 

~1:200,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008a)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base–500 m grid–Residual 

total field, reduced to pole ~1:500,000 B.J. Drenth (unpub. data, 2009)

Exploration

BC Mines and Mineral Exploration Overviews, Yukon 

Mineral Deposits, Natural Resources Canada, Top 100 

Exploration and Deposit Appraisal Projects, 2008, 

Web sites of Mineral Exploration companies

NA Schroeter and others (2006, 2007), DeGrace and others (2007, 2008)

Geochemistry

Geophysics

Geology

Mineral occurrences
Appendix C—Tract 003pCu2003 77

(model 20c) porphyry copper grade and tonnage models of 

Singer and others (2008) (see tables G2a, b, and c). However, 

the copper grade distribution mean is statistically different 

from the general model and all the individual subtype models 

(see tables G2a, b, c, and d). For this reason, a grade and 

tonnage model for the porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tracts 

003pCu2001 (CA01), 003pCu2003 (CA03), 003pCu2004 

(CA04) and 003pCu2005 (CA05) was constructed.

The complete model, which contains data current through 

December 2009, is described in appendix G. For deposits in 

tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), the formal group according to the 

2-km rule, and the name of the independent or groups used, 

along with the tonnages and grades used in the development of 

the grade and tonnage model, are listed in table C7.

Estimate of the Number of 

Undiscovered Deposits

Rationale for the Estimate

Our rationale for estimation of undiscovered porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits in the Insular terranes was based mostly 

on the distribution and relative qualities of known deposits 

and prospects in the Wrangel terrane. Excellent records 

in the British Columbia and Yukon MINFILE databases 

informed our estimates. These estimates were influenced by 

the relatively small inventory of known porphyry copper 

deposits and significant prospects in this tract. Nevertheless, 

the geology is permissive, and there are large areas of heavily 

forested land where bedrock exposures are poor, especially 

where largely covered by unmapped glacial till. Although 

western Canada generally is well explored, it is still possible 

that undiscovered deposits may be hidden by relatively thin 

cover in this tract.

The first round of balloting was private, so we cannot 

know exactly how each panel member weighed the available 

information. Our Canadian panel members could draw on 

the most knowledge and experience, which they generously 

shared during the presentations and discussions that preceded 

estimation. Estimates by each team member were compiled 

and revealed to the team. Reasons for high and low estimates 

were elicited and discussed. On the basis of these discussions, 

team members were allowed to adjust their estimates until 

consensus (agreement on an estimate acceptable to the 

group) was reached. Individual and consensus estimates are 

shown in table C8. Although two participants estimated zero 

undiscovered deposits at the 90-percent level of probability, 

the consensus estimate was for 1 undiscovered deposit at the 

90-percent level.

We calculated the spatial density of deposits indicated 

by the 2 known deposits plus our mean estimate of 2.3 

undiscovered deposits, for a total of 4.3 deposits, which, when 

divided by the tract area of 58,360 km2

, yields a density of 

0.00007 deposits/km2. We compared this spatial density to 

spatial densities of porphyry copper deposits in well-studied 

areas of the world according to Singer and others (2005, 

2008). This showed that, although this estimated spatial 

density is well below the trend of the central tendency of 

the deposit density model, it is within the 10- to 90-percent 

confidence envelope for spatial densities of porphyry copper 

deposits used to define the deposit density model of Singer 

and others (2005, 2008). 

This result can indicate that the estimated number of 

deposits is unusually low for the size of the tract, or that the 

permissive tract is unusually large for the number of deposits 

it is estimated to contain. Alternatively, it may indicate that 

the tract is not particularly prospective compared to the other 

tracts. This tract contains geologic units representing much 

longer time spans than those indicated by the ages of the 

known deposits. The tract is, therefore, larger than it would 

be if the geologic map allowed designation of permissive map 

units according to smaller time intervals, similar to that of the 

known deposits (see the “Geologic Criteria” section above 

for additional information). It is interesting to note, however, 

that a small pulse of magmatism, centered at about 170 Ma 

(see fig. 3B), occurs over an otherwise fairly level interval of 

dated igneous rocks during the time-extent of this tract. This 

pulse, if not an artifact of sampling, is consistent with the ages 

of the known deposits (see fig. 3A; Hushamu, 170 Ma; Island 

Copper, 167 Ma; and Red Dog, 171.5 Ma). 

Table C7. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in tonnage and grade models for Canadian Cordilleran calcalkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au for tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and 

Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Groups include all deposits and prospects with well-defined grades and tonnages that meet the 2-km rule. Mt, million metric tons; %, percent; g/t, 

grams per metric ton; –, no data. Resource estimates available in 2008–2009 have not been updated to include information added to appendix F 

after 2009.] 

GROUP NAME Ore (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t)

Hushamu Hushamu (Total) 780.4 0.207 0.011 0.258 –

Island Island (Total) 377 0.41 0.017 0.19 1.4
78 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Probabilistic Assessment Simulation 

Results

Undiscovered resources for the tract were modeled 

using the consensus estimates for numbers of undiscovered 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits and the grade and tonnage 

models presented in appendix G of this report for Canadian 

Cu±Mo±Au porphyry copper deposits as input for the 

EMINERS Monte Carlo simulator program (Root and others, 

1992; Bawiec and Spanski, in press). Selected simulation 

results are reported in table C9, and results of the Monte 

Carlo simulation are presented as cumulative frequency plots 

(fig. C2). The cumulative frequency plots show the estimated 

resource amounts associated with cumulative probabilities of 

occurrence, as well as the mean for each commodity and for 

total mineralized rock. 

References Cited

Bawiec, W.J., and Spanski, G.T., in press, EMINERS−

Economic mineral resource simulator, version 3.0: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1057, program 

files and 29-p Quick-Start Guide.

Berger, B.R., Ayuso, R.A., Wynn, J.C., and Seal, R.R., 

2008, Preliminary model of porphyry copper deposits: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1321, 

55 p., accessed May 15, 2009, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

of/2008/1321.

Table C8. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit density for tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular 

Mixed Island- and Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Nxx, estimated number of deposits associated with the xxth percentile; Nund, expected number of undiscovered deposits; s,standard deviation; Cv%, 

coefficient of variance; Nknown, number of known deposits in the tract that are included in the grade and tonnage model; Ntotal, total of expected number of 

deposits plus known deposits; area, area of permissive tract in square kilometers; density, deposit density reported as the total number of deposits per km2. 

Nund, s, and Cv% are calculated using a regression equation (Singer and Menzie, 2005). In cases where individual estimates were tallied in addition to the 

consensus estimate, individual estimates are listed.]

N90 N50 N10 N05 N01 Nund s Cv% Nknown Ntotal

1 2 4 5 6 2.3 1.5 66 2 4.3 58,360 0.00007

Estimator N90 N50 N10 N05 N01

Individual 1 0 1 3 6 6

Individual 2 1 3 5 5 5

Individual 3 0 1 3 5 5

Individual 4 1 2 4 6 6

Individual 5 1 2 4 4 4

Individual 6 1 2 4 4 4

Individual 7 1 2 3 3 3

Consensus 1 2 4 5 6 

Estimated number of undiscovered deposits

Consensus undiscovered deposit estimates Summary statistics Tract Area 

(km2

)

Deposit 

density 

(Ntotal/km2

)

[Cu, copper; Mo, molybdenum; Au, gold; and Ag, silver; in metric tons; Rock, in million metric tons]

0.95 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.05 Mean Mean or 

greater None

Cu 0 200,000 1,900,000 7,200,000 9,800,000 3,000,000 0.35 0.07

Mo 0 0 63,000 340,000 520,000 130,000 0.33 0.17

Au 0 0 88 390 550 160 0.32 0.13

Ag 0 0 270 3,100 4,900 1,100 0.27 0.32

Rock 0 51 740 2,900 3,700 1,100 0.37 0.07

Material

Probability of at least the indicated amount Probability of

Table C9. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island- and 

Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.
Appendix C—Tract 003pCu2003 79

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., compilers, 

2004a, YukonAge 2004—A database of isotopic age 

determinations for rock units from Yukon Territory: Yukon 

Geological Survey, CD-ROM. (Also available online at 

http://ygsftp.gov.yk.ca/publications/database/yukonage/

readme.htm.)

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., 2004b, BCAge 

2004A—A database of isotopic age determinations for 

rock units from British Columbia: British Columbia 

Ministry of Energy and Mines, Geological Survey, Open 

File 2004-3 (Release 2.0), 7,766 records, 9.3 Mb, accessed 

December 15, 2009, at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/

Geoscience/PublicationsCatalogue/OpenFiles/2004/Pages/

default.aspx.

Clark, D.A., 1999, Magnetic petrology of igneous 

intrusions—Implications for exploration and magnetic 

interpretation: Exploration Geophysics, v. 30, p. 5–26.

Cox, D.F., 1986a, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu (model 

17), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 76-81.

Cox, D.F., 1986b, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Mo 

(model 21a), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

115–120.

Cox, D.F., 1986c, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Au 

(model 20c), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

110–111.

Dasler, P.G., Young, M.J., Giroux, G., and Perello, J.A., 1995, 

The Hushamu porphyry copper-gold deposit, northern 

Vancouver Island, British Columbia, in Schroeter, T.G., ed., 

1995, Porphyry deposits of the northwestern Cordillera of 

North America: Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy 

and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, p. 367–376.

DeGrace, John, Grant, Brian, Grieve, David, Lefebure, David, 

Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2008, 

British Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 

2007: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2008-1, 30 

p. (Also available online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/

MINING/GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

DeGrace, John, Fredericks, Jay, Grieve, David, Lefebure, 

David, Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, 

Paul, 2009, British Columbia mining and mineral 

exploration overview 2008: British Columbia 

Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, 

Information Circular 2009-1, 31 p. (Also available 

online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/MINING/

GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

Gehrels, G., Rusmore, M., Woodsworth, G., Crawford, M., 

Andronicos, C., Hollister, L., Patchett, J., Ducea, 

M., Butler, R., Klepeis, K., Davidson, C., Friedman, R., 

Haggart, J., Mahoney, B., Crawford, W., Pearson, D., and 

Girardi, J., 2009, U-Th-Pb geochronology of the Coast 

Mountains batholith in north-coastal British Columbia— 

Constraints on age and tectonic evolution: Bulletin of the 

Geological Society of America, v. 121, no. 9/10, p. 1341–

1361.

Gordey, S.P., and Makepeace, A.J., compilers, 1999, Yukon 

digital geology: Geological Survey of Canada Open-File 

D3826, and Geological Services Division, Yukon, Indian and 

Northern Affairs Canada, Open-File 1999-1(D), CD-ROM.

Heon, D., compiler, 2003, Yukon regional geochemical 

database 2003—Stream sediment analyses: Exploration and 

Geological Services Division, Yukon Region, Indian and 

Northern Affairs Canada, accessed December 15, 2009, at 

http://geomaticsyukon.ca/data_download.html.

Journeay, J.M., and Williams, S.P., 1995, GIS map library, a 

window on Cordilleran geology: Geological Survey Canada, 

Open-File 2948, CD-ROM.

Marshall, Brian D., 1993, Conversion of the Radiometric Age 

Data Bank (RADB) to the National Geochronological Data 

Base (NGDB): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 

93-336, 76 p.

Massey, N.W.D., MacIntyre, D.G., Dejardins, P.J., and Cooney, 

R.T., 2005, Digital geology map of British Columbia—

Whole Province: British Columbia Ministry of Energy 

and Mines, GeoFile 2005-1, compilation scale 1:1,000,000 

(source-map scale 1:250,000).

MINFILE BC, 2009, MINFILE mineral inventory: Province of 

British Columbia, Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, total records 12,523, accessed December 2009 at 

http://minfile.gov.bc.ca/.

MINFILE YT, 2009, MINFILE Mineral inventory—Yukon 

Province: Yukon Geological Survey, accessed December 

2009 at http://servlet.gov.yk.ca/ygsmin/index.do.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008a, Canadian aeromagnetic 

data base: Government of Canada, Geological Survey of 

Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth Sciences Sector, 

accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/

index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008b, Canadian gravimetric data 

base: Government of Canada, Geodetic Information System, 

Geoscience Data Repository, Geodetic Survey Division, 

Earth Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://

gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008c, National geochemical 

reconnaissance (NGR) stream sediment and water 

geochemical database: Government of Canada, Geological 

Survey of Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth 

Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.

nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Nelson, J., and Colpron, Maurice, 2007, Tectonics and 

metallogeny of the British Columbia, Yukon and Alaskan 

Cordillera, 1.8 Ma to the present, in Goodfellow, W.D., ed., 

Mineral deposits of Canada; A synthesis of major deposittypes, district metallogeny, the evolution of geological 

provinces, and exploration methods: Geological Association 

of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special Publication 

no. 5, p. 755–791.
80 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Nokleberg, W.J., West, T.D., Dawson, K.M., Shpikerman, V.I., 

Bundtzen, T.K., Parfenov, L.M., Monger, J.W.H., 

Ratkin, V.V., Baranov, B.V., Byalobzhesky, S.G., Diggles, 

M.F., Eremin, R.A., Fujita, K., Gordey, S.P., Gorodinskiy, 

M.E., Goryachev, N.A., Feeney, T.D., Frolov, Y.F., Grantz, 

A., Khanchuk, A.I., Koch, R.D., Natalin, B.A., Natapov, 

L.M., Norton, I.O., Patton, W.W. Jr., Plafker, G., Pozdeev, 

A.I., Rozenblum, I.S., Scholl, D.W., Sokolov, S.D., Sosunov, 

G.M., Stone, D.V., Tabor, R.W., Tsukanov, N.V., and 

Vallier, T.L., 1998, Summary terrane, mineral deposit, and 

metallogenic belt maps of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and 

the Canadian Cordillera: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 98-136, CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://

pubs.usgs.gov/of/1998/of98-136/.)

Panteleyev, Andre, 1995, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (model L04), 

in Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., Selected British 

Columbia mineral deposit profiles, vol. 1—Metallics and 

coal: British Columbia Ministry of Energy of Employment 

and Investment, Energy and Minerals Division, Open 

File 1995-20, p. 87-92, accessed May 29, 2008, at http://

www.em.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geolsurv/MetallicMinerals/

MineralDepositProfiles; http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/

Mining/Geoscience/MineralDepositProfiles/.

Panteleyev, Andre, 2005, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au L04., in

Fonseca, A., and Bradshaw, G., compilers, Yukon Mineral 

Deposits Profiles, Yukon Geological Survey Open File 

2005-5, 175 p., accessed July 28, 2009, at http://www.

geology.gov.yk.ca/mineral_deposit_profiles.html; http://

ygsftp.gov.yk.ca/publications/openfile/2005/of2005_5.pdf; 

http://www.geology.gov.yk.ca/pdf/l04_porphyry_cu_mo_

au.pdf.

Perello, J.A., Fleming, J.A., O’Kane, K.P., Burt, P.D., Clarke, 

G.A., Himes, M.D., and Reeves, A.T., 1995, Porphyry 

copper-gold-molybdenum deposits in the Island Copper 

cluster, northern Vancouver Island, British Columbia, in 

Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry deposits of the Northwestern 

Cordillera of North America: Canadian Institute of Mining, 

Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special Volume 46, p. 214–238.

Pilcher, S.H., and McDougall, J.J., 1976, Characteristics 

of some Canadian Cordilleran porphyry prospects in

Sutherland Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: Canadian Institute of Mining and 

Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, 

p. 79–82.

Read, P.B., Woodsworth, G.J., Greenwood, H.J., Ghent, 

E.D., and Evanchick, C.A., 1991, Metamorphic map of the 

Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 

1714A, scale, 1:2,000,000.

Root, D.H., Menzie, W.D., and Scott, W.A., 1992, Computer 

Monte Carlo simulation in quantitative resource estimation: 

Natural Resources Research, v. 1, no. 2, p. 125–138.

Schroeter, T.G., ed., 1995, Porphyry deposits of the 

Northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian 

Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special 

Volume 46, 888 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Cathro, Michael, Grieve, David, Lane, 

Robert, Pardy, Jamie, and Wojdak, Paul, 2006, British 

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 2005: 

British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, Information Circular 2006-1, 20 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Grieve, David, Lane, Robert, Madu, Bruce, 

Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2007, British 

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 2006: 

British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, Information Circular 2007-1, 28 p.

Sinclair, W.D., 2007, Porphyry deposits, in Goodfellow, 

W.D., ed., Mineral deposits of Canada—A synthesis of 

major deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of 

geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 223–243.

Singer, D.A., and Menzie, W.D., 2005, Statistical guides to 

estimating the number of undiscovered mineral deposits; 

an example with porphyry copper deposits, in Cheng, 

Qiuming, and Bonham-Carter, Graeme, eds., Proceedings 

of IAMG—The annual conference of the International 

Association for Mathematical Geology: Geomatics 

Research Laboratory, York University, Toronto, Canada, p. 

1028–1033.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., Menzie, W.D., and Berger, B.R., 

2005, Porphyry copper density: Economic Geology, v. 100, 

no. 3, p. 491–514.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2008, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world: database, map, and grade and 

tonnage models, 2008: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2008-1155, 45 p., accessed May 1, 2009, at http://

pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1155/.

Sutherland Brown, A., 1976, ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and 

Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, 

510 p., 2 pl., scale 1:250,000,000 (in pocket).

Wheeler, J.O., and McFeely, P., 1991, Tectonic assemblage 

map of the Canadian Cordillera and adjacent parts of the 

United States of America: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Map 1712A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Wheeler, J.O., Brookfield, A.J, Gabrielse, H., Monger, J.W.H., 

Tipper, H.W., and Woodsworth, G.J., 1991, Terrane map 

of the Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Map 1713A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Zartman, R.E., Cole, J.C., and Marvin, R.F., 1976, Users 

guide to the Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB): U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 76-674, 77 p.
Appendix C—Tract 003pCu2003 81













Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

Hushamu

Island Copper

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 with names

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2003

Porphyry copper prospect;

 (see figure C1B for names)

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

0 500 1,000 1,500 KILOMETERS

A

Figure C1. Maps showing tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island-and Continental Arc Porphyry Cu—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. A, Locations of known preaccretionary calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits (named) and prospects (not named). B, Locations of significant prospects for preaccretionary calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au (named) and deposits (not named).
82 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada













Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

0 500 1,000 1,500 KILOMETERS

Camp Lake

Lois

Tex (Dude)

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 (see figure C1A for names)

Assessed porphyry copper tract

 003pCu2003

Porphyry copper prospect;

 with names

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

B

Figure C1.—Continued
Appendix C—Tract 003pCu2003 83

Mean Au

Mean Ag

Mean Rock

Mean Cu

Mean Mo

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

Material, metric tons

Probability

Cu

Mo

Au

Ag

Rock

Mean

Cu

Mean

Mo

Mean

Au

Mean

Ag

Mean

Rock

 0.1 1 10 100 1T 10T 100T 1M 10M 100M 1B 10B 100B 1Tr

Figure C2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer simulation of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2003 (CA03), Insular Mixed Island-and Continental Arc Porphyry Cu—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. (T=thousands, M=millions, B=billions, Tr=trillions).
84 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Deposit Type Assessed: Porphyry Copper

Descriptive model: Porphyry copper (Cox, 1986a, Berger and others, 2008), porphyry Cu-Mo (Cox, 

1986b), porphyry Cu-Au (Cox, 1986c), porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (Panteleyev, 1995)

Grade and tonnage model: Canadian Cordillera Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (appendix G)

(Table D1 summarizes selected assessment results)

Location

This tract is in the Cordilleran region of western Canada. It extends the length of the Canadian Cordillera and from the 

outermost coastal islands to about 600 km inland from them. It includes most of the Insular, Coast, and Intermontane belts 

and part of the Omineca belt in British Columbia and Yukon (figs. 1, D1).

Geologic Feature Assessed

Calc-alkaline igneous rocks of mainly Jurassic (Late Triassic to Early Cretaceous) age in accreted and synaccretionary 

terranes of mixed island-arc and continental arc affinities.

Delineation of the Permissive Tract

Geologic Criteria

We delineated the tract based on the distribution of predominantly calc-alkaline igneous rocks that formed during 

subduction-related continental-arc magmatism that occurred after Middle Jurassic accretion of the Intermontane and Insular 

Appendix D. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 

003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada 

By Mark J. Mihalasky1 , Arthur A. Bookstrom2 , Thomas P. Frost3 , and Steve Ludington4 , with contributions 

from James M. Logan5

 , Andre Panteleyev6 , and Grant Abbott7

1

U.S. Geological Survey, mjm@usgs.gov.

2

U.S. Geological Survey, abookstrom@usgs.gov.

3

U.S. Geological Survey, tfrost@usgs.gov. 

4

U.S. Geological Survey, slud@usgs.gov.

5

British Columbia Geological Survey, Jim.Logan@gov.bc.ca. 

6

XDM Geological Consultants, xdmgeo@shaw.ca.

7

Yukon Geological Survey, grant.abbott@gov.yk.ca. 

[km, kilometers; km2, square kilometers; t, metric tons]

Table D1. Summary of selected resource assessment results for tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

Date of 

assessment

Assessment 

depth (km)

Tract area 

(km2

)

Known copper 

resources (t)

Mean estimate of 

undiscovered copper 

resources (t)

Median estimate of 

undiscovered copper 

resources (t)

2009 1 639,500 17,900,000 13,000,000 11,000,000
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 85

terranes but before Oligocene magmatism in the northern part 

of the Cascadian magmatic arc of the Pacific Northwest region 

of the conterminous United States. 

Lithologic criteria for consideration of rock types as 

permissive for the occurrence of calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits are from descriptive models for porphyry 

copper, Cu-Mo, and Cu-Au deposits by Cox (1986a, b, c) and 

for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of British 

Columbia by Panteleyev (1995). Phaneritic to porphyritic rock 

types associated with such deposits, and therefore considered 

permissive, are quartz diorite, tonalite, granodiorite, quartz 

monzonite, monzogranite, and granite of calc-alkaline 

affinity (table D2a). Porphyro-aphanitic equivalents are 

quartz-andesite, dacite, rhyodacite, quartz-latite, and rhyolite 

porphyries of calc-alkaline affinity and volcaniclastic rocks of 

appropriate age and composition (table D2b).

Most intrusions in this tract are calc-alkaline, but 

a relatively few mildly alkaline (monzonitic to syenitic) 

intrusions of this age-range also are included (these primarily 

occur in central British Columbia, in small spatial clusters 

in the Eocene Endako Group volcanics and the Cretaceous 

Wolverine Range plutonic suite). Calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au systems generally have concentric zones of 

mineralized and altered rocks. Copper tends to be concentrated 

in a central zone with phyllic alteration. Molybdenum tends 

to be concentrated in an inner zone with potassic alteration 

assemblages. Gold tends to be concentrated in an outer zone 

with propylitic and argillic alteration minerals. 

Permissive rocks of this tract are products of postaccretionary, subduction-related, continental-arc magmatism 

that preceded Cascadian magmatism. This imposes age limits 

of Middle Jurassic (172 Ma) to latest Eocene (34 Ma). Ages of 

known porphyry copper deposits and significant prospects in 

this time span range from that of the Middle Jurassic Empress 

prospect (166 Ma) to that of the latest Eocene Mt. Washington 

Copper prospect (35 Ma). However, as represented on 

digital geologic source maps of British Columbia by Massey 

and others (2005) and the Yukon Territory by Gordey and 

Makepeace (1999), some map units represent lithologic 

assemblages containing igneous rocks as old as earliest Early 

Jurassic (200 Ma), and therefore, this tract does include some 

older rocks.

Most of the northern part of the inland boundary of this 

tract is limited by the northwest-striking Tintina Fault (see 

fig. 2), which probably has 430 to 490 km of right-lateral 

displacement (Gabrielse and others, 2006). Most of the 

southern part of the inland boundary of this tract is limited by 

a zone of north-striking normal faults along the eastern margin 

of the Rocky Mountain trench. Price (2009) interpreted the 

Rocky Mountain trench as a broad pull-apart zone, developed 

during Late Cretaceous to Paleocene right-lateral transpression 

south of a northwest-southeast to north-south dilational bend 

in the Tintina fault system. 

In the northern part of the assessment region, east of the 

Tintina Fault, peraluminous to metaluminous intrusions are 

present, which generally fit the geologic criteria described 

earlier, but we do not consider all of these rocks permissive 

for porphyry copper, and exclude some of them from this 

permissive tract. These rocks include the Tombstone, Mayo, 

and Tungsten plutonic suites of granitic intrusions, described 

by Hart and others (2004), and collectively form the midCretaceous Tombstone-Tungsten Belt. Intrusions of the 

Tungsten Suite, located northeast of the Tintina Fault along 

the southeastern border of Yukon (see Hart and others, 2004, 

fig. 1), are peraluminous and of the reduced, ilmenite series 

type. Some of these have associated world-class tungsten 

skarn deposits and geochemical anomalies for copper, zinc, 

tin and molybdenum, but no known porphyry copper deposits 

or prospects. These rocks are considered nonpermissive. 

Extending to the northwest, intrusions of the Mayo Suite are 

sub-alkalic, metaluminous to weakly peraluminous. Some 

of these have associated geochemical anomalies for gold, 

bismuth, tellurium, tungsten, arsenic, silver and lead, but no 

known porphyry copper deposits or prospects. Further to the 

northwest are the alkalic intrusions of the Tombstone Suite. 

Some of these have associated geochemical anomalies for 

gold-copper-bismuth, or uranium-thorium-fluorine. Despite 

their alkaline affinity, some intrusions of this suite have been 

prospected for porphyry copper deposits. The intrusions of the 

northern Mayo Suite and the Tombstone Suite are therefore 

considered permissive for porphyry copper deposits and are 

included in this tract.

Tract Delineation Process

We used digital geologic maps of British Columbia 

by Massey and others (2005) and of the Yukon Territory by 

Gordey and Makepeace (1999) to identify areas of permissive 

rocks. Geologic information in attribute tables associated 

with those maps allowed us to identify polygons representing 

lithologic assemblages containing rocks of the appropriate 

age and composition to be included in this permissive tract. 

We excluded polygons representing lithologic assemblages 

not considered permissive by reason of age or composition 

or depth of emplacement, and we recorded a reason for their 

exclusion in the attribute table for the tract.

Digital geologic-map units that include polygons 

assigned to this permissive tract are listed in table D2a for 

intrusive rocks and table D2b for volcanic rocks. From each 

map unit listed, we selected only those sets of polygons that 

represent lithologic assemblages containing permissive rock 

types. Sets of polygons for which descriptions include rocks 

of ages or compositions that are permissive for more than 

one tract are included in each of the tracts for which they are 

permissive.

To identify the area to be included in this permissive 

tract, we applied the following procedures. From descriptive 

information in the attribute tables that accompany the digital 

geologic maps of British Columbia and the Yukon Territory, 

we classified map units as permissive or nonpermissive, 

according to the geologic criteria described above (and 

summarized in tables D2a and D2b). The map units classified 
86 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Table D2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada. 

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 2005) and 

Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC Czfp Cenozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Czgr Cenozoic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EA Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EBdr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBfp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EBgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBo Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqd Eocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ECgd Early Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECH Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECsy Eocene syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Edr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFL Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFLgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eg Eocene / Middle Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Egd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EGo Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, granodiorite, monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC Egr Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKaqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC EKdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKEnH Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKfp Early Cretaceous to Pliocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EKg Early Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EKgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKGm Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKgr Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKH Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKHM Early Cretaceous monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EKK Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKMAgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EKMdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic to quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EKP Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC EKto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EMH Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EMJSPd Early to Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ENg Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ENqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EOlK Eocene to Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EOlM Eocene to Oligocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EOlT Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EQ Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Eqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ESR Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETE Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETg Paleogene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ETgd Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETgr Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Eto Eocene / Early Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETqd Paleogene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETqm Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETS Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETSBE Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETTs Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Evf Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Jdr Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JFgr Middle to Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Jgd Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKCL Early Jurassic to Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC JKdr Jurassic to Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKg Jurassic to Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC JKgd Jurassic to Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKM Jurassic to Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKP Jurassic to Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKPP Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC JKqp Jurassic to Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC JKto Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC Jqm Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC JTfp Jurassic to Tertiary feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

a. Intrusive rocks 
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 87

Table D2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Terri- tory, Canada.—Continued 

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 

2005) and Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

BC ETgd Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETgr Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Eto Eocene / Early Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETqd Paleogene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETqm Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETS Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETSBE Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETTs Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Evf Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Jdr Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JFgr Middle to Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Jgd Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKCL Early Jurassic to Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC JKdr Jurassic to Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKg Jurassic to Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC JKgd Jurassic to Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKM Jurassic to Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKP Jurassic to Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKPP Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC JKqp Jurassic to Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC JKto Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC Jqm Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC JTfp Jurassic to Tertiary feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC JTgr Jurassic to Tertiary granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC JTH Jurassic to Tertiary quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC JTqp Jurassic to Tertiary high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC KAP Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC KAS Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC KB Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC Czfp Cenozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Czgr Cenozoic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EA Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EBdr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBfp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EBgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBo Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqd Eocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ECgd Early Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECH Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECsy Eocene syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Edr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFL Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFLgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eg Eocene / Middle Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Egd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EGo Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, granodiorite, monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC Egr Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKaqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC EKdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKEnH Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKfp Early Cretaceous to Pliocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EKg Early Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EKgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKGm Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKgr Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKH Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKHM Early Cretaceous monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EKK Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKMAgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EKMdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic to quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EKP Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC EKto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EMH Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EMJSPd Early to Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ENg Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ENqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EOlK Eocene to Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EOlM Eocene to Oligocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EOlT Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EQ Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Eqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ESR Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETE Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETg Paleogene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ETgd Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETgr Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Eto Eocene / Early Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETqd Paleogene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETqm Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETS Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETSBE Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETTs Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Evf Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Jdr Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JFgr Middle to Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Jgd Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKCL Early Jurassic to Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC JKdr Jurassic to Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKg Jurassic to Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC JKgd Jurassic to Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKM Jurassic to Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKP Jurassic to Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKPP Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC JKqp Jurassic to Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC JKto Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC Jqm Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

a. Intrusive rocks 

BC Kdr Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Kg Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Kgd Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Kgr Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC KGWgd Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC KNa Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC KOL Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Kqd Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Kqm Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Ksy Cretaceous syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC KTgd Cretaceous to Tertiary granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC KTgr Early Cretaceous to Pliocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC KTqm Cretaceous to Tertiary quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC KTqp Cretaceous to Tertiary high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC KTsy Early Cretaceous to Pliocene syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC KTW Cretaceous to Tertiary granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC KW Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC KWh Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC KWpe Cretaceous pegmatitic intrusive rocks

BC LJdr Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJEnS Middle to Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJFC Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LJFCL Late Jurassic quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LJFE Middle to Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJFF Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJFG Middle to Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LJFN Late Jurassic quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LJFT Middle to Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LJgd Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJHP Late Jurassic tonalite intrusive rocks

BC LJKdr Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJKgd Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJKgr Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LJKP Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJKqd Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJKqm Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LJKto Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC LJLagr Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LJLaqd Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJLaqm Late Jurassic quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LJMT Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJqd Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LJto Late Jurassic tonalite intrusive rocks

BC LKBdr Late Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKBfp Late Cretaceous feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC LKBg Late Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC LKBgd Late Cretaceous granodioritic to quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKBqm Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LKBqp Late Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC LKCa Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKCL Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LKCT Late Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKdr Late Cretaceous to Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKEnFLgd Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKEnFLqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LKEngr Late Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LKEnP Late Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC LKEnqp Late Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC LKgb Late Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKgd Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKGlgr Late Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LKH Late Cretaceous feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC LKi Late Cretaceous to Pliocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC LKJ Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKKP Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKPedr Late Cretaceous to Paleocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKPegb Late Cretaceous to Paleocene gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKPegd Late Cretaceous to Paleocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

(a. Intrusive rocks) 
88 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Table D2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Terri- tory, Canada.—Continued 

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 

2005) and Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

BC LKBfp Late Cretaceous feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC LKBg Late Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC LKBgd Late Cretaceous granodioritic to quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKBqm Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LKBqp Late Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC LKCa Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKCL Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LKCT Late Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKdr Late Cretaceous to Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKEnFLgd Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKEnFLqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC LKEngr Late Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LKEnP Late Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC LKEnqp Late Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC LKgb Late Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKgd Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKGlgr Late Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC LKH Late Cretaceous feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC LKi Late Cretaceous to Pliocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC LKJ Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKKP Late Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKPedr Late Cretaceous to Paleocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKPegb Late Cretaceous to Paleocene gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKPegd Late Cretaceous to Paleocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKPeqd Late Cretaceous to Paleocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKqd Late Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKqm Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LKTDfp Late Cretaceous to Pliocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC LKTdr Late Cretaceous to Paleogene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKTfp Late Cretaceous to Paleogene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC LKTg Late Cretaceous to Paleogene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC LKTgd Late Cretaceous to Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKto Late Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC LKTpg Late Cretaceous to Paleogene pegmatitic intrusive rocks

BC LKTqd Late Cretaceous to Paleogene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LKTqm Late Cretaceous to Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC LKTqp Late Cretaceous to Paleogene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC LKTSfp Late Cretaceous to Pliocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC LKTto Late Cretaceous to Paleogene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC LKWfp Late Cretaceous feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC LKWqd Late Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC LTrKB Late Triassic to Early Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJA Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJdr Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJgd Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJgr Middle Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC MJKFgr Middle Jurassic to Early Cretaceou granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC Czfp Cenozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Czgr Cenozoic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EA Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EBdr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBfp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EBgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBo Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqd Eocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ECgd Early Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECH Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECsy Eocene syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Edr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFL Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFLgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eg Eocene / Middle Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Egd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EGo Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, granodiorite, monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC Egr Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKaqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC EKdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKEnH Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKfp Early Cretaceous to Pliocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EKg Early Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EKgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKGm Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKgr Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKH Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKHM Early Cretaceous monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EKK Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKMAgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EKMdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic to quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EKP Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC EKto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EMH Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EMJSPd Early to Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ENg Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ENqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EOlK Eocene to Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EOlM Eocene to Oligocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EOlT Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EQ Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Eqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ESR Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETE Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETg Paleogene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ETgd Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETgr Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Eto Eocene / Early Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETqd Paleogene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETqm Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETS Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETSBE Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETTs Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Evf Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Jdr Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JFgr Middle to Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Jgd Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKCL Early Jurassic to Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC JKdr Jurassic to Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKg Jurassic to Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC JKgd Jurassic to Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKM Jurassic to Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKP Jurassic to Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKPP Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC JKqp Jurassic to Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC JKto Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC Jqm Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

a. Intrusive rocks 

BC MJKFgr Middle Jurassic to Early Cretaceou granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC MJKFqp Middle Jurassic to Early Cretaceou high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC MJMc Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJqd Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSe Middle Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLB Early Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLC Middle Jurassic quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLL Middle to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLM Middle to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLqd Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLSqd Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLSt Middle to Late Jurassic gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLSu Middle to Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJSLTw Middle to Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJTqd Middle Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MJTSto Middle Jurassic tonalite intrusive rocks

BC MKAdg Mid-Cretaceous monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC MKBagr Mid-Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC MKEdr Mid-Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MKEgd Mid-Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MKEqd Mid-Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MKEqm Mid-Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MKgb Mid-Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MKgd Mid-Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MKGlgd Mid-Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MKGlqd Mid-Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MKgr Mid-Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC MKqd Mid-Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MKqm Mid-Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBdr Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBgd Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBqd Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBqm Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MLJdr Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJG Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJgd Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJqd Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Mzfp Mesozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC PeEC Paleocene to Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC PeEfp Paleocene to Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC PeEgd Paleocene to Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC PeEgr Paleocene to Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC PeEqm Paleocene to Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC PeEShgr Paleocene to Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC PeEShqd Paleocene to Eocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC PeEShqp Paleocene to Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC Pegd Paleocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Tfp Tertiary feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Tg Tertiary intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Tgd Tertiary granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Tgr Tertiary granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Tqm Tertiary quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

C ihih ll hifliiiik

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

(a. Intrusive rocks) 
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 89

Table D2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Terri- tory, Canada.—Continued 

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 

2005) and Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC Czfp Cenozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Czgr Cenozoic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EA Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EBdr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBfp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EBgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBo Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqd Eocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ECgd Early Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECH Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECsy Eocene syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Edr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFL Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFLgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eg Eocene / Middle Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Egd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EGo Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, granodiorite, monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC Egr Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKaqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC EKdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKEnH Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKfp Early Cretaceous to Pliocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EKg Early Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EKgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKGm Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKgr Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKH Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKHM Early Cretaceous monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EKK Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKMAgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EKMdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic to quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EKP Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC EKto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EMH Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EMJSPd Early to Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ENg Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ENqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EOlK Eocene to Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EOlM Eocene to Oligocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EOlT Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EQ Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Eqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ESR Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETE Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETg Paleogene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ETgd Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETgr Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Eto Eocene / Early Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETqd Paleogene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETqm Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETS Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETSBE Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETTs Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Evf Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Jdr Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JFgr Middle to Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Jgd Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKCL Early Jurassic to Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC JKdr Jurassic to Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKg Jurassic to Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC JKgd Jurassic to Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKM Jurassic to Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKP Jurassic to Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKPP Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC JKqp Jurassic to Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC JKto Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC Jqm Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

a. Intrusive rocks 

BC MKqm Mid-Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBdr Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBgd Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBqd Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJBqm Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC MLJdr Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJG Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJgd Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC MLJqd Middle Jurassic to Late Jurassic quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Mzfp Mesozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC PeEC Paleocene to Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC PeEfp Paleocene to Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC PeEgd Paleocene to Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC PeEgr Paleocene to Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC PeEqm Paleocene to Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC PeEShgr Paleocene to Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC PeEShqd Paleocene to Eocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC PeEShqp Paleocene to Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC Pegd Paleocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Tfp Tertiary feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Tg Tertiary intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Tgd Tertiary granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Tgr Tertiary granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Tqm Tertiary quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Tqp Tertiary high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC TrJg Triassic to Jurassic intrusive rocks, undivided

BC TrJqm Triassic to Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC TrKgr Triassic to Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC TrTdr Triassic to Tertiary dioritic intrusive rocks

BC TrTg Triassic to Tertiary intrusive rocks, undivided

BC TTgd Tertiary granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ?gr Age Unknown granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

YT EJgA Early Jurassic granodiorite/diorite/monzodiorite

YT EJL Early Jurassic quartz monzonite/granite/aplite/pegmatite/ syenite

YT EJqL Early Jurassic quartz monzonite/granite/aplite/pegmatite

YT EKgT Early Cretaceous granite/granodiorite/quartz monzonite/quartz monzodiorite

YT EKK Late Early Cretaceous granodiorite/quartz diorite/quartz monzonite/diorite

YT ES Eocene tonalite/granodiorite

YT ETgN Early Tertiary granodiorite/quartz monzonite/quartz diorite/diorite/porphyry

YT ETqN Early Tertiary granite/alaskite/quartz monzonite/granodiorite

YT JKS Late Jurassic to earliest Cretaceous granodiorite/tonalite

YT LKfP Late Cretaceous to Tertiary porphyry

YT LKgP Late Cretaceous to Tertiary granodiorite/diorite/quartz diorite

YT LKP? Late Cretaceous to Tertiary quartz monzonite/granite/alaskite/granodiorite/ diorite/quartz diorite

YT LKqM Late Cretaceous granite/quartz monzonite

YT LKqP Late Cretaceous to Tertiary quartz monzonite/granite/alaskite/granodiorite

YT LKyP Late Cretaceous to Tertiary syenite

YT LTrgS Late Triassic granite/granodiorite/orthogneiss/quartz diorite/diorite

YT MJgB mid-Jurassic monzodiorite/quartz monzodiorite/hornblendite/granite/ granodiorite

YT mKdW mid-Cretaceous quartz diorite/diorite

YT mKgS mid-Cretaceous quartz monzonite/granodiorite/quartz diorite/syenite

YT mKgW mid-Cretaceous granodiorite/quartz diorite

YT mKqC mid-Cretaceous granite/quartz monzonite/granodiorite

YT mKqC? mid-Cretaceous granite/quartz monzonite/granodiorite

YT mKqS mid-Cretaceous granite/quartz monzonite/granodiorite

YT mKqT mid-Cretaceous granite/quartz monzonite/granodiorite

YT mKqW mid-Cretaceous quartz monzonite/granite/monzonite/syenite

YT mKT mid-Cretaceous syenite/quartz syenite/granite/monzogranite/clinopyrrox/ tinguiate/granite/quartz monzonite/granodiorite

YT mKW mid-Cretaceous quartz monzonite/granite/monzonite/syenite/ granodiorite/quartz diorite

YT mKyS mid-Cretaceous syenite

YT mKyT mid-Cretaceous syenite/quartz syenite/granite/monzogranite/ clinopyroxenite/tinguiate

YT mKyW mid-Cretaceous syenite/granite/granodiorite

BC EEBvb Eocene basaltic volcanic rocks

b. Volcanic rocks

BC EEG Eocene andesitic and alkaline volcanic rocks

BC EEv Eocene to Oligocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EEva Eocene to Oligocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EEvf Eocene to Oligocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC EKaca Eocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC EKav Eocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EMiE Eocene to Lower Miocene basaltic volcanic rocks

BC EO Eocene to Oligocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC EOH Eocene to Oligocene dacitic volcanic rocks

BC EOlCMv Eocene to Oligocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EOlCMva Eocene to Oligocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EOlCMvd Eocene to Oligocene dacitic volcanic rocks

BC EOldb Eocene to Oligocene diabase, basaltic subvolcanic rocks

BC EOlEv Eocene to Oligocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EON Eocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EONva Eocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EOva Eocene to Oligocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EOvd Eocene dacitic volcanic rocks

BC EOvf Eocene to Oligocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC EPeM Eocene trachytic volcanic rocks

BC EPeMK Eocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EPev Eocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EPrb Eocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC ESv Early Eocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC ESva Early Eocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC ESvb Early Eocene basaltic volcanic rocks

BC ESvc Early Eocene volcaniclastic rocks

BC ESvf Early Eocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC ESvl Early Eocene coarse volcaniclastic and pyroclastic volcanic rocks

BC Evc Eocene volcaniclastic rocks

BC Evd Eocene dacitic volcanic rocks

BC JKca Jurassic to Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC Kca Cretaceous calcalkaline volcanic rocks

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

(b.. Volcanic rocks) 
90 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

BC EOlCMva Eocene to Oligocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EOlCMvd Eocene to Oligocene dacitic volcanic rocks

BC EOldb Eocene to Oligocene diabase, basaltic subvolcanic rocks

BC EOlEv Eocene to Oligocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EON Eocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EONva Eocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EOva Eocene to Oligocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC EOvd Eocene dacitic volcanic rocks

BC EOvf Eocene to Oligocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC EPeM Eocene trachytic volcanic rocks

BC EPeMK Eocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EPev Eocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC EPrb Eocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC ESv Early Eocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC ESva Early Eocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC ESvb Early Eocene basaltic volcanic rocks

BC ESvc Early Eocene volcaniclastic rocks

BC ESvf Early Eocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC ESvl Early Eocene coarse volcaniclastic and pyroclastic volcanic rocks

BC Evc Eocene volcaniclastic rocks

BC Evd Eocene dacitic volcanic rocks

BC JKca Jurassic to Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC Kca Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC Ktva Early Cretaceous to Pliocene andesitic volcanic rocks

BC KTvc Early Cretaceous to Pliocene volcaniclastic rocks

BC Kva Cretaceous andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lJHva Early to Middle Jurassic andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lKca Lower Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC lKGca Lower Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC lKGM Lower Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC lKGva Lower Cretaceous andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lKSB Lower Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC lKSBP Lower Cretaceous undivided volcanic rocks

BC lKSBPva Lower Cretaceous andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lKSBSva Lower Cretaceous andesitic volcanic rocks

BC lKSN Lower Cretaceous undivided volcanic rocks

BC lKSRvf Early Cretaceous rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lKSvf Early Cretaceous rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC lKTca Lower Cretaceous calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC lmJBv Lower Jurassic to Middle Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC luKvc Lower Cretaceous to Upper Cretaceo volcaniclastic rocks

BC luKWv Mid-Cretaceous to Upper Cretaceous undivided volcanic rocks

BC luKWvf Mid-Cretaceous to Upper Cretaceous rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC mJv Middle Jurassic undivided volcanic rocks

BC muJHNa Middle Jurassic to Upper Jurassic rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC muJHo Middle Jurassic to Upper Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC muJHSvb Middle Jurassic to Upper Jurassic basaltic volcanic rocks

BC PeEca Paleocene to Eocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC PeEF Paleocene to Eocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC PeEvf Paleocene to Eocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC TrJN Triassic to Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC TrJNO Triassic to Jurassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC uJBvd Middle to Late Jurassic dacitic volcanic rocks

BC uKEvf Upper Cretaceous to Eocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC uKK Cretaceous / Late Cretaceous andesitic volcanic rocks

BC uKPo Upper Cretaceous undivided volcanic rocks

BC uKPovc Upper Cretaceous volcaniclastic rocks

BC uKQG Upper Cretaceous andesitic volcanic rocks

BC uKva Late Cretaceous andesitic volcanic rocks

BC uKvf Late Cretaceous dacitic volcanic rocks

BC uTrTca Upper Triassic calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

YT ETfN Early Tertiary porphyry/dykes/flows

YT lES1 Lower Eocene rhyolite/andesite/flows/breccia/tuffs/ conglomerate/domes/plugs/laccoliths

YT lES2 Lower Eocene mudstone/sandstone/conglomerate/tuff/ breccia/dacite/rhyolite/flows/dykes/sills

YT lES2? Lower Eocene mudstone/sandstone/conglomerate/tuff/ breccia/dacite/rhyolite/flows/dykes/sills

YT lTR2 Lower Tertiary, mostly(?) Eocene rhyolite/flows/tuff/breccia

YT lTR4 Lower Tertiary, mostly(?) Eocene porphyry/rhyolite

YT mKN mid-Cretaceous andesite/dacite/breccia/tuffs/rhyolite/ porphyry/plugs/dykes/sills

YT mKN? mid-Cretaceous andesite/dacite/breccia/tuffs/rhyolite/ porphyry/plugs/dykes/sills

YT uKC1 Upper Cretaceous basalt/breccia/andesite/porphyry/dacite/ trachyte

YT uKC2 Upper Cretaceous tuff/plugs/necks/flows/porphyry

YT uKW Upper Cretaceous dacite/flows/tuffs/basalt/dykes/sandstone

Table D2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Terri- tory, Canada.—Continued 

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 

2005) and Yukon Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC Czfp Cenozoic feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Czgr Cenozoic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EA Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EBdr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBfp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EBgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBo Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqd Eocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EBqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ECgd Early Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECH Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ECsy Eocene syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Edr Eocene dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFL Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EFLgd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Efp Eocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eg Eocene / Middle Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Egd Eocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EGo Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, granodiorite, monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC Egr Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKaqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC EKdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKEnH Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKfp Early Cretaceous to Pliocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC EKg Early Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EKgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKGm Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKgr Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKH Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKHM Early Cretaceous monzodioritic to gabbroic intrusive rocks

BC EKK Early Cretaceous granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EKMAgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMAto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EKMdr Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMgd Early Cretaceous granodioritic to quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKMqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EKP Early Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqd Early Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EKqm Early Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC EKto Early Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC EMH Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC EMJSPd Early to Middle Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ENg Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ENqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC EOlK Eocene to Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EOlM Eocene to Oligocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC EOlT Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC EQ Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite, porphyritic intrusive rocks

BC Eqm Eocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC Eqp Eocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC ESR Eocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETE Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETg Paleogene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC ETgd Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETgr Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Eto Eocene / Early Eocene tonalite intrusive rocks

BC ETqd Paleogene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC ETqm Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETS Paleogene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC ETSBE Paleogene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC ETTs Paleogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Evf Eocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC Jdr Jurassic dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JFgr Middle to Late Jurassic granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC Jgd Jurassic granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKCL Early Jurassic to Late Cretaceous quartz monzonitic to monzogranitic intrusive rocks

BC JKdr Jurassic to Cretaceous dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKg Jurassic to Cretaceous intrusive rocks, undivided

BC JKgd Jurassic to Cretaceous granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKM Jurassic to Cretaceous gabbroic to dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKP Jurassic to Cretaceous quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC JKPP Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC JKqp Jurassic to Cretaceous high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC JKto Jurassic to Cretaceous tonalite intrusive rocks

BC Jqm Jurassic quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

a. Intrusive rocks 
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 91

as permissive for this tract represent the bedrock-surface 

expressions of intermediate to felsic igneous rocks of calcalkaline affinity and of Jurassic to Eocene age in subductionrelated magmatic arcs along the continental margin. 

To polygons or groups of polygons that represent the 

bedrock-surface expression of permissive map units, we 

added a 10-km buffer to the mapped margins of permissive 

intrusions. This buffer expanded the area of the permissive 

tract to include all significant porphyry copper prospects, and 

to include possible unexposed permissive rocks and porphyry 

copper deposits. Examples of permissive rock types below the 

mapped surface would include permissive plutons that expand 

downward, subsurface satellite cupolas of intrusions, and 

unmapped parts of plutons or porphyry copper occurrences that 

are covered by younger materials (such as basalt flows, glacial 

till, colluvium, alluvium, or basin-fill sediments less than 1 km 

thick) or are structurally covered. We also applied a 2-km buffer 

around the outer margins of polygons or groups of polygons 

representing permissive volcanic rocks, the thin edges of which 

might be discontinuous, covered, or otherwise not mapped at 

the scale of our source maps. For additional information on 

buffering, see the “Permissive Tracts for Porphyry Copper” 

section in the Introduction of this report.

After buffering, we examined aeromagnetic, gravimetric, 

and geochemical anomaly maps for evidence of unmapped 

permissive igneous rocks or hydrothermal systems (Natural 

Resources Canada, 2008a, b, c). Positive aeromagnetic and 

gravity anomalies were interpreted as possible evidence for 

granitoid intrusions or magnetite-bearing hydrothermal systems 

(see Clark, 1999, for discussion). Stream-sediment geochemical 

anomalies for copper associated with molybdenum or zinc were 

interpreted tentatively as possible evidence for hydrothermal 

systems. Where such anomalies appeared to indicate that 

permissive intrusions or geochemical anomalies associated with 

this tract might extend beyond the margins of the preliminary 

tract buffers, the tract was expanded to include them. However, 

we excluded geochemical anomalies associated with tungsten. 

A smoothing routine (described in appendix H, metadata) 

was then applied to the buffered tract. Finally, buffer zones were 

trimmed so as not to extend east of the Tintina Fault, which 

bounds the northeastern margin of the tract. 

Geologic Interpretation

The Endako porphyry Mo deposit, in central British 

Columbia, is the oldest porphyry-style deposit in this magmatic 

belt. The age of the Endako deposit is about 144 Ma, according 

to Re-Os dates on molybdenite from the Endako deposit and 

U-Pb dates on zircon from the Endako Quartz Monzonite 

(Selby and Creaser, 2001; Whalen and others, 2001; Bysouth 

and Wong, 1995). According to Nelson and Colpron (2007, p. 

779), the Endako deposit formed near the inboard margin of 

early post-accretionary continental-arc magmatism (150 to 135 

Ma). The Jean porphyry copper deposit, near the east-central 

margin of this tract, is associated with granodiorite, dated 

134±6 Ma (average of K-Ar age determinations on biotite 

and hornblende, from 1996, reported in BC MINFILE record 

number 093N 079). 

At least 12 porphyry copper occurrences probably formed 

within this tract during the interval between 105 and 95 Ma. 

These include the Ball Creek, Colossus, Copper Canyon, 

Dobbin, Trudy, Maloney, Suits, and Rita prospects. Most of 

these prospects are in the Intermontane terranes, near the long 

central axis of this permissive tract, but the Colossus prospect 

(~105 Ma) is in Wrangellia, just inland from the northern half 

of Vancouver Island. 

At least 21 porphyry copper deposits formed in Late 

Cretaceous to middle Eocene time, during the interval between 

about 95 and 45 Ma. In southern British Columbia, most Late 

Cretaceous-Eocene porphyry copper deposits are inboard from 

the Coast Range batholith, but a few are outboard from it. In 

central British Columbia most porphyry copper deposits of 

this age are inboard from the Coast Range batholith. Many are 

concentrated along the northeast-trending Skeena arch, which 

is marginal to the south end of the Bowser Basin (see fig. 1). 

In northern British Columbia and the Yukon Territory, most 

porphyry copper deposits and prospects of this age are inboard 

from the Coast Range batholith.

Braided networks of northwest-trending dextral faults 

of Cretaceous and Cenozoic ages parallel the Canadian 

Cordillera (fig. D2). According to Gabrielse and others (2006, 

p. 255), “Geological constraints suggest a total cumulative 

dextral displacement of about 860 km of outermost parts of 

the Cordillera with respect to rocks tied directly to the North 

American craton at their current latitudes.” About half of this 

displacement occurred on mid-Cretaceous faults, such as the 

Teslin, Cassiar, Pinchi, and Northern Rocky Mountain Trench 

Faults. The rest of this displacement occurred during Eocene 

time, primarily on the Tintina and Northern Rocky Mountain 

Trench Faults and splays.

Plate-movement reconstructions by Engebretson and 

others (1985) for time intervals from 85 to 61 Ma indicate 

that the Cordilleran margin of North America moved westnorthwestward over the Kula Plate. During this time interval, 

the Kula Plate was moving northward at about four times the 

westward rate of the North American Plate. This would have 

resulted in oblique subduction of the Kula Plate, which would 

have imposed dextral transpressional stress on the overriding 

continental margin. 

Histograms of age determinations on igneous rocks 

indicate that rates of magmatism increased sharply at about 58 

Ma, spiked at about 51 Ma, and then decreased sharply after 

about 48 Ma (see fig. 3B). This flare-up in rates of magmatism 

probably was related to changes in rates and directions of 

plate movements. According to a plate-movement model by 

Haeussler and others (2003, p. 867), “synchronous near-trench 

magmatism from southeastern Alaska to Puget Sound at about 

50 Ma documents the Eocene subduction of a spreading center, 

the crest of which was subparallel to the continental margin.” 

There is no record of this in the pattern of magnetic anomalies 

on the sea floor, because the hypothetical Resurrection plate 

and the spreading ridges that bounded it were subducted. 
92 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

According to Haeussler and others (2003), onshore 

clues to the previous existence of the Resurrection plate are 

provided by evidence for two trench-ridge-trench (TRT) triple 

junctions. One of these is in southern Alaska, and another 

is centered on the Cascadian margin near Puget Sound. 

The Alaskan TRT is characterized by near-trench anatectic 

granites, intruded into subduction-related accretionary-wedge 

complexes. Ages of such granites decrease eastward along 

the length of the south Alaskan margin. This indicates that 

between 61 Ma and 48 Ma, the Alaskan TRT migrated 2,100 

km eastward. The Cascadian TRT was relatively stationary 

and is characterized by a thick section of oceanic basalts of 

the Siletz River Volcanics, dated between about 64 and 48 

Ma. Haeussler and others (2003) suggested that for these two 

TRT junctions to have been active simultaneously requires a 

northeast-moving Resurrection plate between the Farallon and 

Kula plates. If the spreading ridge between the Resurrection 

and Kula plates were oriented northwest and moved northeast, 

that would move the Alaskan TRT eastward along the southern 

edge of Alaska. If the spreading ridge between Resurrection 

and Farallon plates were oriented northeast and moving 

northeast, the position of the Cascadian TRT would remain 

relatively stationary. 

As the Resurrection plate was progressively consumed 

by subduction, the northwest-trending ridge between the 

Resurrection and Kula plates would have approached the 

continental margin to be drawn into the subduction zone. 

Being subparallel to the western Canadian continental margin, 

that spreading ridge would have been subducted nearly 

simultaneously along the length of the Canadian Cordillera. 

As suggested by Haeussler and others (2003), subduction of 

progressively younger and warmer parts of the Resurrection 

plate would have caused voluminous magmatism and rapid 

uplift in the Canadian continental margin prior to 50 Ma. 

Subsequent subduction of a nearly trench-parallel 

spreading ridge between the Resurrection and Kula plates 

would have caused a surge in rates of generation of Eocene 

igneous rocks and associated porphyry copper deposits. Such 

a surge occurred between about 52 Ma and 48 Ma, as shown 

by the histograms in figure 3. Post-compressional extension, 

possibly related to subduction of this spreading ridge, also 

would have promoted the rise and exhumation of metamorphic 

core complexes and the extensional collapse of the Cordilleran 

fold-and-thrust belt (Haeussler and others, 2003). 

Then subduction of the nearly trench-perpendicular 

spreading ridge between the Kula and Farallon plates would 

have opened a downward-widening window between these 

plates as they continued to separate while being subducted 

(Breitsprecher and others, 2003; Haeussler and others, 2003). 

Magmatism of the Challis magmatic belt, which extends 

from the Absaroka and Challis volcanic fields in Wyoming, 

Montana, and Idaho to British Columbia south of Kamloops, 

may have formed as the North American Plate obliquely 

overrode such a slab window (Breitsprecher and others, 2003, 

see fig. 1). The Lexington-Lone Star deposit, which is in the 

northwestern part of the Challis-Kamloops magmatic belt, is 

the only known porphyry copper deposit that formed in this 

part of the tract between about 58 Ma and 48 Ma. 

Before the magmatism related to the development and 

subduction of the Resurrection and Kula plates, recent work 

by James K. Mortensen and Craig J.R. Hart, at the University 

of British Columbia, Mineral Deposit Research Unit, suggests 

that latest Cretaceous magmatism in the northern Cordillera of 

southernmost Yukon and east-central Alaska (which involved 

only the Farallon Plate) may be related to post-accretionary, 

non-arc-related processes (see Richards, 2009) in a waning- or 

post-subduction setting (written commun., J.K. Mortensen, 

2011; oral communs., J.K. Mortensen and C.J.R. Hart, 2010; 

Mortensen and Hart, 2010; Hart, 2010).

New U-Pb zircon crystallization age dates for igneous 

rocks and new aeromagnetic-based mapping of Early and midCretaceous oxidized and reduced igneous rocks (magnetiteand ilmenite-series, respectively), indicate an early arc 

magmatic phase (115-99 Ma), then a latter inboard-migrating 

magmatic phase consisting of either (1) extension in the backarc and melting of enriched mantle (95-90 Ma) (Mair and 

others, 2006; oral commun., C.J.R. Hart, 2010), or (2) flat-slab 

subduction with crustal thickening and anatexis (99-94 Ma), 

with terminal slab break-off (94-90 Ma) (written commun., 

J.K. Mortensen, 2011).

After this latter phase, an early Late Cretaceous (78-72 

Ma) magmatic pulse occurred in a narrow northwest-trending 

band (in which occur the 74-Ma Casino and 76-Ma Cash 

deposits), followed by a widespread, late Late Cretaceous (72-

67 Ma) magmatic pulse that occurred simultaneously across 

the region between the Denali and Tintina Faults, showing no 

age progression relative to earlier magmatic arc orientations. 

Mortensen (written commun., 2011; oral commun., 

2010) suggests that the widespread extent and lack of age 

progression, as well as the broadly adakitic compositions 

characterizing some of the igneous units, precludes a normal 

arc origin for this magmatic pulse. He further maintains that 

these observations are most consistent with post-subduction 

lithospheric detachment in late Late Cretaceous time. 

Given this scenario, Mortensen suggests that, “widespread 

lithospheric delamination [occurred] under a large area 

of western Yukon (and eastern Alaska?) at about 72 Ma, 

which triggered both partial melting of the foundering block 

(producing arc-like, adakitic melts) and simultaneous partial 

melting of enriched mantle that flowed upwards to displace the 

sinking block” (written commun., 2011).

Mortensen acknowledges that there are some problems 

with the proposed lithospheric delamination model: “Most 

importantly, in such a scenario one commonly observes 

widespread crustal uplift when the block detaches, and also 

eruption of abundant ignimbrites related to partial melting 

of the base of the crust by heat from a mafic magmatic 

underplate” (written commun., 2011). However, while there is 

evidence for Late Cretaceous ignimbrites and block faulting 

before and during Late Cretaceous magmatism, there is little 

evidence for significant uplift at this time (written commun., 

2011). Research is currently underway by the University of 
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 93

British Columbia, Mineral Deposit Research Unit, to further 

resolve and investigate these magmatic events.

Known Deposits

There are 23 known calc-alkaline porphyry copper 

deposits in tract 003pCu4002 (CA04), 3 of which include 

multiple ore bodies that are grouped according to the 2-km 

rule. These deposits fit descriptive models for porphyry 

copper deposits by Singer and others (2008), and for calcalkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of British Columbia 

by Panteleyev (1995). According to the criteria of Singer and 

others (2008), some of these ore bodies and deposits are of the 

porphyry Cu-Mo subtype, and some are of the Cu-Au subtype, 

as noted in table D3.

These are bulk-mineable ore bodies and deposits, which 

generally are associated with igneous intrusions of calcalkaline composition and porphyritic texture. For those that 

occur in groups, we list (in table D3) the name of the group, 

followed by the names of the ore bodies in the group. The 

tonnage, grade, and copper content of each ore body in the 

group is followed by the total tonnage, grade, and copper 

content of the group. 

Porphyry copper deposits commonly consist of 

stockworks of intersecting veins and veinlets, containing 

various proportions of quartz and chalcopyrite±bornite±

molybdenite±pyrite±gold. Disseminated ore minerals also 

may occur in hydrothermally altered rocks around and 

between veins and veinlets, and in breccias. Associated 

igneous rocks include porphyritic, aplitic, and aphanitic to 

phaneritic varieties of diorite, quartz monzodiorite, and quartz 

monzonite to tonalite, granodiorite, and monzogranite. 

Panteleyev (1995, p. 2) described three subtypes of 

the Canadian calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposit 

type: (1) plutonic Cu-Mo, (2) classic Cu±Mo±Au, and (3) 

volcanic Cu±Au±Mo. Deposits of the classic and volcanic 

subtypes occur in this tract. Deposits of the classic subtype 

are related to porphyritic stocks, within and around which 

mineralization occurred at relatively shallow depths. 

Deposits of the volcanic subtype are associated with multiple 

intrusions in subvolcanic settings of small stocks, sills, dikes, 

and breccias.

 In calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits, the 

Mo zone commonly is in the lower, inner part of the copper 

zone or below it, and the Au zone is commonly in the 

upper-outer part of the copper zone, or above and around 

it. Potassic alteration assemblages, generally consisting of 

secondary K-feldspar and biotite, are common in the Cu-Mo 

zone. Phyllic alteration assemblages, generally consisting 

of quartz, pyrite, and sericite, are common in the copper 

zone. Argillic alteration assemblages, generally consisting of 

clay minerals, may be peripheral to, or superimposed upon 

the phyllic zone, especially along late faults and fractures. 

Propylitic alteration, generally consisting of chlorite, epidote, 

and carbonate minerals, commonly surrounds the phyllic 

zone and may overlap the Cu-Au zone. However, if the 

magmatic-hydrothermal system expands or collapses, or 

undergoes multiple pulses of intrusion and mineralization, 

different assemblages of ore and alteration minerals can be 

superimposed. 

According to Panteleyev (1995, p. 3), “Oxidized and 

leached zones are marked by ferruginous cappings with 

supergene clay minerals, limonite (goethite, hematite, and 

jarosite) and residual quartz.” Supergene minerals include 

chalcocite, covellite, digenite, chrysocolla, native copper and 

copper oxide, carbonate and sulfate minerals. However, zones 

of supergene enrichment generally are not well developed or 

economically important in deposits of this tract. The Bell and 

Berg deposits are exceptions. They have fairly continuous 

zones of moderately supergene enriched ore, which probably 

are post-glacial in age.

Three of the known deposits in this tract include nearby 

deposits and prospects that are grouped with the main deposit 

according to the 2-km rule of Singer and others (2005). That 

rule states that porphyry copper deposits or prospects that have 

mineralized or altered rocks that are separated by less than 2 

km are grouped for purposes of modeling tonnage, grade, and 

deposit density (for additional information, see the “Grade 

and Tonnage Models,” “Groups of Porphyry-Cu Deposits 

and Prospects (Aggregated According to the 2-km Rule)” 

section in the Introduction of this report). Nevertheless, we 

are interested in the character and distribution of individual 

ore bodies and prospects, so we list both the groups and their 

constituent ore bodies in table D3. However, only the location 

of the largest ore body in the group is shown on the maps in 

figures D1A and D1B.

We estimate that known deposits of this tract contain 

about 17,900,000 metric tons of copper (table D1). Some 

estimates listed here include recent additions to known 

resources, and some of our groups are aggregated differently 

from those of Singer and others (2008). Named deposits 

followed by one asterisk are not included in our tonnage 

and grade models because estimated tonnages and grades 

are based on unsubstantiated press releases. Named deposits 

followed by two asterisks are not included in our tonnage and 

grade models because they are open in one or more directions, 

are being actively explored, and their resource estimates are 

being changed. Additional descriptive information about 

known porphyry copper deposits and additional references are 

included in the table in appendix F.

Prospects, Mineral Occurrences, and Related 

Deposit Types

 Appendix F lists 82 porphyry copper prospects in this 

tract. Of those, we consider 61 to be significant porphyry 

copper prospects. Three of those are rank 2 prospects, 

estimated to contain less than 16 kt copper, but are 

incompletely known and possibly related to larger porphyry 

copper systems. Seventeen are rank 3 prospects with intercepts 

of at least 20 m of at least 0.2-percent copper. Forty-one are 

rank 4 prospects with samples or sampled intervals containing 
94 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

[Ma, million years; NA, not applicable; –, no data; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; Cu-Mo subtype, deposits that have 

Au/Mo ratios <3or average Mo grades >0.03%; Cu-Au subtype, deposits that have Au/Mo ratios >30 or average Au grades >0.2 g/t. Contained Cu in metric tons 

is computed as (tonnage Mt x 1,000,000) x (percent Cu / 100); gs, coordinates of this site are used for the group location; *, estimated tonnage and grade from 

an unsubstantiated press release (not used in grade and tonnage model); **, partial tonnage and grade for a deposit that is known to be open to extension (not 

used in grade and tonnage model). For group aggregates: the latitude and longitude, subtype, and age is that of the deposit with the largest Cu resources; the Cu 

and Mo grades are tonnage-weighted averages calculated using the computed contained Cu and Mo as (t contained Cu or Mo / (Mt x 1,000,000)) x 100 (note 

that the computed contained Mo is not shown in this table); and the Au and Ag grades are a tonnage-weighted average calculated as g/t x Mt. For sources of age, 

tonnage, and grade information, see appendix F. Resource estimates are through 2009, but include updates for 2010 when available.]

Table D3. Known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia 

and Yukon Territory, Canada.

Name Latitude Longitude Subtype Age (Ma) Tonnage (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t) Contained Cu (t)

DOROTHY-NAK GROUP

Dorothy 55.248 -126.168 NA 50 45 0.26 0.01 – – 117,000

NAK gs 55.286 -126.238 NA 52 271 0.184 – 0.133 – 499,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 55.286 -126.238 NA 51 316 0.195 – – – 616,000

HUCKLEBERRY GROUP

Huckleberry gs 53.681 -127.178 Cu-Mo 82.5 177.5 0.468 0.014 0.023 0.844 831,000

Ox Lake 53.674 -127.057 NA 83.5 21.4 0.34 0.008 – – 72,800

GROUP AGGREGATE 53.681 -127.178 Cu-Mo 83 198.9 0.454 0.013 – – 904,000

OK GROUP

OK gs 50.042 -124.651 NA 36 143 0.24 0.009 – – 343,000

Okeover 50 -124.667 NA 36 86.8 0.31 0.014 – – 269,000

GROUP AGGREGATE 50.042 -124.651 NA 36 230 0.266 0.011 – – 612,000

INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS

Bell Copper 55.003 -126.232 Cu-Au 52 495 0.36 0.005 0.16 1 1,780,000

Berg 53.804 -127.435 Cu-Mo 48.5 650.6 0.284 0.036 0.018 3.6 1,850,000

Big Onion (Cimbria) 54.81 -126.896 NA 48.5 94.4 0.42 0.02 0.064 1 396,000

Cash 62.429 -137.62 NA 76 36 0.28 0.021 0.17 – 101,000

Casino 62.738 -138.828 NA 74 964 0.22 0.02 0.24 1.8 2,120,000

Catface 49.256 -125.981 NA 48.5 308 0.37 0.007 0.05 – 1,140,000

Fish Lake (Prosperity) 51.464 -123.626 Cu-Au 80 1,150.00 0.22 0.002 0.41 2.3 2,530,000

Gambier Island 49.515 -123.369 Cu-Mo 88 114 0.29 0.018 0.03 1.3 331,000

Granisle 54.945 -126.157 NA 51.5 171.2 0.41 – 0.144 0.4 488,000

Hi-Mars* 49.941 -124.359 NA 81 82 0.3 – – – 246,000

Jean** 55.105 -124.956 NA 134 27 0.3 0.015 – – 81,000

Lexington-Lone Star 49.012 -118.615 Cu-Au 57 19.5 0.56 – 0.55 – 109,000

Louise Lake 54.852 -127.69 NA 89 151 0.238 0.008 0.228 – 359,000

Maggie 50.924 -121.421 NA 63 181.4 0.28 0.029 – – 508,000

Morrison (Hearne Hill) 55.183 -126.286 Cu-Au 54 206.9 0.337 0.004 0.177 – 697,000

New Nanik (Nanika) 53.751 -127.687 NA 48.5 16.5 0.437 – – – 71,900

Poison Mountain 51.133 -122.614 NA 57.5 808 0.24 0.008 0.12 3 1,940,000

Poplar 54.017 -126.99 NA 73 236 0.37 – – – 873,000

Rey Lake 50.338 -120.711 NA 69 46.9 0.17 0.018 – – 80,000

Taseko 51.104 -123.4 Cu-Au 86 15 0.53 0.012 0.53 – 79,500

INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS TOTAL 5,773.4 15,780,400

TRACT TOTAL 6,518.3 17,912,400

TRACT ROUNDED TOTAL 6,520 17,900,000

at least 0.1-percent copper, but less than 20 m of 0.2-percent 

copper. In addition, 4 are rank 4.5 prospects with Mo/Cu 

greater than 1/3. Eighteen are rank 5 prospects with geological 

indications of porphyry-copper-style mineralized rocks but 

negligible assay results for copper or no assay data. Eighteen 

are not primarily porphyry copper prospects but are of types 

that could be related to nearby porphyry copper systems. 

These include porphyry gold-, porphyry molybdenum-, and 

various types of skarn- and vein-type deposits. Table D4 

lists the significant porphyry copper prospects in this tract. 

Additional descriptive information and references are included 

in appendix F.

Exploration History

Recent exploration activities in this tract include about 

220 km of core drilling from 2004 to 2007 in British Columbia 

(see Sinclair, 2007, for a discussion on earlier exploration and 

exploration methods). About 62 percent of this drilling was 

in or around known porphyry copper deposits or groups of 

known deposits and prospects. This probably includes infill 

drilling to provide data needed in preparation for development, 

and to meet the recently tightened reporting requirements of 

Canadian NI 43-101. This surge in recent drilling within and 

around known deposits in this tract has yielded significant 
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 95

[Ma, million years; NA, not applicable; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; g/t, gram per metric ton; gs, group site-coordinates of this site are used for 

the group location. For sources and additonal information about age, tonnage, grade and comments, see appendix F. For mineral name abbreviations under 

“Comments”, see appendix F.]

Table D4. Significant porphyry copper prospects in tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and 

Yukon Territory, Canada.

Group Name Rank Latitude Longitude Age (Ma) Comments

Catface Hecate Bay 3 49.248 -125.957 49 Intercept: 300 m, 0.25% Cu (extension of Catface deposit)

Catface Irishman Creek 3 49.266 -125.987 49 Intercept: 155 m, 0.63% Cu, 6.7 g/t Ag (extension of Catface deposit)

Huckleberry Seel 3 53.654 -127.094 82 Intercept: 127 m, 0.46% Cu, 0.012% Mo, 0.364 g/t Au, 4.538 g/t Ag; 7 holes with >100-m ore-grade 

core (extension of Huckleberry deposit)

NA Colossus 2 50.531 -125.203 105 Resource: 0.118 Mt ore @ 2.5% Cu (2,950 t Cu)

NA Mount Wash-ington Copper

2 49.763 -125.302 35 Resource: 0.306 Mt ore @ 1.07% Cu (3,270 t Cu); cpy-py-qtz stockwork and disseminated cpy and bn 

along along the subhorizontal upper contact of a Tertiary dioritic sill; 8 m x 750 m porphyry-Cu prospect 

with an epithermal gold-copper-arsenic overprint (Minfile BC, 2008).

NA Uebell 2 50.032 -126.813 38 Resource: 0.146 Mt ore @ 1.996% Cu (2,900 t Cu)

NA Ball Creek (Mary) 3 57.278 -130.417 105 Intercept: 231 m, 0.208% Cu, 0.005% Mo, 0.535 g/t Au

NA Bear Lake 3 56.114 -126.883 53 Intercept: 159 m, 0.27% Cu, 0.061% Mo

NA Copper Canyon (Duke) 3 50.173 -121.204 105 Intercept: 57.9 m, 0.63% Cu

NA Copper zone 3 51.04 -123.371 83 Intercept: 288.6 m, 0.276% Cu, 0.023% Mo

NA Croesus (CR) 3 54.288 -126.817 46 Intercept: 63.6 m, 0.51% Cu, 0.016% Mo, 0.08 g/t Au, 9 g/t Ag

NA Dobbin 3 50.003 -119.778 105 Intercept: 122 m, 0.3% Cu

NA IXL 3 49.545 -118.41 46 Intercept: 24 m, 0.78% Cu, 0.16 g/t Au; porphyry-Cu with Zn-Cu-Au skarn 

NA Kino 3 54.558 -128.327 65 Intercept: 30 m, 0.37% Cu

NA Nucleus 3 62.334 -137.336 65 Intercept: 117 m, 0.24% Cu, 0.86 g/t Au

NA Row-bottom 3 51.078 -123.417 83 Intercept: 45.7 m, 0.41% Cu, 0.034% Mo

NA Sylvia 3 53.85 -127.181 49 Intercept: 63 m, 0.33% Cu, 0.02% Mo

NA Trail Peak 3 55.412 -126.312 49 Intercept: 30 m, 0.36% Cu, 0.18 g/t Au; four holes with Cu and Mo in K-altered rocks

NA Whipsaw 3 49.293 -120.759 65 Intercept: 26 m, 0.298% Cu, 0.0115% Mo

NA Zymo 3 54.835 -127.944 89 Intercept: 97.7 m, 0.296% Cu, 0.342 g/t Au, 270 g/t Ag; porphyry-Cu and epithermal-style features

NA Ann 4 57.059 -131.55 48 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.15% Cu

NA Babs 4 54.854 -126.002 51 Intercept: 77 m, 0.19% Cu

NA Ben 37 4 51.304 -124.417 44 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.1% Cu, 0.002% Mo

NA Blue 33-36 4 51.223 -124.489 63 Intercept: 3 m, 0.75% Cu, 6.8 g/t Ag

NA Buzzer (Taseko) 4 51.101 -123.353 87 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.6% Cu

NA Charlie 4 51.177 -123.671 65 Intercept: interval unavailable; 13.68% Cu, 10.6 g/t Au, 13.68 g/t Ag; sampled vein is above stockwork 

on valley floor

NA Chita 4 51.25 -123.536 82 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.29% Cu, 0.01% Mo

NA Coles Creek 4 53.533 -127.233 85 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.25% Cu, 0.03% Mo, 0.24 g/t Au, 33 g/t Ag

NA Copper Mtn (Trigger Lk) 4 51.002 -123.14 82 Intercept: 10 m, 0.28% Cu, 0.25 g/t Ag

NA Copper Star 4 54.229 -127.268 49 Intercept: 1.8 m, 0.49% Cu

NA Cyprus (Mt Nansen) 4 62.09 -137.199 58 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.35% Cu, 0.035% Mo

NA Fawley 4 60.185 -135.391 46 Intercept: interval unavailable; 1.12% Cu, 4.45 g/t Au, 21.9 g/t Ag

NA Fly 4 51.608 -124.492 65 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.68% Cu

NA Gem Lake 4 49.684 -125.411 49 Intercept: 18 m, 1% Cu

NA Giant 4 62.644 -137.304 67 Intercept: 3 m, 0.1% Cu, 0.69 g/t Au, 1.4 g/t Ag

NA Goulter 4 62.078 -137.194 67 Intercept: interval unavailable; maximum grades reported: 2% Cu, 0.05% Mo, 120 g/t Au, 3,428 g/t Ag

NA Independence 4 49.638 -120.967 46 Intercept: 149 m, 0.119% Cu, 0.011% Mo

NA Jake North 4 56.236 -127.323 46 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.16% Cu, 2.25 g/t Au, 8.4 g/t Ag

NA Jay 4 49.386 -119.068 46 Intercept: 1 m, 0.31% Cu, 2.05 g/t Ag

NA Klazan 4 62.381 -137.493 50 Intercept: 44 m, 0.17% Cu; AuAg soil geochemical anomalies on gossan

NA Lori 4 49.71 -122.924 154 Intercept: 3 m, 0.22% Cu, 0.008% Mo

NA Lynx 4 49.388 -119.338 54 Intercept: 2.65 m, 0.61% Cu, 0.51 g/t Ag

NA Maloney 4 62.009 -137.905 104 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.2% Cu; AuAgPbZn soil geochem near Cu-Mo zone; IP anomaly 1300 x 

200 m

NA MIM 4 62.357 -138.571 92 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.35% Cu, 1.2 g/t Au; CuMoAuAs soil geochem 1200 x 800 m; mag 

low, IP chargeability high

NA Mohawk 4 51.095 -123.388 87 Intercept: 2.4 m, 4.56% Cu, 10.63 g/t Au, 22.29 g/t Ag

NA Murex 4 49.761 -125.25 35 Intercept: 4 m, 4.08% Cu, 6.31 g/t Au, 32.91 g/t Ag

NA Newmac 4 51.732 -124.636 65 Intercept: 18 m, 0.3% Cu, 0.54 g/t Au

NA Newton Hill 4 51.803 -123.635 46 Intercept: 3 m, 0.49% Cu, 2.8 g/t Au, 13.1 g/t Ag

NA PAL 4 62.61 -137.204 67 Intercept: 11 m, 0.6% Cu, 0.34 g/t Au, 6.5 g/t Ag

NA Pam 4 53.859 -127.016 49 Intercept: 73 m, 0.11% Cu, 0.01% Mo

NA Revenue 4 62.325 -137.269 65 Intercept: 40 m, 0.12% Cu, 0.03% Mo; Cu-Au and Cu-Mo soil anomalies; mag lows correlate with gold 

anomalies

NA Rhyolite 4 61.848 -138.508 44 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.17% Cu, 0.006% Mo

NA Rita 4 49.631 -120.478 97 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.209% Cu, 4.7 g/t Ag

NA Rum 66 4 51.266 -124.291 65 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.5% Cu

NA Silver Queen 4 60.226 -135.049 46 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.2% Cu, 0.34 g/t Au, 3620 g/t Ag; dissappointing drill results

NA Suits 4 60.816 -135.481 104 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.225% Cu, 0.001% Mo; dissappointing drill results

NA Tarn Creek 4 51.267 -123.857 82 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.48% Cu, 3 g/t Au

NA Thezar 75 (Lennac Lk) 4 54.75 -126.338 77 Intercept: 6 m, 0.26% Cu, <0.004% Mo, <.14 g/t Ag

NA Trudi (Trudy) 4 62.047 -140.983 105 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.13% Cu, 0.005% Mo; geochem anomaly for Cu in soil; drilling found 

low-grade Cu, very low-grade Mo

NA WEL 4 49.375 -120.897 145 Intercept: interval unavailable; 0.89% Cu, 0.89 g/t Au

NA Wolf (Bee) 4 55.215 -126.367 46 Intercept: 1.2 m, 4.2% Cu; sample from porphyry with dissem cpy and cpy films +/- minor mo on 

fractures

NA Empress 4.5 49.671 -120.176 166 Porphyry Mo-Cu, intercept: 15.25 m, 0.0093% Cu, 0.0852% Mo

NA Pattison 4.5 62.526 -138.614 65 Porphyry Mo-Cu, intercept: interval unavailable; 0.01% Cu, 0.015% Mo; Mo soil anomalies; weak IP 

response

NA Porphyry Creek 4.5 56.452 -125.995 81 Includes Davie Creek Mo-Cu zone (intercept: 136 m, 0.1% Cu, 0.1% Mo, 0.03 g/t Au, 0.3 g/t Ag), and 

Croy-Bloom qtz-Cu-Au vein zone (intercept: 1 m, 1.02% Cu)

NA Red Bird 4.5 53.299 -127.01 46 Porphyry Mo-Cu, resource: 88.2 Mt at 0.061% Mo, 0.068% Cu (60,000t Cu)

Significant individual porphyry copper prospects

Significant individual porphyry Mo-Cu prospects

Significant porphyry Cu prospects in groups of known porphyry Cu deposits and prospects
96 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

increases in the estimated copper resources of the Berg 

deposit, as documented in table D5.

About 16 percent of the 220 km of core drilling that 

was done in this tract between 2004 and 2007 was on rank 

3 porphyry-copper prospects, while 4 percent was done on 

rank 4 porphyry copper prospects and 19 percent was done 

on prospects for other types of deposits that may (or may 

not) be related to porphyry copper systems. At the rank 3 

Seel prospect (in the Huckleberry group) about 18 km of 

drilling was done. At the rank 3 Whipsaw prospect, about 

12 km of additional drilling was done to follow up on a 

previous intercept of 26 m of mineralized rock containing 

0.298-percent copper and 0.0115-percent molybdenum. 

At the rank 4 Coles Creek prospect, about 8.3 km of core 

drilling was done to test an area from which samples 

containing 0.25-percent copper, 0.03-percent molybdenum, 

0.24 g/t gold, and 33 g/t silver previously had been reported.

About 15 km of core drilling in this tract was done at 

prospects for deposit types that may (or may not) be related 

to porphyry copper systems. At the Lustdust prospect, about 

10 km of core drilling was done in search of porphyry copper 

deposits that may underlie a system of polymetallic veins. 

A similar target related to polymetallic veins was explored 

at the McConnel Creek prospect. A zone of intrusion-related 

gold-pyrrhotite veins was explored for associated porphyry 

copper mineralization at the Snip North prospect, which 

probably is part of the Bronson Slope porphyry copper 

system. Porphyry molybdenum systems were drilled for 

molybdenum and copper at the Red Bird and Kliyul Creek 

prospects. 

The percentage of exploration drilling that was done 

outside of known deposits or groups of deposits and prospects 

was higher in this tract (nearly 30 percent) than in tracts 

003pCu2001 (12 percent), 003pCu2002 (4 percent), or 

[This information was compiled from Schroeter and others (2006, 2007) and DeGrace and others (2008, 2009). Web-site addresses of “Operators” are listed in 

the table in appendix F; CD, core drilling; EN, environmental baseline studies, monitoring, or remediation work; FS, feasibility studies; G, geologic mapping; 

GC, geochemical sampling (rock, soil, silt, etc.); IP, Induced Polarization; MG, magnetic surveys; MS, metallurgical studies; PR, prospecting; TR, trenching; 

m, meters; –, no data.] 

Table D5. Readily available recent exploration activities for deposits and prospects in tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental 

Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

Name Rank Operator Activities CD (m)

Berg 1 Terrane Metals Corp CD 11,300

Big Onion (Cimbria) 1 Eagle Peak Resources Ltd CD 19,300

Catface 1 Selkirk Metals Corp CD 2,400

Fish Lake (Prosperity) 1 Taseko Mines Ltd FS, EN –

Hi-Mars 1 Dentonia Resources Ltd CD –

Huckleberry 1 Huckleberry Mines Ltd CD 6,388

Jean 1 Newstrike Resources Ltd CD 2,105

Louise Lake 1 North American Gem Inc CD 9,587

Morrison 1 Pacific Booker Minerals Inc MS, EN, CD 1,700

OK 1 Goldrush Resources Ltd CD 968

Okeover (OK) 1 Prophecy Resource Corp CD 2,000

Ox Lake 1 Gold Reach Resources Ltd IP, CD –

Poplar 1 Aumega Discoveries Ltd CD 3,000

Ball Creek (Mary) 3 Paget Resources Corp CD 3,800

Seel 3 Gold Reach Resources Ltd CD 18,419

Whipsaw 3 Canfleur Mining Inc TR, CD 12,200

Zymo 3 Canadian Gold Hunter PR –

Coles Creek 4 Callinan Mines, Ltd GC, IP, CD 4,495

Newmac 4 Newmac Resources Inc IP, CD 1,800

Newton Hill 4 High Ridge Resources Inc TR, CD 2,019

Kliyul Creek 0 Geoinformatics Exploration Inc G, GC, CD, 751

Lustdust 0 Alpha Gold Corp

TR, G, GC, IP 

CD 10,310

McConnell Creek 0 GGL Diamond Corp CD 1,000

Red Bird 0 Torch River Resources Ltd CD 2,143

Snip North 0 Newcastle Minerals Ltd CD 1,095
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 97

003pCu2003 (13 percent). This may indicate this tract is 

perceived to have greater potential for undiscovered deposits 

than the other tracts. About 70 percent of the drilling in tract 

003pCu2004 (CA04) was done in and around known deposits 

(rank 1), 22 percent was done on prospects of ranks 3 and 4, 

and 8 percent was done on prospects that are not classified 

primarily as porphyry-copper-type, but commonly are 

associated with porphyry-copper systems.

Sources of Information

Principal sources of information used by the assessment team 

for delineation of 003pCu2004 (CA04) are listed in table D6. 

Grade and Tonnage Model Selection

As discussed in the Introduction and as shown in 

appendix G, a new grade and tonnage model for Canadian 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits was constructed due to the lower copper 

grades present in Canadian examples compared to the global 

porphyry copper models (Singer and others 2008). 

Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au

The deposits and prospects of permissive tract 

003pCu2004 (CA04), as well as those of tracts 003pCu2001 

(CA01), 003pCu2003 (CA03), and 003pCu2005 (CA05), fit 

Theme Name or Title Scale Citation

GeoFile 2005-1: Digital Geology Map of British 

Columbia - Whole Province 1:250,000 Massey and others (2005)

Yukon Digital Geology 1:250,000 Gordey and Makepeace (1999)

Geoscience Map 2005-3: Geology of British Columbia 1:1,000,000 Massey and others (2005)

Terrane Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and others (1991)

Tectonic Assemblage Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000

Wheeler and McFeely (1991); Journeay and Williams (1995; GIS vector 

representation of Wheeler and McFeely, 1991)

Metamorphic Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Read and others (1991)

Paleocene to Oligocene forearc, arc, and backarc 

magmatism of the Pacific Northwest, USA ~1:2,000,000 Madsen and others (2006, figure 1)

Main structural elements of the southeastern Omineca 

Belt showing the distribution of prominent normal faults ~1:1,000,000 Parrish and others (1992; figure 17.85)

YukonAge 2004: A database of isotopic age 

determinations for rock units from Yukon Territory

NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004a)

BC Age 2004A-1: A database of isotopic age 

determinations for rock units from British Columbia NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004b)

Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB); National 

Geochronological Data Base (NGDB) NA Zartman and others (1976); Marshall (1993)

Porphyry deposits NA Sinclair (2007)

Porphyry copper deposits of the world NA Singer and others (2008)

Lode mineral deposits NA Nokleberg and others (1998)

MINFILE (British Columbia) Mineral occurrences 

database NA MINFILE BC (2009)

MINFILE (Yukon) Mineral occurrences database NA MINFILE YT (2009)

Porphyry deposits of the Canadian Cordillera NA CIM SV 15 (Sutherland Brown, 1976)

Porphyry deposits of the Northwestern Cordillera of 

North America NA CIM SV 46 (Schroeter, 1995)

National Geochemical Reconnaissance (NGR) Stream 

sediment, lake sediment and Water Geochemical Data 

Base

NA Natural Resources Canada (2008c)

Yukon regional geochemical database 2003! Stream 

sediment analyses NA Heon (2003)

Canadian Geodetic Information System–Gravity (2 km 

grid)–Bouguer anomaly, free-air anomaly, isostatic 

residual anomaly, observed gravity, vertical gradient, and 

horizontal gradient

~1:2,000,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008b)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base–1 km and 200 m 

grid–Residual total field

~1:1,000,000 & 

~1:200,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008a)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base–500m grid–Residual 

total field, reduced to pole ~1:500,000 B.J. Drenth (unpub. data, 2009)

Exploration

BC mines and mineral exploration overviews, Yukon 

mineral deposits, Natural resources Canada, Top 100 

exploration and deposit appraisal projects, 2008, web 

sites of mineral exploration companies

NA Schroeter and others (2006, 2007), DeGrace and others (2008, 2009)

Geochemistry

Geophysics

Geology

Mineral occurrences

[NA, not applicable]

Table D6. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada.
98 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

the descriptive model for Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of 

British Columbia (Panteleyev, 1995) and the Yukon Territory 

(Panteleyev, 2005). After spatial grouping according to the 

2-km rule, 34 known deposits of this subtype are present in 

the Canadian Cordillera (23 of which occur in this tract). In 

aggregate, when compared to the Singer and others (2008) 

grade and tonnage models, the Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits 

are on average lowest in tonnage, lowest in copper grade, 

higher in molybdenum grade (except for model 21a), higher 

in gold grade (except for model 20c), and highest in Ag grade.

Statistical tests at a 1-percent screening level on these 

deposits (as a group) indicate that their molybdenum grade 

and gold grade distribution means are not statistically 

different from the general (models 17, 20c, and 21a 

combined) or Cu subtype (model 17) porphyry copper 

grade and tonnage models of Singer and others (2008) (see 

tables G2a and b). Neither is their tonnage distribution mean 

statistically different from the general, Cu subtype, or Cu-Au 

subtype (model 20c) porphyry copper grade and tonnage 

models of Singer and others (2008) (see tables G2a, b, and c). 

However, the copper grade distribution mean is statistically 

different from the general model and all the individual 

subtype models (see tables G2a, b, c, and d). For this reason, 

a grade and tonnage model for the porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

deposits in tracts 003pCu2001 (CA01), 003pCu2003 

(CA03), 003pCu2004 (CA04) and 003pCu2005 (CA05) was 

constructed.

The complete model, which contains data current through 

December 2009, is described in appendix G. For deposits in 

tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), the formal group according to the 

2-km rule and the name of the independent or groups used, 

along with the tonnages and grades used in the development of 

the grade and tonnage model, are listed in table D7.

Estimate of the Number of 

Undiscovered Deposits

Rationale for the Estimate

Our rationale for estimation of undiscovered porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits in this tract was based on the distribution 

and relative qualities of known deposits and prospects in 

the continental magmatic arcs included in this tract. Our 

knowledge of this was based mostly on information in 

the British Columbia and Yukon MINFILE databases. In 

MINFILE records, deposits and prospects generally are 

classified in terms of mineral deposit models, such as the 

model for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits by 

Panteleyev (1995), which is appropriate to this tract.

Our estimates for this tract are supported by an inventory 

of 58 significant prospects that are not in any group with a 

known deposit, and are therefore eligible to be counted as 

possible undiscovered deposits. Of these, 3 are of rank 2 (with 

small estimated resources), 14 are of rank 3 (with intercepts 

of at least 20 m of 0.2 percent copper), 41 are of rank 4 (with 

intercepts of at least 0.1 percent copper), and 4 are classified 

as porphyry Mo-Cu deposits of rank 4.5 with Cu/Mo less than 

1/3. 

Our estimates are constrained by the spatial density of 

known deposits in this tract, and by the perception that the 

Canadian Cordilleran region is well explored for porphyry 

copper. Nevertheless, there are large areas in this permissive 

tract where bedrock exposures are mostly covered by glacial 

till. Although glacial till is not shown on maps of bedrock 

geology, it is distributed widely and can mostly to completely 

hide features the size of a porphyry copper deposit. 

There are enough promising independent prospects in 

this tract that we were able to confidently estimate numbers 

of undiscovered deposits at the 90- and 50- percent levels 

of subjective probability. But for the 10-percent level, there 

is sufficient uncertainty about the quality of many of the 

prospects (due to little or no assay data), and as such, there 

may be many more undiscovered deposits at this probability 

level than we estimated.

The first round of balloting was private, so we cannot 

know exactly how each panel member weighed the available 

information. Our Canadian panel members could draw on the 

most knowledge and experience, which they shared during the 

presentations and discussions that preceded estimation. 

Estimates by each team member were compiled and 

revealed to the team. Reasons for high and low estimates 

were elicited and discussed. On the basis of these discussions, 

team members were allowed to adjust their estimates until 

consensus (agreement on an estimate acceptable to the group) 

was reached. Individual and consensus estimates are shown in 

table D8. 

We compared the spatial density of deposits indicated by 

the 23 known deposits plus our estimated 9.6 undiscovered 

deposits, for a total of 32.6 deposits, divided by the tract area 

of 639,500 km2

, yielding a density of 0.00005 deposits/km2. 

We compared this to the deposit density model of Singer 

and others (2005, 2008). This comparison showed that our 

estimated deposit density is similar to densities observed in 

comparable tracts throughout the world. 

Probabilistic Assessment Simulation 

Results

Undiscovered resources for the tract were modeled 

using the consensus estimates for numbers of undiscovered 

porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits and the grade and tonnage 

models presented in appendix G of this report for Canadian 

Cu±Mo±Au porphyry copper deposits as input for the 

EMINERS Monte Carlo simulator program (Root and others, 

1992; Bawiec and Spanski, in press). Selected simulation 

results are reported in table D9. Results of the Monte Carlo 

simulation are presented as cumulative frequency plots (fig. 

D2). The cumulative frequency plots show the estimated 
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 99

Group Name Ore (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t)

Independent Bell Copper 495 0.36 0.005 0.16 1

Independent Berg 650.6 0.284 0.036 0.018 3.6

Independent Big Onion (Cimbria) 94.4 0.42 0.02 0.064 1

Independent Cash 36 0.28 0.021 0.17 –

Independent Casino 964 0.22 0.02 0.24 1.8

Independent Catface 308 0.37 0.007 0.05 –

Bell Dorothy-Nak (Total) 316 0.195 – 0.114 –

Independent Fish Lake (Prosperity) 1,150 0.22 0.002 0.41 2.3

Independent Gambier Island 114 0.29 0.018 0.03 1.3

Independent Granisle 171.2 0.41 – 0.144 0.4

Huckleberry Huckleberry (Total) 198.9 0.454 0.013 0.021 0.753

Independent Lexington-Lone Star 19.5 0.56 – 0.55 –

Independent Louise Lake 151 0.238 0.008 0.228 –

Independent Maggie 181.4 0.28 0.029 –

Independent Morrison (Hearne Hill) 206.9 0.337 0.004 0.177 –

Independent New Nanik (Nanika) 16.5 0.437 – – –

Ok Ok (Total) 230 0.266 0.011 – –

Independent Poison Mountain 808 0.24 0.008 0.12 3

Independent Poplar 236 0.37 – – –

Independent Rey Lake 46.9 0.17 0.018 – –

Independent Taseko 15 0.53 0.012 0.53 –

[Groups include all deposits and prospects with well-defined grades and tonnages that meet the 2-km rule. Independent indicates that a deposit is 

not in a group. Mt, million metric tons; %, percent; g/t, grams per metric ton; –, no data. Resource estimates available in 2008–2009 have not been 

updated to include information added to appendix F after 2009.]

Table D7. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in tonnage and grade models for Canadian Cordilleran calcalkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au for tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

N90 N50 N10 N05 N01 Nund s Cv% Nknown Ntotal

3 8 19 19 19 9.6 5.9 61 23 32.6 639,500 0.00005

Estimator N90 N50 N10 N05 N01

Individual 1 4 9 20 20 20

Individual 2 4 8 21 21 21

Individual 3 4 8 12 12 12

Individual 4 3 6 9 9 9

Individual 5 3 5 13 13 13

Individual 6 3 6 9 9 9

Individual 7 6 14 32 32 32

Consensus 3 8 19 19 19

Estimated number of undiscovered deposits

Consensus undiscovered deposit estimates Summary statistics Tract area 

(km2

)

Deposit 

density 

(Ntotal/km2)

[Nxx, estimated number of deposits associated with the xxth percentile; Nund, expected number of undiscovered deposits; s, standard deviation; Cv%, coefficient

of variance; Nknown, number of known deposits in the tract that are included in the grade and tonnage model; Ntotal, total of expected number of deposits plus 

known deposits; area, area of permissive tract in square kilometers; density, deposit density reported as the total number of deposits per km2. Nund, s, and Cv% 

are calculated using a regression equation (Singer and Menzie, 2005). In cases where individual estimates were tallied in addition to the consensus estimate, 

individual estimates are listed.]

Table D8. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit density for tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran 

Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.
100 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

resource amounts associated with cumulative probabilities of 

occurrence, as well as the mean, for each commodity and for 

total mineralized rock.

References Cited

Bawiec, W.J., and Spanski, G.T., in press, EMINERS–

Economic mineral resource simulator, version 3.0: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1057, program 

files and 29-p Quick-Start Guide.

Berger, B.R., Ayuso, R.A., Wynn, J.C., and Seal, R.R., 

2008, Preliminary model of porphyry copper deposits: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1321, 

55 p., accessed May 15, 2009, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

of/2008/1321.

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., compilers, 2004a, 

YukonAge 2004; A database of isotopic age determinations 

for rock units from Yukon Territory: Yukon Geological 

Survey, CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://ygsftp.

gov.yk.ca/publications/database/yukonage/readme.htm.)

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., 2004b, BCAge 

2004A—A database of isotopic age determinations for 

rock units from British Columbia: British Columbia 

Ministry of Energy and Mines, Geological Survey, Open 

File 2004-3 (Release 2.0), 7766 records, 9.3 Mb, accessed 

December 15, 2009, at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/

Geoscience/PublicationsCatalogue/OpenFiles/2004/Pages/

default.aspx.

Breitsprecher, K., Thorkelson, D.J., Groome, S.G., and 

Dostal, J., 2003, Geochemical confirmation of the KulaFarallon slab window beneath the Pacific Northwest in 

Eocene time: Geology, v. 31, no. 4, p. 351–354.

Bysouth, G.D., and Wong, G.Y., 1995, The Endako 

molybdenum mine, central British Columbia—An 

update, in Schroeter, T.G., ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian 

Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special 

Volume 46, p. 697–703.

Clark, D.A., 1999, Magnetic petrology of igneous 

intrusions—Implications for exploration and magnetic 

interpretation: Exploration Geophysics, v. 30, p. 5–26.

Cox, D.F., 1986a, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu (model 

17), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 76-81.

Cox, D.F., 1986b, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Mo 

(model 21a), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

115–120.

Cox, D.F., 1986c, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Au 

(model 20c), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

110–111.

DeGrace, John, Grant, Brian, Grieve, David, Lefebure, David, 

Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2008, 

British Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 

2007: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2008-1, 30 

p. (Also available online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/

MINING/GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

DeGrace, John, Fredericks, Jay, Grieve, David, Lefebure, 

David, Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, 

Paul, 2009, British Columbia mining and mineral 

exploration overview 2008: British Columbia 

Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, 

Information Circular 2009-1, 31 p. (Also available 

online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/MINING/

GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

Engebretson, D.C., Cox, Allan, and Gordon, R.G., 1985, 

Relative motions between oceanic and continental plates in 

the Pacific Basin: Geological Society of America, Special 

Paper 206, 59 p.

Gabrielse, Hubert, Murphy, D.C., and Mortensen, J.K., 

2006, in Haggart, J.W., Enkin, R.J., and Monger, J.W.H., 

eds., Paleogeography of the North American Cordillera—

Evidence for and against large-scale displacements: 

[Cu, copper; Mo, molybdenum; Au, gold; and Ag, silver, in metric tons; Rock, in million metric tons]

Table D9. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

0.95 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.05 Mean Mean or 

greater None

Cu 650,000 1,700,000 11,000,000 26,000,000 31,000,000 13,000,000 0.43 0.03

Mo 4,900 45,000 420,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 530,000 0.41 0.05

Au 19 76 500 1,400 1,700 640 0.41 0.04

Ag 0 120 3,000 11,000 14,000 4,400 0.38 0.08

Rock 200 630 4,100 9,700 11,000 4,700 0.44 0.03

Material

Probability of at least the indicated amount Probability of
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 101

Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 46, p. 

255–276.

Gordey, S.P., and Makepeace, A.J., compilers, 1999, Yukon 

digital geology: Geological Survey of Canada Open-File 

D3826, and Geological Services Division, Yukon, Indian 

and Northern Affairs Canada, Open-File 1999-1(D), 

CD-ROM.

Haeussler, P.J., Bradley, D.C., Wells, R.E., and Miller, M.L., 

2003, Life and death of the Resurrection plate—Evidence 

for its existence and subduction in the northeastern Pacific 

in Paleocene-Eocene time: Bulletin of the Geological 

Society of America, v. 115, no. 7, p. 867–880.

Hart, C.J.R., 2010, A redox regime for intrustion-related gold 

systems [abs.]: Geological Society of America, Abstracts 

with Programs, v. 42, no. 5, Paper No. 84-10.

Hart, C.J.R., Mair, J.L., Goldfarb, R.J., and Groves, D.I., 

2004, Source and redox controls on metallogenic variations 

in intrusion-related ore systems, Tombstone-Tungsten 

belt, Yukon Territory, Canada: Transactions of the Royal 

Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, v. 95, p. 339–356.

Heon, D., compiler, 2003, Yukon regional geochemical 

database 2003—Stream sediment analyses: Exploration 

and Geological Services Division, Yukon Region, Indian 

and Northern Affairs Canada, accessed December 15, 

2009, at http://geomaticsyukon.ca/data_download.html.

Journeay, J.M., and Williams, S.P., 1995, GIS map library, 

a window on Cordilleran geology: Geological Survey 

Canada, Open-File 2948, CD-ROM.

Madsen, J.K., Thorkelson, D.J., Friedman, R.M., and 

Marshall, D.D., 2006, Cenozoic to recent plate 

configurations in the Pacific Basin—Ridge subduction 

and slab window magmatism in western North America: 

Geosphere, v. 2, no. 1, p. 11–34.

Mair, J.L., Hart, C.J.R., and Stephens, J.R., 2006, 

Deformation history of the northwestern Selwyn Basin, 

Yukon, Canada—Implications for orogen evolution and 

mid-Cretaceous magmatism: Bulletin of the Geological 

Society of America, v. 118, no. 3/4, p. 304–323.

Marshall, Brian D., 1993, Conversion of the Radiometric Age 

Data Bank (RADB) to the National Geochronological Data 

Base (NGDB): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 

93-336, 76 p.

Massey, N.W.D., MacIntyre, D.G., Dejardins, P.J., and 

Cooney, R.T., 2005, Digital geology map of British 

Columbia—Whole province: British Columbia Ministry 

of Energy and Mines, GeoFile 2005-1, compilation scale 

1:1,000,000 (source-map scale 1:250,000).

MINFILE BC, 2009, MINFILE mineral inventory: Province 

of British Columbia, Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, total records 12,523, accessed 

December 2009 at http://minfile.gov.bc.ca/.

MINFILE YT, 2009, MINFILE mineral inventory: Yukon 

Province, Yukon Geological Survey, accessed December 

2009 at http://servlet.gov.yk.ca/ygsmin/index.do.

Mortensen, J.K., and Hart, C.J.R., 2010, Late and postaccretionary magmatism and metallogeny in the northern 

Cordillera, Yukon, and eastern Alaska [abs.]: Geological 

Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, v. 42, no. 5, 

Paper No. 290-5.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008a, Canadian aeromagnetic 

data base: Government of Canada, Geological Survey 

of Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth Sciences 

Sector, accessed at http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008b, Canadian gravimetric 

data base: Government of Canada, Geodetic Information 

System, Geoscience Data Repository, Geodetic Survey 

Division, Earth Sciences Sector, accessed at http://gdr.

nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008c, National geochemical 

reconnaissance (NGR) stream sediment and water geochemical 

database: Government of Canada, Geological Survey of Canada, 

Geoscience Data Repository, Earth Sciences Sector, accessed at 

http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Nelson, J., and Colpron, Maurice, 2007, Tectonics and 

metallogeny of the British Columbia, Yukon and Alaskan 

Cordillera, 1.8 Ma to the present, in Goodfellow, W.D., 

ed., Mineral deposits of Canada—A synthesis of major 

deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of 

geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 755–791.

Nokleberg, W.J., West, T.D., Dawson, K.M., Shpikerman, 

V.I., Bundtzen, T.K., Parfenov, L.M., Monger, J.W.H., 

Ratkin, V.V., Baranov, B.V., Byalobzhesky, S.G., Diggles, 

M.F., Eremin, R.A., Fujita, K., Gordey, S.P., Gorodinskiy, 

M.E., Goryachev, N.A., Feeney, T.D., Frolov, Y.F., Grantz, 

A., Khanchuk, A.I., Koch, R.D., Natalin, B.A., Natapov, 

L.M., Norton, I.O., Patton, W.W. Jr., Plafker, G., Pozdeev, 

A.I., Rozenblum, I.S., Scholl, D.W., Sokolov, S.D., Sosunov, 

G.M., Stone, D.V., Tabor, R.W., Tsukanov, N.V., and 

Vallier, T.L., 1998, Summary terrane, mineral deposit, and 

metallogenic belt maps of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and 

the Canadian Cordillera: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 98-136, CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://

pubs.usgs.gov/of/1998/of98-136/.)

Panteleyev, Andre, 1995, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (model L04), 

in Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., Selected British 

Columbia mineral deposit profiles, vol. 1—Metallics and 

coal: British Columbia Ministry of Energy of Employment 

and Investment, Energy and Minerals Division, Open 

File 1995-20, p. 87–92, accessed May 29, 2008, at http://

www.em.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geolsurv/MetallicMinerals/

MineralDepositProfiles; http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/

Mining/Geoscience/MineralDepositProfiles/.

Panteleyev, Andre, 2005, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au L04., in

Fonseca, A., and Bradshaw, G., compilers, Yukon Mineral 

Deposits Profiles, Yukon Geological Survey Open File 

2005-5, 175 p., accessed July 28, 2009, at http://www.

geology.gov.yk.ca/mineral_deposit_profiles.html; http://

ygsftp.gov.yk.ca/publications/openfile/2005/of2005_5.pdf; 

http://www.geology.gov.yk.ca/pdf/l04_porphyry_cu_mo_

au.pdf.
102 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Parrish, R.R., Friedman, R.M., and Armstrong, R.L., 1992, 

chap 17, Structural styles, Part G, Eocene extension faults, 

in Gabrielse, H., and Yorath, C.J., eds., Geology of the 

Cordilleran Orogen in Canada: Geological Survey of 

Canada, Geology of Canada, no. 4, p. 660–675.

Pilcher, S.H., and McDougall, J.J., 1976, Characteristics 

of some Canadian Cordilleran porphyry prospects, in

Sutherland Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining 

and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney 

Volume, p. 79–82.

Price, R.A., 2009, Paleogene dextral transtension and ductile 

crustal boudinage—Linking listric normal faulting in 

the Cordilleran foreland thrust and fold belt to tectonic 

exhumation of mid-crustal metamorphic infrastructure 

in the hinterland [abs.]: Geological Society of America, 

Abstracts with Programs, v. 41, no. 5, 30 p.

Read, P.B., Woodsworth, G.J., Greenwood, H.J., Ghent, 

E.D., and Evanchick, C.A., 1991, Metamorphic map of the 

Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 

1714A, scale, 1:2,000,000.

Richards, J.P., 2009, Postsubduction porphyry Cu-Au 

and epithermal Au deposits—Products of remelting of 

subduction-modified lithosphere: Geology, v. 37, no. 3, p. 

247–250.

Root, D.H., Menzie, W.D., and Scott, W.A., 1992, Computer 

Monte Carlo simulation in quantitative resource 

estimation: Natural Resources Research, v. 1, no. 2, p. 

125–138.

Schroeter, T.G., ed., 1995, Porphyry deposits of the 

northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian 

Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special 

Volume 46, 888 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Cathro, Michael, Grieve, David, Lane, 

Robert, Pardy, Jamie, and Wojdak, Paul, 2006, British 

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 

2005: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2006-1, 20 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Grieve, David, Lane, Robert, Madu, Bruce, 

Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2007, British 

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 

2006: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2007-1, 28 p.

Selby, D., and Creaser, R.A., 2001, Re-Os geochronology and 

systematics in molybdenite from the Endako porphyry 

molybdenum deposit, British Columbia, Canada: 

Economic Geology, v. 96, p. 197–204.

Sinclair, W.D., 2007, Porphyry deposits, in Goodfellow, 

W.D., ed., Mineral deposits of Canada—A synthesis of 

major deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of 

geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 223–243.

Singer, D.A., and Menzie, W.D., 2005, Statistical guides to 

estimating the number of undiscovered mineral deposits; 

an example with porphyry copper deposits, in Cheng, 

Qiuming, and Bonham-Carter, Graeme, eds., Proceedings 

of IAMG—The annual conference of the International 

Association for Mathematical Geology: Geomatics 

Research Laboratory, York University, Toronto, Canada, p. 

1028–1033.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., Menzie, W.D., and Berger, B.R., 

2005, Porphyry copper density: Economic Geology, v. 100, 

no. 3, p. 491-514.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2008, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world— Database, map, and grade 

and tonnage models, 2008: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 2008-1155, 45 p., accessed December 15, 2009, 

at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1155/.

Sutherland Brown, A., 1976, ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining 

and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney 

Volume, 510 p., 2 pl., scale 1:250,000,000 (in pocket).

Whalen, J.B., Anderson, R.G., Struik, L.C., and Villeneuve, 

M.E., 2001, Geochemistry and Nd isotopes of the 

Francois Lake plutonic suite, Endako batholith—Host 

and progenitor to the Endako molybdenum camp, central 

British Columbia: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 

38, p. 603–618.

Wheeler, J.O., and McFeely, P., 1991, Tectonic assemblage 

map of the Canadian Cordillera and adjacent parts of the 

United States of America: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Map 1712A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Wheeler, J.O., Brookfield, A.J, Gabrielse, H., Monger, J.W.H., 

Tipper, H.W., and Woodsworth, G.J., 1991, Terrane map 

of the Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Map 1713A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Zartman, R.E., Cole, J.C., and Marvin, R.F., 1976, Users 

guide to the Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB): U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report, 76-674, 77 p.
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 103













Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

OK Catface

Fish Lake (Prosperity)

Taseko

Hi-Mars

Gambier Island

Lexington-Lone Star

Maggie

Poison Mountain

Rey Lake

Big Onion

Louise Lake

Jean

Cash

Casino

Dorothy-Nak

Bell Copper

Granisle

Morrison (Hearne Hill)

Huckleberry

Berg

New Nanik (Nanika)

Poplar

Ox Lake

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 with names

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2004

Porphyry copper prospect;

 (see figure 003pCu2004-1B

 for names)

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

A

Figure D1. Maps showing permissive tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory. A, Locations of known porphyry copper deposits (named) and significant prospects (not named). B, Locations of 

significant prospects (named) and known porphyry copper deposits (not named).
104 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada













Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

PAL

Giant

Goulter

Nucleus

Klazan

Revenue

Cyprus (Mt. Nansen)

Babs

Trail Peak

Thezar 75 (Lennac Lake)

Wolf (Bee)

Coles Creek 

Copper Star

Pam

Croesus (CR)

Sylvia

Blue 33-36

Copper Mountain

(Trigger Lake)

Charlie

Chita

Tarn Creek

Copper zone

Buzzer

Mohawk

Ben 37

Rum 66

Rowbottom

Whipsaw

Independence

WEL

Red Bird

Fawley

Trudi (Trudy)

Suits

Silver Queen

Rhyolite

Maloney

MIM Pattison

Ann

Ball Creek

Porphyry Creek

Jake North

Bear Lake

Zymo Kino

Newton Hill Fly

Newmac

Dobbin

Lynx

Jay IXL

Colossus Uebell

Gem Lake Murex

Mount

Washington

Copper

Lori

Canyon Copper (Duke)

Rita

Empress

Irishman Creek

Hecate Bay

Seel

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 (see figure 003pCu2004-1A

 for names)

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2004

Porphyry copper prospect;

 with names

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

B

Figure D1.—Continued
Appendix D—Tract 003pCu2004 105

Mean Au

Mean Ag

Mean Rock

Mean Cu

Mean Mo

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

Material, metric tons

Probability

Cu

Mo

Au

Ag

Rock

Mean

Cu

Mean

Mo

Mean

Au

Mean

Ag

Mean

Rock

 0.1 1 10 100 1T 10T 100T 1M 10M 100M 1B 10B 100B 1Tr

Figure D2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer simulation of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2004 (CA04), Cordilleran Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada. (T=thousands, M=millions, B=billions, Tr=trillions).
106 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Deposit Type Assessed: Porphyry Copper

Descriptive model: Porphyry copper (Cox, 1986a, Berger and others, 2008), porphyry Cu-Mo (Cox, 

1986b), porphyry Cu-Au (Cox, 1986c), porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (Panteleyev, 1995)

Grade and tonnage model: Canadian Cordillera Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (appendix G)

(Table E1 summarizes selected assessment results)

Location

This tract is in the Cordilleran region of western Canada in the Coast and Insular belts. Its southern segment is in the 

Coast Mountains east of Vancouver, British Columbia. Its northern segment is in the St. Elias Mountains of northern British 

Columbia and southwestern Yukon (figs. 1, E1).

Geologic Feature Assessed

Calc-alkaline igneous rocks in post-accretionary continental magmatic arcs of Oligocene to Pliocene age.

Appendix E. Porphyry Copper Assessment for Tract 

003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory Canada 

By Mark J. Mihalasky1 , Arthur A. Bookstrom2 , Thomas P. Frost3 , and Steve Ludington4 , with contributions 

from James M. Logan5

 , Andre Panteleyev6 , and Grant Abbott7

1

U.S. Geological Survey, mjm@usgs.gov.

2

U.S. Geological Survey, abookstrom@usgs.gov.

3

U.S. Geological Survey, tfrost@usgs.gov. 

4

U.S. Geological Survey, slud@usgs.gov.

5

British Columbia Geological Survey, Jim.Logan@gov.bc.ca. 

6

XDM Geological Consultants, xdmgeo@shaw.ca.

7

Yukon Geological Survey, grant.abbott@gov.yk.ca. 

[km, kilometers; km2, square kilometers; t, metric tons]

Table E1. Summary of selected resource assessment results for tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia 

and Yukon Territory, Canada.

Delineation of the Permissive Tract

Geologic Criteria

The fundamental units defining this permissive tract are continental magmatic arcs that have been active along the 

continental margin of North America since Oligocene time (since about 34 Ma). Criteria for inclusion of rock types as 

Date of 

assessment

Assessment depth 

(km)

Tract area 

(km2

)

Known copper 

resources (t)

Mean estimate of 

undiscovered 

copper resources 

(t)

Median estimate of 

undiscovered copper 

resources (t)

2009 1 32,840 224,000 1,800,000 720,000
Appendix E—Tract 003pCu2005 107

permissive for the occurrence of calc-alkaline porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits are from descriptive models for porphyry 

copper, Cu-Mo, and Cu-Au deposits by Cox (1986a, b, c) and 

for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of British 

Columbia by Panteleyev (1995). Phaneritic to porphyritic rock 

types associated with such deposits include quartz diorite, 

tonalite, granodiorite, quartz monzonite, monzogranite, and 

granite of calc-alkaline affinity (table E2a). Also included 

in the tract are porphyro-aphanitic equivalents including 

quartz-andesite, dacite, rhyodacite, quartz-latite, and rhyolite 

porphyries of calc-alkaline affinity and temporally equivalent 

volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks (table E2b). 

Map units that represent calc-alkaline igneous rocks 

ranging in age from the beginning of Oligocene time (34 

Ma) to the end of Pliocene time (1.8 Ma) are included in this 

permissive tract. This age span includes the dated porphyry 

copper deposits and prospects in this tract, which range in age 

from Oligocene (29 Ma) to late Miocene (7 Ma).

Calc-alkaline igneous rocks of Oligocene to Pliocene age 

in the Garibaldi-Pemberton magmatic arc of southern British 

Columbia form the southern segment of this permissive tract. 

At about 49o

N the orientation of the trend of the Cascades 

magmatic arc curves from nearly north-south in the United 

States to northwest in southern British Columbia, and its name 

changes from the Cascades magmatic arc to the GaribaldiPemberton magmatic arc, although there is no change in the 

fundamental nature of the arc.

Calc-alkaline igneous rocks of Oligocene to Miocene 

age in the Wrangel-Stikine magmatic arc form the northern 

segment of this permissive tract. The Wrangel-Stikine 

magmatic arc extends from northwestern British Columbia, 

through southeastern Alaska, and along the southwestern 

margin of the Yukon Territory into southern Alaska. In 

northern British Columbia and southwestern Yukon, much of 

this arc is covered by alpine glaciers. 

Tract Delineation Process

We used digital geologic maps of British Columbia 

by Massey and others (2005) and of Yukon by Gordey and 

Makepeace (1999) to identify permissive rocks. Geologic 

information in attribute tables associated with those maps 

allowed us to identify polygons representing lithologic 

assemblages of the appropriate age and composition to be 

included in this permissive tract. We excluded polygons 

representing lithologic assemblages not considered permissive 

by reason of age or composition, and we recorded a reason for 

their exclusion in the attribute table for the tract. 

Digital geologic-map units that include polygons 

assigned to this permissive tract are listed in table E2a for 

intrusive rocks and table E2b for volcanic rocks. From each 

map unit listed, we selected only those sets of polygons that 

represent lithologic assemblages containing permissive rock 

types. 

[Province, map unit, age range, and principal rock types from 1:250,000 scale digital geologic maps of British Columbia (Massey and others, 2005) and Yukon 

Territory (Gordey and Makepeace, 1999)]

Province Map unit Age range Rock types

BC LTgd Neogene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Migd Miocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC Miqd Miocene quartz dioritic intrusive rocks

BC Miqm Miocene quartz monzonitic intrusive rocks

BC OlMiCo Late Oligocene to Early Miocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

BC OlMigd Oligocene to Miocene granodioritic intrusive rocks

BC ?dr Oligocene? dioritic rocks

BC OlTg Oligocene intrusive rocks, undivided

BC OlTgr Oligocene granite, alkali feldspar granite intrusive rocks

BC OlTqp Oligocene high level quartz phyric, felsitic intrusive rocks

BC Olfp Oligocene feldspar porphyritic intrusive rocks

YT OT Oligocene granite/granodiorte/quartz diorite/diorite/gabbro

BC MiPiCO Miocene to Pliocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

BC MiPivb Miocene to Pliocene basalt and andesite flows, breccia, tuff

BC MiPivc Upper Miocene to Pliocene volcaniclastic rocks

BC MiPivd Upper Miocene to Pliocene dacitic volcanic rocks

BC Miv Miocene undivided volcanic rocks

BC Miva Miocene andesitic volcanic breccia, lesser basalt

BC Mivb Miocene basaltic volcanic rocks

BC Mivf Miocene rhyolite, felsic volcanic rocks

YT MW Mid to Late Miocene granodiorite/diorite/gabbro/rhyolite/ 

rhyodacite/dacite/trachyte

a. Intrusive rocks

b. Volcanic rocks

Table E2. Map units that define tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.
108 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

We excluded igneous rocks of the Miocene Anahim 

igneous assemblage, which occur along a nearly east-trending 

belt in west-central British Columbia and have been interpreted 

as a product of a mantle plume (see Ernst and Buchan, 2001). 

This assemblage includes basaltic, trachytic, and rhyolitic 

volcanic rocks and subvolcanic intrusions of granite and alkalifeldspar granite, and is probably not associated with a porphyry 

copper deposit-forming tectonic environment.

We excluded igneous rocks of Quaternary age, except 

where included in a geologic unit with rocks of Oligocene 

to Pliocene age. Thus, we excluded most of the Quaternary 

volcanic rocks associated with active and dormant volcanoes 

of the Cascades-Garibaldi-Pemberton magmatic arc. Although 

porphyry copper deposits may be forming beneath some of 

these volcanoes, they would probably be at depths of more than 

1 km.

After selecting permissive units, we added a 10-km buffer 

zone around the mapped margins of permissive intrusions. We 

also put a 10-km buffer zone around the Owl Creek group of 

porphyry copper prospects, which are associated with dioritic 

intrusions that are not depicted on the map, probably because 

they are too small to be represented. The buffer ensures that we 

included possible unexposed permissive rocks and porphyry 

copper deposits. Examples of permissive rock types below 

the mapped surface could include permissive plutons that 

expand downward, subsurface satellite cupolas of intrusions, 

or parts of plutons or porphyry copper occurrences that are 

covered by unmapped surficial materials. We also added a 2-km 

buffer zone around the outer margins of polygons or groups 

of polygons representing permissive volcanic rocks that might 

hide subvolcanic intrusions. This 2-km buffer was added to 

include small or covered exposures of volcanic rocks near the 

margins of larger mapped exposures. For additional information 

on buffering, see the “Permissive Tracts for Porphyry Copper” 

section in the Introduction of this report.

After buffering, we examined aeromagnetic, gravimetric, 

and geochemical anomaly maps for evidence of unmapped 

permissive igneous rocks or hydrothermal systems (Natural 

Resources Canada, 2008a, b, c). Positive aeromagnetic and 

gravity anomalies were interpreted as possible evidence 

for granitoid intrusions, or magnetite-bearing hydrothermal 

systems (see Clark, 1999, for discussion). Where such 

anomalies extend beyond the margins of the buffered 

permissive map units, the tract was extended to include them. 

Stream-sediment geochemical anomalies for copper also were 

considered (Natural Resources Canada, 2008c). Areas with 

geochemical anomalies for copper, molybdenum, and zinc 

are interpreted to represent hydrothermal systems and were 

included in the tract if there was reason to believe they were 

as young as late Tertiary. Areas with anomalies for copper 

and nickel, without molybdenum or zinc, are interpreted to 

represent areas of mafic igneous rocks, and were not included 

in the tract. 

Finally, a smoothing routine was applied to the buffered 

tract. A description of the smoothing routine is included in the 

metadata in appendix H.

Geologic Interpretation 

The Cascades-Garibaldi-Pemberton magmatic arc is 

related to subduction of the northeast-moving Juan de Fuca 

Plate beneath the western margin of the southwest-moving 

North American Plate (Riddihough and Hyndman, 1991). 

Subduction of the Juan de Fuca Plate probably began at about 

40 Ma and continues to the present. Dated porphyry copper 

deposits and prospects of the Cascades-Garibaldi-Pemberton 

magmatic arc mostly are younger than about 30 Ma. 

Inasmuch as the Wrangel-Stikine magmatic arc contains 

Oligocene to Miocene intrusions of generally calc-alkaline 

affinity, we consider this magmatic arc to be permissive for 

porphyry copper deposits. Nevertheless, we are uncertain 

whether or how any of these igneous rocks are related to 

subduction beneath the continental margin, which probably 

ended during the transition from subduction to transform 

plate-margin tectonic environment, after about 39 Ma (see 

Madsen and others, 2006). Skulski and others (1991) indicated 

that the late Cenozoic Wrangel volcanic belt records a 

transition from a subduction to transform margin, and that 

the northwestern segment comprises calc-alkaline lavas 

emplaced above a Benioff zone, whereas the southeastern 

segment comprises transitional lavas, with minor alkaline and 

calc-alkaline lavas, emplaced over a leaky transform fault 

zone. However, only the northwesternmost part of our tract 

coincides with this northwestern segment of the Wrangel 

volcanic belt, which extends from westernmost Yukon well 

northwestward into Alaska (see Skulski and others, 1991, fig. 

1).

Near the northernmost part of the southern segment of 

this tract, the Quartz Hill porphyry Mo deposit is related to 

granitic intrusions of Oligocene age (30-24 Ma). We know of 

no porphyry copper deposits or significant porphyry copper 

prospects within the northern segment of this tract in northern 

British Columbia, Yukon, or southeastern Alaska.

Known Deposits

The Giant Copper deposit (22 Ma) is the only known 

porphyry copper deposit in this tract. It includes a northwestelongate cluster of at least five breccia pipes, as well as 

tourmaline-sulfide-magnetite replacement bodies, a Cu-Au 

vein, and polymetallic veins. These breccias, replacement 

bodies, and veins are related to the Oligocene Invermay 

quartz-diorite stock.

According to BC MINFILE record 092HSW001, the 

AM breccia pipe is the largest and highest grade ore body in 

the Giant Copper group. It contains chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite, 

and lesser pyrite. Chalcopyrite rims breccia fragments and 

is disseminated in the matrix of the breccias. Chalcopyrite 

also occurs in subordinate veinlets that cut both the breccia 

fragments and matrix. The Invermay zone is a relatively 

poorly mineralized breccia, cut by the higher grade Invermay 

Cu-Au vein, which has received more exploration attention 

than the breccia. Table E3 summarizes the estimated resources 
Appendix E—Tract 003pCu2005 109

of the AM and Invermay ore bodies, and of the Giant Copper 

group. 

Table E3 lists known deposits in this permissive tract. 

Additional information about these deposits is included in the 

table for deposits and prospects in appendix F.

Prospects, Mineral Occurrences, and Related 

Deposit Types

Significant prospects are listed in table E4. The No. 1 

prospect is part of the Giant Copper group, and therefore was 

not treated as a possible undiscovered deposit. 

The Hannah prospect is characterized by pyrite, 

chalcopyrite, and molybdenite in veins, stockworks, and 

shear zones in a quartz monzonite stock with phyllic and 

argillic alteration assemblages. Although undated, the Hannah 

prospect is assigned to this tract because it is believed to be 

late Tertiary (see BC MINFILE record number 092N 028) 

and is on the trend of the Garibaldi-Pemberton magmatic-arc, 

which is the fundamental feature that defines this tract.

The Owl Creek group of prospects is a northwesttrending string of three prospects, A-zone, B-zone, and 

C-zone, spaced at 1.5-km intervals. Because each prospect is 

less than 2 km from its nearest neighbor, these three prospects 

are grouped. They are interpreted as manifestations of the 

same hydrothermal system and are considered to represent one 

possible undiscovered porphyry copper deposit. These Owl 

Creek prospects are associated with predominantly dioritic 

intrusions that are described in BC MINFILE records but are 

not shown on our geologic source maps. These intrusions and 

their associated mineralized and altered rocks occur within a 

northwest-striking shear zone along the trend of the CascadeGaribaldi volcanic chain. Isotopic age determinations are not 

available for these intrusions, but they are probably about midOligocene in age (see Nokleberg and others, 2005). 

The A-zone prospect is at the southeast end of the Owl 

Creek group of prospects where chalcopyrite, molybdenite, 

pyrite, and magnetite are disseminated in propylitized and 

argillized rocks. These occur along shear zones intruded 

by small bodies of diorite, quartz diorite, granodiorite, and 

feldspar porphyry. A 185-m intercept of 0.2-percent copper is 

[Ma, million years; NA, not applicable; –, no data; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; Cu-Mo subtype, deposits that have 

Au/Mo ratios <3 or average Mo grades >0.03%; Cu-Au subtype, deposits that have Au/Mo ratios >30 or average Au grades >0.2 g/t. Contained Cu in metric 

tons is computed as (tonnage Mt x 1,000,000) x (percent Cu / 100); gs, coordinates of this site are used for the group location; *, estimated tonnage and grade 

from an unsubstantiated press release (not used in grade and tonnage model); **, partial tonnage and grade for a deposit that is known to be open to extension 

(not used in grade and tonnage model). For group aggregates: the latitude and longitude, subtype, and age is that of the deposit with the largest Cu resources; the 

Cu and Mo grades are tonnage-weighted averages calculated using the computed contained Cu and Mo as (t contained Cu or Mo / (Mt x 1,000,000)) x 100 (note 

that the computed contained Mo is not shown in this table); and the Au and Ag grades are a tonnage-weighted average calculated as g/t x Mt. For sources of age, 

tonnage, and grade information, see appendix F. Resource estimates are through 2009, but include updates for 2010 when available.] 

Name Latitude Longitude Subtype Age (Ma) Tonnage (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t) Contained Cu (t)

GIANT COPPER GROUP

Giant Copper gs (AM Breccia) 49.164 -121.025 NA 22 29.5 0.65 0.007 0.011 0.36 192,000

Invermay 49.178 -121.031 Cu-Au 22 15.3 0.21 – 0.38 7.92 32,200

GROUP AGGREGATE 49.164 -121.025 NA 22 44.8 0.5 – 0.137 2.945 224,200

TRACT TOTAL 44.8 224,200

TRACT ROUNDED TOTAL 44.8 224,000

Table E3. Known calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), l Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and 

Yukon Territory, Canada.

Table E4. Significant calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au prospects in tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia 

and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Ma, million years; NA, not applicable; Mt, million metric tons; t, metric ton; %, percent; g/t, gram per metric ton; gs, group site-coordinates of this site are used 

for the group location. For sources and additonal information about age, tonnage, grade and comments, see appendix F. For mineral name abbreviations under 

“Comments”, see appendix F.]

Group Name Rank Latitude Longitude Age (Ma) Comments

Giant Copper No. 1 3 49.171 -121.028 29 Intercept: 27 m, 0.67% Cu, 247 g/t Ag; sphal, gn, py, cpy; breccia, veins, disseminations 

in potassic hornfels with tourmaline

Owl Creek A zone 3 50.38 -122.758 30 Intercept: 185 m, 0.20% Cu

Owl Creek C zone 3 50.398 -122.795 30 Intercept: 91.4 m, 0.40 % Cu

NA Hannah 8, 10, 

11 4 51.291 -125.404 7 Intercept: 2 m, 1% Cu, 85 g/t Au, 51 g/t Ag; py, cpy, mo; vein, stockwork, shear; phyllic and argillic alteration assemblages

Significant individual porphyry Cu prospects

Significant porphyry Cu prospects in groups of known porphyry Cu deposits and prospects
110 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

reported from the A-zone, which is, therefore, classified as a 

significant rank 3 prospect. 

The B-zone prospect is between the A- and C-zones 

where chalcopyrite, molybdenite, pyrite, and magnetite occur 

in stockworks or veinlets. No assay data are available for the 

B zone, which is, therefore, classified as a rank 5 prospect. 

The C-zone prospect is at the northwest end of the Owl 

Creek group of prospects where chalcopyrite, molybdenite, 

pyrite, and magnetite occur in veins and stockworks of 

veinlets in shear zones intruded by hornblende diorite. 

Propylitic, phyllic, and silicic alteration assemblages 

accompany the intrusions, veins, and stockworks. A 91-m 

intercept of 0.4-percent copper is reported from the C-zone, 

which is, therefore, classified as a significant rank 3 prospect. 

Exploration History

The only exploration reported to have been done in this 

tract from 2005 to 2008 was done in the Giant Copper group 

of deposits and prospects, where Imperial Metals Corp. did 

about 1,870 m of core drilling. The property was first staked 

in the 1930s, and the Invermay zone discovered in 1933 

(Robertson, 2006).

The Owl Creek group of prospects were first recognized 

when showings of the Copper Queen (the A-zone Owl Creek 

prospect) were reported in1913, but with workings likely 

before that date (Butler, 2008). Exploration was carried out by 

an underground adit developed in the early 1900’s, followed 

by three drill holes in 1928 that intersected as much as 300 

feet of low grade copper found in several zones of probable 

porphyry type deposits (Butler, 2008). Assessment reports 

from 1973 and 1986 (see BC MINFILE number 092JSE004) 

indicated significant intercepts of hydrothermally altered rocks 

containing 0.2 to 0.4 percent copper.

Sources of Information

Principal sources of information used by the assessment 

team for delineation of tract 003pCu2005 are listed in table 

E5. 

Grade and Tonnage Model Selection

As discussed in the Introduction and as shown in 

appendix G, a new grade and tonnage model for Canadian 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits was constructed due to the lower copper 

grades present in Canadian examples compared to the global 

models (Singer and others, 2008). 

Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au

The deposits and prospects of permissive tract 

003pCu2005 (CA05), as well as those of tracts 003pCu2001 

(CA01), 003pCu2003 (CA03), and 003pCu2004 (CA04), fit 

the descriptive model for Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits of 

British Columbia (Panteleyev, 1995) and the Yukon Territory 

(Panteleyev, 2005). After spatial grouping according to the 

2-km rule, 34 known deposits of this subtype are present in 

the Canadian Cordillera (1 of which occurs in this tract). In 

aggregate, when compared to the Singer and others (2008) 

grade and tonnage models, the Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits 

are on average lowest in tonnage, lowest in copper grade, 

higher in molybdenum grade (except for model 21a), higher in 

gold grade (except for model 20c), and highest in Ag grade.

Statistical tests at a 1-percent screening level on these 

deposits (as a group) indicate that their molybdenum grade 

and gold grade distribution means are not statistically different 

from the general (models 17, 20c, and 21a combined) or 

Cu subtype (model 17) porphyry copper grade and tonnage 

models of Singer and others (2008) (see tables G2a and 

b). Neither is their tonnage distribution mean statistically 

different from the general, Cu subtype, or Cu-Au subtype 

(model 20c) porphyry copper grade and tonnage models of 

Singer and others (2008) (see tables G2a, b, and c). However, 

the copper grade distribution mean is statistically different 

from the general model and all the individual subtype models 

(see tables G2a, b, c, and d). For this reason, a grade and 

tonnage model for the porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits in tracts 

003pCu2001 (CA01), 003pCu2003 (CA03), 003pCu2004 

(CA04) and 003pCu2005 (CA05) was constructed.

The complete model, which contains data current through 

December 2009, is described in appendix G. For deposits in 

tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), the formal group according to the 

2-km rule, and the name of the independent or groups used, 

along with the tonnages and grades used in the development of 

the grade and tonnage model, are listed in table E6.

Estimate of the Number of 

Undiscovered Deposits

Rationale for the Estimate

Given the availability of MINFILE records for known 

porphyry copper prospects in British Columbia and Yukon, 

and knowing that the MINFILE data sets are quite complete 

and up-to-date, our rationale for estimation of numbers 

of undiscovered deposits was to estimate numbers of 

undiscovered deposits based largely on the distributions and 

qualities of those prospects within each permissive tract. At 

the 90-percent level of subjective probability we could not 

identify prospects that we were confident would become 

deposits. At the 50-percent level of probability we tried to 

identify prospects with a good chance of becoming deposits, 

but we also considered overall exploration maturity and 

the spatial density of known deposits as possible limiting 

factors. At the 10-percent level of probability we considered 

the preceding factors plus the potential for undiscovered 
Appendix E— Tract 003pCu2005 111

prospects and deposits in areas that are largely covered by 

mapped and unmapped surficial deposits, and in areas of 

unexplained geophysical and geochemical anomalies that 

might be indicative of undiscovered porphyry copper deposits. 

At the 5-percent level of probability, our consensus estimate 

(agreement on an estimate acceptable to the group) was the 

same as our estimate at the 10-percent level of probability. The 

estimates and consensus results are presented in table E8. 

The southern segment of this tract contains one known 

porphyry copper deposit and four significant prospects (tables 

E3 and E4). The No. 1 prospect is grouped with the known 

deposit and is, therefore, regarded as a possible extension to 

the known deposit and not as a possible undiscovered deposit. 

The two significant prospects of the Owl Creek group are 

regarded as manifestations of one possible undiscovered 

porphyry copper system. Otherwise, this permissive tract 

[NA, not applicable]

Table E5. Principal sources of information used for tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada.

Theme Name or title Scale Citation

GeoFile 2005-1: Digital Geology Map of British 

Columbia! Whole Province 1:250,000 Massey and others (2005)

Yukon Digital Geology 1:250,000 Gordey and Makepeace (1999)

Geoscience Map 2005-3: Geology of British Columbia 1:1,000,000 Massey and others (2005)

Terrane Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and others (1991)

Tectonic Assemblage Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Wheeler and McFeely (1991); Journeay and Williams (1995; GIS vector 

representation of Wheeler and McFeely, 1991)

Metamorphic Map of the Canadian Cordillera 1:2,000,000 Read and others (1991)

YukonAge 2004: A database of isotopic age 

determinations for rock units from Yukon Territory NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004a)

BC Age 2004A-1: A database of Isotopic Age 

Determinations for Rock Units from British Columbia NA Breitsprecher and Mortensen (2004b)

Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB); National 

Geochronological Data Base (NGDB) NA Zartman and others (1976); Marshall (1993)

Porphyry Deposits NA Sinclair (2007)

Porphyry Copper Deposits of the World NA Singer and others (2008)

Lode mineral deposits NA Nokleberg and others (1998)

MINFILE (British Columbia) Mineral Occurrences 

Database NA MINFILE BC (2009)

MINFILE (Yukon) Mineral Occurrences Database NA MINFILE YT (2009)

Porphyry Deposits of the Canadian Cordillera NA CIM SV 15 (Sutherland Brown, 1976, ed.)

Porphyry Deposits of the Northwestern Cordillera of 

North America NA CIM SV 46 (Schroeter, 1995, ed.)

National Geochemical Reconnaissance (NGR) Stream 

Sediment, Lake Sediment and Water Geochemical Data 

Base

NA Natural Resources Canada (2008c)

Yukon Regional Geochemical Database 2003! Stream 

Sediment Analyses NA Heon (2003)

Canadian Geodetic Information System—Gravity (2-km 

grid)—Bouguer anomaly, free-air anomaly, isostatic 

horizontal gradient ~1:2,000,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008b)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base – 1km and 200m grid 

– Residual total field

~1:1,000,000 and 

~1:200,000 Natural Resources Canada (2008a)

Canadian Aeromagnetic Data Base – 500m grid – 

Residual total field, reduced to pole ~1:500,000 B.J. Drenth (unpub. data, 2009)

Exploration

BC Mines and Mineral Exploration Overviews, Yukon 

Mineral Deposits, Natural Resources Canada, Top 100 

Exploration and Deposit Appraisal Projects, 2008, 

websites of Mineral Exploration companies

NA Schroeter and others (2006, 2007), DeGrace and others (2008, 2009)

Geochemistry

Geophysics

Geology

Mineral occurrences

[Groups include all deposits and prospects with well-defined grades and tonnages that meet the 2-km rule. Mt, million 

metric tons; %, percent; g/t, grams per metric ton. Resource estimates available in 2008–2009 have not been updated 

to include information added to appendix F after 2009.] 

GROUP NAME Ore (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t)

Giant Copper Giant Copper (Total) 44.8 0.5 0.005 0.137 2.945

Table E6. Tonnages and grades of deposits of this tract used in tonnage and grade models for 

Canadian Cordilleran calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au for tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late 

Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.
112 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

appears to be less thoroughly explored than other permissive 

tracts of the Canadian Cordillera. These considerations 

influenced our estimates at the 50-, 10- and 5-percent levels of 

subjective probability.

We calculated the spatial density of deposits indicated 

by the one known deposit plus our mean estimate of 1.4 

undiscovered deposits, for a total of 2.4 deposits, divided by 

the tract area of 32,840 km2, yielding a density of 0.00007 

deposits/km2. We compared this spatial density to spatial 

densities of porphyry copper deposits in well-studied areas of 

the world according to Singer and others (2005, 2008). This 

showed that although this estimated spatial density is well 

below the trend of the central tendency, it is just within the 10- 

to 90-percent confidence envelope for the spatial density of 

known deposits used to construct the deposit density model (as 

calculated by Singer and others, 2005). 

Probabilistic Assessment Simulation 

Results

Undiscovered resources for the tract were modeled using 

the consensus estimates for numbers of undiscovered porphyry 

Cu±Mo±Au deposits and the grade and tonnage models 

presented in appendix G of this report for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au 

porphyry copper deposits as input for the EMINERS Monte 

Carlo simulator program (Root and others, 1992; Bawiec and 

Spanski, in press). Selected simulation results are reported in 

table E9. Results of the Monte Carlo simulation are presented as 

cumulative frequency plots (fig. E2). The cumulative frequency 

plots show the estimated resource amounts associated with 

cumulative probabilities of occurrence, as well as the mean, for 

each commodity and for total mineralized rock. 

[Nxx, estimated number of deposits associated with the xxth percentile; Nund, expected number of undiscovered deposits; s, standard deviation; Cv%, coefficient

of variance; Nknown, number of known deposits in the tract that are included in the grade and tonnage model; Ntotal, total of expected number of deposits plus 

known deposits; area, area of permissive tract in square kilometers; density, deposit density reported as the total number of deposits per km2. Nund, s, and Cv% 

are calculated using a regression equation (Singer and Menzie, 2005). In cases where individual estimates were tallied in addition to the consensus estimate, 

individual estimates are listed.] 

N90 N50 N10 N05 N01 Nund s Cv% Nknown Ntotal

0 1 3 4 4 1.4 1.4 99 1 2.4 32,840 0.00007

Estimator N90 N50 N10 N05 N01

Individual 1 0 1 2 2 2

Individual 2 0 1 2 4 4

Individual 3 0 0 1 3 5

Individual 4 0 1 3 5 5

Individual 5 0 1 1 3 3

Individual 6 0 2 3 4 4

Individual 7 0 2 4 6 6

Consensus 0 1 3 4 4

Estimated number of undiscovered deposits

Consensus undiscovered deposit estimates Summary statistics Tract area 

(km2

)

Deposit 

density 

(Ntotal/km2

)

Table E7. Undiscovered deposit estimates, deposit numbers, tract area, and deposit density for tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late 

Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.

[Cu, copper; Mo, molybdenum; Au, gold; and Ag, silver, in metric tons; Rock, in million metric tons]

0.95 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.05 Mean Mean or 

greater None

Cu 0 0 720,000 5,000,000 7,400,000 1,800,000 0.31 0.29

Mo 0 0 17,000 220,000 340,000 76,000 0.29 0.41

Au 0 0 27 260 390 92 0.3 0.36

Ag 0 0 0 2,100 3,400 660 0.23 0.54

Rock 0 0 260 1,900 2,800 680 0.33 0.29

Material

Probability of at least the indicated amount Probability of

Table E8. Results of Monte Carlo simulations of undiscovered resources for tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British 

Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada.
Appendix E—Tract 003pCu2005 113

References Cited

Bawiec, W.J., and Spanski, G.T., in press, EMINERS–Economic 

mineral resource simulator, version 3.0: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 2009-1057, program files and 29-p 

Quick-Start Guide.

Berger, B.R., Ayuso, R.A., Wynn, J.C., and Seal, R.R., 2008, 

Preliminary model of porphyry copper deposits: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1321, 55 p., 

accessed May 15, 2009, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1321.

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., compilers, 2004a, 

YukonAge 2004—A database of isotopic age determinations 

for rock units from Yukon Territory: Yukon Geological 

Survey, CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://ygsftp.gov.

yk.ca/publications/database/yukonage/readme.htm).

Breitsprecher, Katrin, and Mortensen, J.K., 2004b, BCAge 

2004A—A database of isotopic age determinations for rock 

units from British Columbia: British Columbia Ministry of 

Energy and Mines, Geological Survey, Open File 2004-3 

(Release 2.0), 7,766 records, 9.3 Mb, accessed December 

15, 2009, at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/

PublicationsCatalogue/OpenFiles/2004/Pages/default.aspx.

Butler, Sean, 2008, Summary report on the Gold King property, 

Pemberton-Tenquille Lake-Birkenhead River Area of 

British Columbia, Canada (revised): Wolverine Minerals 

Corporation, 29 p., accessed March 25, 2011, at http://www.

wolverineminerals.ca/i/pdf/Gold%20King%20Technical_

Report.pdf.

Clark, D.A., 1999, Magnetic petrology of igneous intrusions—

Implications for exploration and magnetic interpretation: 

Exploration Geophysics, v. 30, p. 5–26.

Cox, D.F., 1986a, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu (model 17), 

in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: 

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 76–81.

Cox, D.F., 1986b, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Mo (model 

21a), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 115–120.

Cox, D.F., 1986c, Descriptive model of porphyry Cu-Au (model 

20c), in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 110–111.

DeGrace, John, Grant, Brian, Grieve, David, Lefebure, David, 

Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2008, 

British Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 

2007: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and 

Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2008-1, 30 p. 

(Also available online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/

MINING/GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

DeGrace, John, Fredericks, Jay, Grieve, David, Lefebure, David, 

Madu, Bruce, Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 

2009, British Columbia mining and mineral exploration 

overview 2008: British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines 

and Petroleum Resources, Information Circular 2009-1, 

31 p. (Also available online at http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/

MINING/GEOSCIENCE/PUBLICATIONSCATALOGUE/

MINERALEXPLORATIONREVIEW/Pages/default.aspx.)

Ernst, R.E., and Buchan, K.L., 2001, The use of mafic dike 

swarms in identifying and locating mantle plumes, in

Ernst, R.E., and Buchan. K.L., eds., Mantle plumes—Their 

identification through time: Geological Society of America, 

Special Paper 352, p. 247–265.

Gordey, S.P., and Makepeace, A.J., compilers, 1999, Yukon 

digital geology: Geological Survey of Canada Open-File 

D3826, and Geological Services Division, Yukon, Indian 

and Northern Affairs Canada, Open-File 1999-1(D), 

CD-ROM.

Heon, D., compiler, 2003, Yukon Regional Geochemical 

Database 2003—Stream sediment analyses: Exploration and 

Geological Services Division, Yukon Region, Indian and 

Northern Affairs Canada, accessed December 15, 2009, at 

http://geomaticsyukon.ca/data_download.html.

Journeay, J.M., and Williams, S.P., 1995, GIS map library, a 

window on Cordilleran geology: Geological Survey Canada, 

Open-File 2948, CD-ROM.

Madsen, J.K., Thorkelson, D.J., Friedman, R.M., and Marshall, 

D.D., 2006, Cenozoic to Recent plate configurations in 

the Pacific Basin—Ridge subduction and slab window 

magmatism in western North America: Geosphere, v. 2, no. 

1, p. 11–34.

Marshall, Brian D., 1993, Conversion of the Radiometric Age 

Data Bank (RADB) to the National Geochronological Data 

Base (NGDB): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 

93-336, 76 p.

Massey, N.W.D., MacIntyre, D.G., Dejardins, P.J., and Cooney, 

R.T., 2005, Digital geology map of British Columbia—Whole 

province: British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines, 

GeoFile 2005-1, compilation scale 1:1,000,000 (source-map 

scale 1:250,000).

MINFILE BC, 2009, MINFILE mineral inventory: Province of 

British Columbia, Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, total records 12,523, accessed December 2009 at 

http://minfile.gov.bc.ca/.

MINFILE YT, 2009, MINFILE mineral inventory: Yukon 

Province, Yukon Geological Survey, accessed December 

2009 at http://servlet.gov.yk.ca/ygsmin/index.do.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008a, Canadian aeromagnetic data 

base: Government of Canada, Geological Survey of Canada, 

Geoscience Data Repository, Earth Sciences Sector, accessed 

December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008b, Canadian gravimetric data 

base: Government of Canada, Geodetic Information System, 

Geoscience Data Repository, Geodetic Survey Division, 

Earth Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://

gdr.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Natural Resources Canada, 2008c, National geochemical 

reconnaissance (NGR) stream sediment and water 

geochemical database: Government of Canada, Geological 

Survey of Canada, Geoscience Data Repository, Earth 

Sciences Sector, accessed December 15, 2009, at http://gdr.

nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php.

Nokleberg, W.J., West, T.D., Dawson, K.M., Shpikerman, V.I., 

Bundtzen, T.K., Parfenov, L.M., Monger, J.W.H., Ratkin, V.V., 
114 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Baranov, B.V., Byalobzhesky, S.G., Diggles, M.F., 

Eremin, R.A., Fujita, K., Gordey, S.P., Gorodinskiy, M.E., 

Goryachev, N.A., Feeney, T.D., Frolov, Y.F., Grantz, A., 

Khanchuk, A.I., Koch, R.D., Natalin, B.A., Natapov, L.M., 

Norton, I.O., Patton, W.W. Jr., Plafker, G., Pozdeev, A.I., 

Rozenblum, I.S., Scholl, D.W., Sokolov, S.D., Sosunov, G.M., 

Stone, D.V., Tabor, R.W., Tsukanov, N.V., and Vallier, T.L., 

1998, Summary terrane, mineral deposit, and metallogenic 

belt maps of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian 

Cordillera: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 98-136, 

CD-ROM. (Also available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

of/1998/of98-136/.)

Nokleberg, W.J., Bundtzen, T.K., Eremin, R.A., Ratkin, 

V.V., Dawson, KM., Shpikerman, V.I., Goryachev, N.A., 

Byalobzhesky, S.G., Frolov, Y.F., Khanchuk, A.I., Koch, R.D., 

Monger, J.W.H., Pozdeev, A.I., Rozenblum, I.S., Rodionov, 

S.M., Parfenov, L.M., Scotese, C.R., and Sidorov, A.A., 

2005, Metallogenesis and tectonics of the Russian Far East, 

Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera: U.S. Geological Survey 

Professional Paper 1697, 397 p.

Panteleyev, Andre, 1995, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (model L04), 

in Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., Selected British 

Columbia mineral deposit profiles, vol. 1—Metallics and 

coal: British Columbia Ministry of Energy of Employment 

and Investment, Energy and Minerals Division, Open 

File 1995-20, p. 87-92, accessed May 29, 2008, at http://

www.em.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geolsurv/MetallicMinerals/

MineralDepositProfiles; http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/

Geoscience/MineralDepositProfiles/.

Panteleyev, Andre, 2005, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (model L04), 

in Fonseca, A., and Bradshaw, G., compilers, Yukon mineral 

deposits profiles: Yukon Geological Survey Open File 2005-

5, 175 p., accessed July 28, 2009, at http://www.geology.gov.

yk.ca/mineral_deposit_profiles.html; http://ygsftp.gov.yk.ca/

publications/openfile/2005/of2005_5.pdf; http://www.geology.

gov.yk.ca/pdf/l04_porphyry_cu_mo_au.pdf.

Pilcher, S.H., and McDougall, J.J., 1976, Characteristics of some 

Canadian Cordilleran porphyry prospects, in Sutherland 

Brown, A., ed., Porphyry deposits of the Canadian Cordillera: 

The Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Special 

Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, p. 79–82.

Read, P.B., Woodsworth, G.J., Greenwood, H.J., Ghent, 

E.D., and Evanchick, C.A., 1991, Metamorphic map of the 

Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 

1714A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Riddihough, R.P., and Hyndman, R.D., 1991, Modern plate 

tectonic regime of the continental margin of western Canada, 

chap. 13 of Gabrielse H., and Yorath, C.J., eds, Geology of the 

Cordilleran Orogen in Canada: Geological Survey of Canada, 

Geology of Canada, no. 4, p. 435–455. (Also available online 

at Geological Society of America, The Geology of North 

America, v. G-2).

Robertson, Stephen, 2006, Giant copper property, Southern 

British Columbia: Imperial Metals, 43-101 Technical Report, 

47 p., accessed March 25, 2011, at http://www.imperialmetals.

com/i/pdf/Giant_Copper_2006_43-101_Report.jul28.06.pdf.

Root, D.H., Menzie, W.D., and Scott, W.A., 1992, Computer 

Monte Carlo simulation in quantitative resource estimation: 

Natural Resources Research, v. 1, no. 2, p. 125–138.

Schroeter, T.G., ed., 1995, Porphyry deposits of the 

Northwestern Cordillera of North America: Canadian 

Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Special 

Volume 46, 888 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Cathro, Michael, Grieve, David, Lane, 

Robert, Pardy, Jamie, and Wojdak, Paul, 2006, British 

Columbia mining and mineral exploration overview 2005: 

British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, Information Circular 2006-1, 20 p.

Schroeter, Tom, Grieve, David, Lane, Robert, Madu, Bruce, 

Northcote, Bruce, and Wojdak, Paul, 2007, British Columbia 

mining and mineral exploration overview 2006: British 

Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 

Resources, Information Circular 2007-1, 28 p.

Sinclair, W.D., 2007, Porphyry deposits, in Goodfellow, 

W.D., ed., Mineral deposits of Canada—A synthesis of 

major deposit-types, district metallogeny, the evolution of 

geological provinces, and exploration methods: Geological 

Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special 

Publication no. 5, p. 223–243.

Singer, D.A., and Menzie, W.D., 2005, Statistical guides to 

estimating the number of undiscovered mineral deposits; an 

example with porphyry copper deposits, in Cheng, Qiuming, 

and Bonham-Carter, Graeme, eds., Proceedings of IAMG—

The annual conference of the International Association for 

Mathematical Geology: Geomatics Research Laboratory, 

York University, Toronto, Canada, p. 1028–1033.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., Menzie, W.D., and Berger, B.R., 

2005, Porphyry copper density: Economic Geology, v. 100, 

no. 3, p. 491–514.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2008, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world— Database, map, and grade 

and tonnage models, 2008: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 2008-1155, 45 p., accessed May 1, 2009, at http://

pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1155/.

Skulski, Thomas, Francis, Don, and Ludden, John, 1991, 

Arc-transform magmatism in the Wrangell volcanic belt: 

Geology, v. 19, no. 1, p. 11–14.

Sutherland Brown, A., 1976, ed., Porphyry deposits of the 

Canadian Cordillera: The Canadian Institute of Mining and 

Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, the Charles S. Ney Volume, 

510 p., 2 pl., scale 1:250,000,000 (in pocket).

Wheeler, J.O., and McFeely, P., 1991, Tectonic assemblage map 

of the Canadian Cordillera and adjacent parts of the United 

States of America: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 

1712A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Wheeler, J.O., Brookfield, A.J, Gabrielse, H., Monger, J.W.H., 

Tipper, H.W., and Woodsworth, G.J., 1991, Terrane map of 

the Canadian Cordillera: Geological Survey of Canada, Map 

1713A, scale 1:2,000,000.

Zartman, R.E., Cole, J.C., and Marvin, R.F., 1976, Users guide 

to the Radiometric Age Data Bank (RADB): U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report, 76–674, 77 p.
Appendix E—Tract 003pCu2005 115

Figure E1. Maps showing permissive tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

Canada. A, Locations of known porphyry copper deposits (named) and significant prospects (not named). B, Locations of 

significant prospects (named) and known porphyry copper deposits (not named).















Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

Giant Copper (AM Breccia)

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 with names

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2005

Porphyry copper prospect;

 (see figure E1B for names)

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

A
116 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada













Edmonton

Calgary

Vancouver

Victoria

Seattle

Portland

145°W 140°W 135°W

55°N

50°N

45°N

135°W

140°W

145°W

125°W

60°N 65°N 160°W 150°W 130°W 110°W 100°W 90°W

70°N

60°N

50°N

40°N

H a nn ah 8 , 10, 11

No. 1

Owl Creek (A zone)

Owl Creek (C zone)

0 50 100 150 200 KILOMETERS

0 50 100 MILES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED

STATES

UNITED

STATES

EXPLANATION

Porphyry copper

Other porphyry copper tracts

Porphyry copper deposit;

 (see figure E1A for names)

Assessed porphyry copper tract

003pCu2005

Porphyry copper prospect;

 with names

Projection: British Columbia NAD 1983 Albers;

Central meridian 126° W; latitude of origin 45° N

Source for political boundaries: Boundaries and 

Sovereignty Encyclopedia,

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues

B

Figure E1.—Continued
Appendix F 117

Mean Au

Mean Ag

Mean Rock

Mean Cu Mean Mo

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

Material, metric tons

Probability

Cu

Mo

Au

Ag

Rock

Mean

Cu

Mean

Mo

Mean

Au

Mean

Ag

Mean

Rock

 0.1 1 10 100 1T 10T 100T 1M 10M 100M 1B 10B 100B 1Tr

Figure E2. Cumulative frequency plot showing the results of a Monte Carlo computer simulation of undiscovered resources in tract 003pCu2005 (CA05), Late Continental Arc—British Columbia and Yukon Territory, 

Canada. (T=thousands, M=millions, B=billions, Tr-trillions).

Appendix F. Table of Attributes of Porphyry Copper 

Deposits and Prospects, British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada

(See attached file)
118 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Appendix G. Grade and Tonnage Model for Calc-Alkaline 

Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au Deposits of the Canadian Cordillera

By Thomas P. Frost1, Arthur A. Bookstrom1, and Mark J. Mihalasky1

1

U.S. Geological Survey, Spokane, WA..

Description

Deposits included in this grade and tonnage model all fit 

the descriptive model for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au 

in the Canadian Cordillera (Panteleyev, 1995 and 2005), but 

they occur in four different permissive tracts: 003pCu2001 

(CA01), 003pCu2003(CA03), 003pCu2004 (CA04), and 

003pCu2005(CA05). That they are in different tracts does not 

preclude them from being included in the same grade and tonnage 

model, despite differences in age and original tectonic setting.

Table G1 lists estimated tonnages and grades for deposits 

and groups of deposits that are included in our grade and tonnage 

model for calc-alkaline porphyry Cu±Mo±Au in the Canadian 

Cordillera. This model is based on resource estimates that were 

available through the end of 2009. It has not been updated with 

resource estimates made to the deposits or prospects listed in 

appendix F in 2010. Estimated resources of spatially grouped 

deposits are aggregated according to the 2-km rule (explained in 

the Introduction to this report). Sites with estimated resources of 

less than 16,000 metric tons of contained copper are not included 

because they are considered too small to represent a complete 

porphyry copper deposit. 

Table G2 summarizes the results of t-tests of 

the distributions of tonnage, copper, molybdenum, 

gold, and silver for deposits from tracts 003pCu2001 

(CA01), 003pCu2003(CA03), 003pCu2004 (CA04), and 

003pCu2005(CA05) in Canada against Singer and others (2008) 

global models for general porphyry copper (porphyry Cu models 

17, 20c, 21a, combined), porphyry Cu (model 17), porphyry 

Cu-Au (model 20c), and porphyry Cu-Mo (model 21a).

Before performing any tests, the Canadian Cordillera 

porphyry copper deposits listed in the Singer and others (2008) 

database were removed. For the test against the general model 

(table G2a), tonnage, molybdenum grade, and gold grade 

distributions are not rejected, but copper grade is too low and 

silver is too high to fit the general model. For the test against 

model 17 (table G2b), tonnage, molybdenum grade, and gold 

grade distributions are not rejected, but copper and silver are 

rejected. For the test against model 20c (table G2c), only tonnage 

is not rejected. For the test against model 21a, only the silver 

grade was not rejected.

Because of these inconsistencies in tonnage and grade 

between the Canadian porphyry Cu±Mo±Au deposits and any 

of Singer and others (2008) global porphyry copper models, 

we have developed a new regional grade and tonnage model 

specifically for the Canadian deposits. The cumulative frequency 

curves for tonnage, copper and molybdenum grade in percent, 

and gold and silver grade in grams per metric ton are shown in 

figures G1 through G5, respectively.

References Cited

Panteleyev, Andre, 1995, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au (model L04), 

in Lefebure, D.V., and Ray, G.E., eds., Selected British 

Columbia mineral deposit profiles, vol. 1—Metallics and 

coal: British Columbia Ministry of Energy of Employment 

and Investment, Energy and Minerals Division, Open 

File 1995-20, p. 87-92, accessed May 29, 2008, at http://

www.em.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geolsurv/MetallicMinerals/

MineralDepositProfiles; http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/

Geoscience/MineralDepositProfiles/.

Panteleyev, Andre, 2005, Porphyry Cu±Mo±Au L04., in 

Fonseca, A., and Bradshaw, G., compilers, Yukon Mineral 

Deposits Profiles, Yukon Geological Survey Open File 

2005-5, 175 p., accessed July 28, 2009, at http://www.

geology.gov.yk.ca/mineral_deposit_profiles.html; http://

ygsftp.gov.yk.ca/publications/openfile/2005/of2005_5.pdf; 

http://www.geology.gov.yk.ca/pdf/l04_porphyry_cu_mo_

au.pdf.

Singer, D.A., Berger, V.I., and Moring, B.C., 2008, Porphyry 

copper deposits of the world: database, map, and grade and 

tonnage models, 2008: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2008-1155, 45 p., accessed May 1, 2009, at http://

pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1155/.
Appendix G 119

[Mt, million metric tons; g/t, grams per metric ton; –, no data; NA, not applicable. Independent indicates that a deposit is not in a group.]

TRACT ID CLUSTER GROUP NAME ORE (Mt) Cu (%) Mo (%) Au (g/t) Ag (g/t)

CA01 NA Independent Brenda 227 0.16 0.039 0.013 0.63

CA01 Bronson Independent Bronson Slope - Red Bluff 129.8 0.16 0.008 0.44 2.44

CA01 Gibraltar Gibraltar Gibraltar (Total) 1,365 0.291 0.006 – 0.077

CA01 NA Independent Gnat Lake (Gnat Pass) 30.4 0.39 – – –

CA01 Highland Valley Highland Valley Highland Valley (Total) 3,180 0.392 0.013 0.005 0.77

CA01 Kemess Kemess Kemess (Total) 948 0.153 – 0.221 –

CA01 Kinaskan Kinaskan Kinaskan (Total) 247.2 0.337 – 0.372 0.634

CA01 Kwanika Independent Kwanika (Swan) 211.2 0.278 – 0.269 –

CA01 Kemess Independent Pine 70 0.15 – 0.57 –

CA01 Schaft Creek Schaft Creek Schaft Creek (Total) 1,484 0.255 0.021 0.169 –

CA03 Hushamu Hushamu Hushamu (Total) 780.4 0.207 0.011 0.258 –

CA03 Island Island Island (Total) 377 0.41 0.017 0.19 1.4

CA04 Bell (Babine) Independent Bell Copper 495 0.36 0.005 0.16 1

CA04 Berg Independent Berg 650.6 0.284 0.036 0.018 3.6

CA04 Bell Independent Big Onion (Cimbria) 94.4 0.42 0.02 0.064 1

CA04 NA Independent Cash 36 0.28 0.021 0.17 –

CA04 Casino Independent Casino 964 0.22 0.02 0.24 1.8

CA04 Catface Independent Catface 308 0.37 0.007 0.05 –

CA04 Bell Bell Dorothy-Nak (Total) 316 0.195 – 0.114 –

CA04 Fish Lake Independent Fish Lake (Prosperity) 1,150 0.22 0.002 0.41 2.3

CA04 NA Independent Gambier Island 114 0.29 0.018 0.03 1.3

CA04 Bell (Babine) Independent Granisle 171.2 0.41 – 0.144 0.4

CA04 Huckleberry Huckleberry Huckleberry (Total) 198.9 0.454 0.013 0.021 0.753

CA04 NA Independent Lexington-Lone Star 19.5 0.56 – 0.55 –

CA04 Louise Lake Independent Louise Lake 151 0.238 0.008 0.228 –

CA04 NA Independent Maggie 181.4 0.28 0.029 – –

CA04 Bell (Babine) Independent Morrison (Hearne Hill) 206.9 0.337 0.004 0.177 –

CA04 Berg Independent New Nanik (Nanika) 16.5 0.437 – – –

CA04 Ok OK Ok (Total) 230 0.266 0.011 –

CA04 NA Independent Poison Mountain 808 0.24 0.008 0.12 3

CA04 Berg Independent Poplar 236 0.37 – – –

CA04 NA Independent Rey Lake 46.9 0.17 0.018 – –

CA04 Fish Lake Independent Taseko 15 0.53 0.012 0.53 –

CA05 Giant Copper Giant Copper Giant Copper (Total) 44.8 0.5 0.005 0.137 2.945

Table G1. Estimated resources of deposits used in the grade and tonnage model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits.
120 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

[Shown are the number of deposits in each distribution, percentiles, means and standard deviations, differences of means, and p-values for the t-test.

Prob > |t|, p-value for the two-tailed t-test; Prob > t, p-value for a one-tailed t-test; *, Prob > |t| is <0.01, indicating significantly different sample means

at the 99-percent confidence level (shaded). Log-Mt, logarithm (to base 10) of million metric tons; Log-%, logarithm (to base 10) of percent; Log-g/t,

logarithm (to base 10) of grams per metric ton.] 

Table G2. Summary of t-test results for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits against the four porphyry copper deposit model distributions 

of Singer and others (2008).

Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian

No. of deposits 364 34 364 34 188 24 211 27 141 16

Min 0.643 1.176 -1.155 -0.824 -3.301 -2.699 -2.959 -2.308 -1.022 -1.114

10% 1.544 1.386 -0.561 -0.796 -2.457 -2.367 -1.582 -1.773 -0.208 -0.613

25% 1.915 1.943 -0.444 -0.657 -2.155 -2.147 -1.125 -1.194 0.089 -0.179

Median 2.423 2.340 -0.337 -0.542 -1.854 -1.898 -0.678 -0.770 0.301 0.057

75% 2.875 2.833 -0.222 -0.402 -1.620 -1.699 -0.426 -0.570 0.589 0.381

90% 3.223 3.098 -0.114 -0.322 -1.391 -1.491 -0.194 -0.273 0.775 0.501

Max 4.328 3.502 0.255 -0.252 -1.000 -1.409 0.114 -0.024 1.322 0.556

Mean 2.401 2.319 -0.341 -0.534 -1.900 -1.936 -0.802 -0.891 0.313 0.039

SD 0.665 0.594 -0.194 0.162 0.431 -0.320 0.562 -0.535 0.388 0.418

Diff. of means

Prob > |t|

Prob > t

Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian

No. of deposits 231 34 231 34 118 24 94 27 78 15

Min 0.643 1.176 -1.155 -0.824 -3.000 -2.699 -2.000 -2.308 -1.022 -1.114

10% 1.482 1.386 -0.553 -0.796 -2.305 -2.367 -1.523 -1.773 -0.230 -0.613

25% 1.903 1.942 -0.444 -0.658 -2.097 -2.147 -1.224 -1.194 0.138 -0.179

Median 2.455 2.340 -0.337 -0.542 -1.854 -1.898 -0.921 -0.770 0.301 0.057

75% 2.869 2.833 -0.237 -0.402 -1.667 -1.699 -0.699 -0.570 0.546 0.381

90% 3.191 3.098 -0.126 -0.322 -1.523 -1.491 -0.469 -0.273 0.800 0.501

Max 4.226 3.502 0.114 -0.252 -1.108 -1.409 0.000 -0.244 1.301 0.556

Mean 2.381 2.309 -0.349 -0.534 -1.805 -1.936 -0.947 -0.891 0.307 0.039

SD 0.655 0.594 -0.880 0.162 0.348 0.320 0.397 0.535 0.401 0.418

Diff. of means

Prob > |t|

Prob > t

Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian

No. of deposits 92 34 92 34 29 24 92 27 40 16

Min 1.078 1.176 -0.699 -0.824 -3.301 -2.699 -1.523 -2.308 -0.721 -1.114

10% 1.544 1.386 -0.569 -0.796 -3.000 -2.367 -0.620 -1.773 -0.143 -0.613

25% 1.892 1.943 -0.465 -0.658 -2.581 -2.147 -0.523 -1.194 -0.079 -0.179

Median 2.255 2.340 -0.357 -0.542 -2.301 -1.898 -0.423 -0.766 0.398 0.057

75% 2.772 2.283 -0.196 -0.402 -2.126 -1.699 -0.222 -0.570 0.586 0.381

90% 3.105 3.095 -0.086 -0.322 -1.959 -1.491 -0.110 -0.273 0.770 0.501

Max 4.048 3.502 0.255 -0.252 -1.699 -1.409 0.114 -0.244 1.322 0.556

Mean 2.334 2.319 -0.329 -0.534 -2.403 -1.936 -0.395 -0.891 0.350 0.039

SD 0.615 0.594 -0.199 0.162 0.364 0.320 0.248 0.535 0.385 0.418

Diff. of means

Prob > |t|

Prob > t

Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian

41 34 41 34 41 24 25 27 23 16

Min 1.255 1.176 -0.921 -0.824 -2.097 -2.699 -2.959 -2.308 -0.481 -1.114

0.100 1.681 1.386 -0.674 -0.796 -2.000 -2.367 -2.643 -1.773 -0.232 -0.613

0.250 2.109 1.943 -0.431 -0.658 -1.784 -2.147 -2.000 -1.194 0.079 -0.179

Median 2.505 2.340 -0.292 -0.542 -1.495 -1.898 -1.638 -0.770 0.204 0.057

0.750 3.203 2.833 -0.209 -0.402 -1.314 -1.699 -1.523 -0.570 0.602 0.381

0.900 3.792 3.098 -0.067 -0.322 -1.076 -1.491 -1.101 -0.273 0.738 0.501

Max 4.328 3.502 0.000 -0.252 -1.000 -1.409 -0.921 -0.244 0.934 0.556

0.446

0.223

Gold (Log-g/t)

0.015 0.205 -0.467

-0.056

Tonnage (Log-Mt)

0.670 0.616

0.496

Copper (Log-%) Molybdenum (Log-%)

0.311

Tonnage (Log-Mt) Copper (Log-%) Molybdenum (Log-%)

0.0162*

0.692 0.0143*

Tonnage (Log-Mt)

a. Canadian deposits tested against the global Cu general model (models 17, 20c, and 21a)

b. Canadian deposits tested against the global Cu subtype model (model 17 only) 

<0.0001*

<0.0001*

0.620

0.310

0.088

0.428

Silver (Log-g/t)

0.0081*

Gold (Log-g/t)

d. Canadian deposits tested against the global Cu-Mo subtype model (model 21a only) 

0.451 <0.0001* <0.0001* <0.0001*

0.902 <0.0001* <0.0001* <0.0001*

0.0285*

0.288 <0.0001* 0.335

Copper (Log-%) Molybdenum (Log-%) Gold (Log-g/t)

0.062

0.577 <0.0001*

0.214

0.274

0.022*

0.011*

c. Canadian deposits tested against the global Cu-Au subtype model (model 20c only) 

Silver (Log-g/t)

Silver (Log-g/t)

0.185 0.031 0.268

Silver (Log-g/t)

0.083 0.162 0.036

Tonnage (Log-Mt) Copper (Log-%) Molybdenum (Log-%) Gold (Log-g/t)
Appendix G 121

[Shown are the number of deposits in each distribution, percentiles, means and standard deviations, differences of means, and p-values for the t-test.

Prob > |t|, p-value for the two-tailed t-test; Prob > t, p-value for a one-tailed t-test; *, Prob > |t| is <0.01, indicating significantly different sample means

at the 99-percent confidence level (shaded). Log-Mt, logarithm (to base 10) of million metric tons; Log-%, logarithm (to base 10) of percent; Log-g/t,

logarithm (to base 10) of grams per metric ton.] 

Table G2. Summary of t-test results for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits against the four porphyry copper deposit model distributions 

of Singer and others (2008)—Continued.

No. of deposits 92 34 92 34 29 24 92 27 40 16

Min 1.078 1.176 -0.699 -0.824 -3.301 -2.699 -1.523 -2.308 -0.721 -1.114

10% 1.544 1.386 -0.569 -0.796 -3.000 -2.367 -0.620 -1.773 -0.143 -0.613

25% 1.892 1.943 -0.465 -0.658 -2.581 -2.147 -0.523 -1.194 -0.079 -0.179

Median 2.255 2.340 -0.357 -0.542 -2.301 -1.898 -0.423 -0.766 0.398 0.057

75% 2.772 2.283 -0.196 -0.402 -2.126 -1.699 -0.222 -0.570 0.586 0.381

90% 3.105 3.095 -0.086 -0.322 -1.959 -1.491 -0.110 -0.273 0.770 0.501

Max 4.048 3.502 0.255 -0.252 -1.699 -1.409 0.114 -0.244 1.322 0.556

Mean 2.334 2.319 -0.329 -0.534 -2.403 -1.936 -0.395 -0.891 0.350 0.039

SD 0.615 0.594 -0.199 0.162 0.364 0.320 0.248 0.535 0.385 0.418

Diff. of means

Prob > |t|

Prob > t

Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian Model Canadian

41 34 41 34 41 24 25 27 23 16

Min 1.255 1.176 -0.921 -0.824 -2.097 -2.699 -2.959 -2.308 -0.481 -1.114

0.100 1.681 1.386 -0.674 -0.796 -2.000 -2.367 -2.643 -1.773 -0.232 -0.613

0.250 2.109 1.943 -0.431 -0.658 -1.784 -2.147 -2.000 -1.194 0.079 -0.179

Median 2.505 2.340 -0.292 -0.542 -1.495 -1.898 -1.638 -0.770 0.204 0.057

0.750 3.203 2.833 -0.209 -0.402 -1.314 -1.699 -1.523 -0.570 0.602 0.381

0.900 3.792 3.098 -0.067 -0.322 -1.076 -1.491 -1.101 -0.273 0.738 0.501

Max 4.328 3.502 0.000 -0.252 -1.000 -1.409 -0.921 -0.244 0.934 0.556

Mean 2.671 2.319 -0.332 -0.534 -1.529 -1.936 -1.758 -0.891 0.271 0.039

SD 0.771 0.594 0.214 0.162 0.311 0.320 0.503 0.535 0.355 0.418

Diff. of means

Prob > |t|

Prob > t

0.015 0.205 -0.467

0.4960.311

0.232

Tonnage (Log-Mt) Copper (Log-%) Molybdenum (Log-%)

0.0162*

0.0401

Silver (Log-g/t)

0.352 0.202 0.407 -0.868

0.014* <0.0001* <0.0001* <0.0001*

0.0081*

0.029* <0.0001* <0.0001* <0.0001* 0.0803

Gold (Log-g/t)

d. Canadian deposits tested against the global Cu-Mo subtype model (model 21a only) 

0.451 <0.0001* <0.0001* <0.0001*

0.902 <0.0001* <0.0001* <0.0001*

Proportion of deposits

10 87654 100 7050403020 1000 600400300200 10000 2000 60004000 20000

Tonnage, million metric tons

90th = 36.1

50th = 208

10th = 1193

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Figure G1. Tonnage model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits, in log (base 10) of millions of metric tons.
122 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0.1 0.080.07 1 0.2 0.3 0.90.80.70.60.50.4

Copper grade, percent

Proportion of deposits

10th = 0.472

50th = 0.292

90th = 0.181

Figure G2. Copper grade model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits, in log (base 10) of percent. 
Appendix G 123

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0.001 0.01 0.002 0.0040.003 0.0080.006

Molybdenum grade, percent

0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06

0.1 0.08

50th = 0.007

10th = 0.026

Proportion of deposits

Figure G3. Molybdenum grade model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits, in log (base 10) of percent. 
124 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0.001 0.01 0.0030.002 0.0070.005 0.1 0.070.050.030.02 1 0.80.60.50.40.30.2

Gold grade, grams per metric ton

Proportion of deposits

50th = 0.095

10th = 0.562

Figure G4. Gold grade model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits, in log (base 10) of grams per metric ton.
Appendix G 125

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0.1 0.080.06 1 0.80.70.60.50.40.30.2 10 98765432 20

Silver grade, grams per metric ton

10th = 2.25

Proportion of deposits

Figure G5. Silver grade model for Canadian Cu±Mo±Au deposits, in log (base 10) of grams per metric ton.
126 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

Appendix H. Geographic Information System (GIS) Files 

Representing the Porphyry Copper Mineral Resource 

Assessment Permissive Tracts, Deposits and Significant 

Prospects, and Accompanying Metadata, Porphyry 

Copper Assessment, British Columbia and Yukon 

Territory, Canada

By Mark J. Mihalasky1, Arthur A. Bookstrom2, Thomas P. Frost3, and Steve Ludington4

Description of GIS Files

An ESRI file-geodatabase (003pCu.gdb), containing 

three feature classes, and an ESRI map document (.mxd) are 

included with this assessment report. These files may also 

be downloaded from the USGS publications Web site as a 

compressed file sir2010-5090c_appendix_h.zip. The 

file-geodatabase feature classes are as follows:

boundary_003pCu is a vector (polygon) feature class 

that represents an outline of Canada, including country 

political boundary and coastline. The dataset was extracted 

from U.S. Department of State (2009) SSIB spatial database.

mineral_sites_003pCu is a vector (point) feature class 

that represents porphyry copper mineral sites (deposits, 

significant prospects, and deposit-prospect groups) for the 

Canadian Cordillera. As defined for this mineral resource 

assessment, a “mineral site” includes deposits, significant 

prospects, and spatial groupings of proximal deposits and(or) 

significant prospects. This dataset includes an inventory of 

mineral resources in 89 known porphyry copper (and 2 related 

copper-bearing polymetallic vein) ore zones, representing 

50 porphyry copper deposits, and lists key characteristics of 

280 additional porphyry copper and related copper-bearing 

prospects. See metadata and report for additional details. See 

appendix F for cited references.

tracts_003pCu is a vector (polygon) feature class that 

represents porphyry copper mineral resource assessment 

permissive tracts for the Canadian Cordillera. A mineral 

resource assessment tract is defined as a geographic area 

(a tract of land) which is determined to possess certain 

characteristics and attributes that permit the occurrence 

of a particular type of mineral deposit. This feature class 

contains five permissive tracts for the occurrence of 

porphyry copper deposits: two island-arc tracts, one tract of 

transitional, mixed island-arc and continental arc affinities, 

and two continental arc tracts. These polygon features 

spatially overlap and may require setting a definition query 

(for example "Tract_ID"='CAOIPC') in order to separately 

display the entire tract. When displaying multiple tracts at 

the same time, portions of some tracts will be concealed. 

The attribute table associated with each tract contains 

cursory information about geologic setting, mineral 

deposits, and mineral resource assessment estimates. See 

report and metadata for additional details.

These datasets are contained in an ESRI map document 

(version 9.3): GIS_SIR5090-C.mxd. Also included are 

separate ASCII files of the metadata for the mineral sites 

and tracts, located in the folder “003pCu.met”.

Reference Cited

U.S. Department of State, 2009, Small-scale digital 

international land boundaries (SSIB)—Lines, edition 10 

and Polygons, beta edition 1: U.S. Department of State, 

Office of the Geographer and Global Issues, Boundaries 

and Sovereignty Encyclopedia (B.A.S.E.).

1

U.S. Geological Survey, mjm@usgs.gov.

2

U.S. Geological Survey, abookstrom@usgs.gov.

3

U.S. Geological Survey, tfrost@usgs.gov. 

4

U.S. Geological Survey, slud@usgs.gov.
Appendix I 127

Appendix I. Assessment Team Member Information

Grant Abbott is former Director of the Yukon 

Geological Survey (retired 2008). He graduated from the 

University of British Columbia in 1971 with a B.A.Sc. in 

Geological Engineering and from Queens University in 

1976 with a M.A.Sc. in Geological Engineering. He is an 

economic geologist and has largely spent his time in the 

Yukon—from 1970 to 1979 as a student and exploration 

geologist and since 1980 as a government geoscientist 

undertaking mineral deposit studies and regional bedrock 

mapping. He has a comprehensive knowledge of mineral 

deposits in the northern Cordillera and their regional setting 

and has participated in several regional mineral assessments 

in Alaska and Yukon.

Arthur A. Bookstrom is a Research Geologist with the 

USGS in Spokane, Washington. He received a B.A. in geology 

from Dartmouth College (1961), an M.S. in geology from 

the University of Colorado (1964), and a Ph.D. in geology 

from Stanford University (1975). He worked as a mine 

geologist at the Climax molybdenum mine in Colorado, El 

Romeral magnetite mine in Chile, and the Rochester silver 

mine in Nevada. He has done exploration-project work at 

sites in Colorado, Nevada, and Montana, as well as regional 

exploration for molybdenum in Colorado and regional 

exploration for gold in Nevada, Montana, and Saudi Arabia. 

His work with the USGS has included regional geologic 

studies, metallogenic studies, mineral-environmental studies, 

and mineral-resource assessments.

Thomas P. Frost is a Research Geologist with the USGS 

in Spokane, Washington. He completed his B.A. in Geology 

in 1975 at U.C. Santa Barbara and his Ph.D. at Stanford in 

1987. He has experience as a marine geologist working on 

environmental hazards associated with oil leasing in the 

Gulf of Alaska and Cook Inlet, a petrologist working on 

rheologic modeling of mafic and felsic magma interaction in 

granitic plutons in the Sierra Nevada, and a geochemist doing 

geochemical surveys and geologic mapping. Recent work 

includes the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management 

Project, which was charged with assessing forest-landscapeaquatic-social-economic conditions in the Columbia Basin 

and developing adaptive management plans for Federal lands 

in the basin. He has participated in porphyry copper mineral 

resource assessments of Russia, Mongolia, northern China, 

and Kazakhstan.

James M. Logan is a Professional Geologist (P.Geo.) 

and mineral deposit specialist with the Geological Survey 

Branch of the British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines. 

He obtained a B.Sc. degree from Brock University, Ontario, 

in 1977 and completed a M.Sc. degree at the University of 

British Columbia in 1986. He has worked as an exploration 

geologist, mapping and evaluating a variety of precious 

and base metal mineral deposits across Canada and the 

western United States. His recent experience has included 

regional mapping and mineral deposit studies in northwest, 

central, and southeast British Columbia, including research 

on the geological setting, geochronology, and metallogenic 

characteristics of alkaline Cu-Au porphyry deposits of the 

Mesozoic arc sequences of the Intermontane Belt of British 

Columbia.

Steve Ludington is a Research Geologist with the USGS 

in Menlo Park, California. He received a BA in Geology 

from Stanford University (1967) and a Ph.D. in Geology 

from the University of Colorado (1974). He worked as an 

exploration geologist in Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona 

before joining the USGS in 1974. His work with the USGS 

has included regional geologic studies, metallogenic and 

geochemical studies, wilderness studies, and mineral-resource 

assessments. He has done mineral-resource assessment 

work in the United States, Costa Rica, Bolivia, Mongolia, 

Afghanistan, and Mexico and was a coordinator for the 1998 

USGS National Mineral Resource Assessment.

Mark J. Mihalasky is a Research Geologist with the 

USGS in Spokane, Washington. He received a B.S. in Geology 

in 1984 from Stockton State College, a M.S. in 1988 from 

Eastern Washington University in Geology, and a Ph.D. in 

Earth Sciences in 1999 from the University of Ottawa. He 

has worked as an exploration geologist and GIS consultant, 

Assistant Professor of Earth and Marine Geology and Coastal 

Research Center Director of Research at The Richard Stockton 

College of New Jersey, and, since joining the USGS in 2008, 

a geospatial analyst and resource assessment scientist. He has 

experience in economic geology, mineral and interdisciplinary 

natural resource assessment, and quantitative analysis and 

modeling of geospatial data. He has been involved with 

metallic mineral resource assessments (gold, silver, copper) in 

Nevada, China, Afghanistan, and western Asia (eastern Russia, 

Mongolia, northern China, Kazakhstan), diamond resources 
128 Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory, Canada

in Mali and Central African Republic, and interdisciplinary 

natural resource assessments in Madagascar, Gabon, and the 

United States.

Andre Panteleyev is an economic geologist, formerly 

with the British Columbia Department of Mines of the British 

Columbia Geological Survey. He received his B.Sc. (Honours, 

1964), M.Sc. (1969), and Ph.D. (1976) from the University of 

British Columbia. He specialized in economic geology studies 

at Queen’s University from 1967 to 1969, and is registered 

as a Professional Engineer (P.Eng.) with the Association 

of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British 

Columbia. He specializes in intrusion-related and subvolcanic 

mineralized environments, conceptual mineral deposit 

modeling, the genetic interrelationships of mineral deposits, 

regional metallogeny, methodologies and applications of 

regional mineral potential assessments, and multisector land 

use negotiations. His work experience includes nine field 

seasons in the Canadian Cordillera with Kennco Explorations 

(Western) Ltd (a Canadian subsidiary of Kennecott Copper 

Corporation) doing porphyry copper exploration. He has 

worked and lectured extensively in Canada, Mongolia, China, 

Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, and Perú, as well as the United 

States, El Salvador, Fiji, Mexico, and Sweden.
Produced in the Menlo Park Publishing Service Center, California

Manuscript approved for publication, June 1, 2011

Text edited by Tracey Suzuki and Peter H. Stauffer

Layout and design by Stephen L. Scott
Mihalasky and others—Global Mineral Resource Assessment—Porphyry Copper Assessment of British Columbia and Yukon Territory—Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5090–C