Evaluation
of mineral-resource
potentia
I in NewMexico
tracted economically under current or future
conditions (Tavlor and Steven, 1983).Mineral-resourcepotential is preferred in describing an area, whereas mineral-resource
"Iavorability" is used in describing a specific
rock type or geologic environment (Goudarzi, 7984).The mineral-resource potential
McLemore,
Geologist,
NewMexico
Bureau
NM87801
by VirginiaT.
of MinesandMineral
Resouces,
Socorro,
is not a measureof the quantities of the minNMBMMR evaluationsdelineateareaswhere eral resources,but is a measure of the potenIntroduction
Production of minerals and mineral fuels more detailed geologic, geochemical,and tial ol occurrence.Factorsthat could preclude
in New Mexico has decreasedfrom g7.2bll- geophysicalwork is needed. Thesereports, development of the resources,such as the
lion in 1981to $6.5 billion in 1983(Eveleth which outline exploration targets and iden- feasibility of extracting the minerals, land
and Bieberman, 1984; Eveleth et al., 1984), tify known deposit types, are useful to ex- ownership, accessibility of the minerals, or
cost of exploration, development, producbut mineral resources are still vital to our ploration geologists.
tion, processing,or marketing, are not constate and national economies.New Mexico
Definitions
sidered in assessingthe mineral-resource
production
led the nation in the
of uranium,
Manv renorts have been written in recent potential even though these factors certainly
perlite, and potash ln 1982, was second in
the production of pumice, and was third in years that describe the mineral resourcesor affect the economicsof extraction. Total evalthe production of copper. Significant quan- mineral-resourcepotential of areas in New uation of mineral-resourcepotential involves
tities of natural gas (ranked fourth), molyb- Mexico. However, the terms mineral re- a completeunderstandingof the known and
denum, gold, crude oil (all three ranked sourcesor mineral-resourcepotential have undiscoveredmineral resourcesin a given
seventh),silver,and coalalsowere produced rarely been defined. Usage of these terms area.
from New Mexico (Eveleth and Bieberman, varies from one reoort to another and some
Classification
1984).Production of commodities such as reports do not diffbrentiatebetween them.
of mineral resources differs
Classification
Mineral
naturally
occurresourcesare the
sand and gravel, brick clay, Iimestone and
clay for cement, and others are important to ring concentrations of materials (solid, gas, from classification of the mineral-resource
construction and other industries in New or liquid) in or on the earth's crust that can potential. Quantities of mineral resourcesare
Mexico. Evaluation of mineral-resourcepo- be extracted economically under current or classifiedaccording to availability of geologic
tential helps us assessthe future availabiiitv future economic conditions. Reports de- data (geologicassurance),economicfeasibilscribingmineral resourcesvary from simple itv (identified or undiscovered),and as ecoof these minerals.
Local, state, and federal officials are re- inventoriesof known mineral depositsto de- n b m i c o r s u b e c o n o m i c( F i g . 1 ) . M i n e r a l resourcepotential is a qualitative judgment
quired to make decisionsregarding use, ac- tailed geologicinvestigations.
Amineral occurrence
is any locality where a of the probability of the existenceof a comquisition, and restriction of federal, state,and
other lands. These decisionsmay affect fu- useful mineral or material occurs. A mineral modity.
Classification of mineral-resource potenture exploration and development of mineral prospectis any occurrence that has been deresources.Yet,adequatemineral-resourcedata veloped by underground or above ground tial varies from simple subjective schemes,
are not always available in a usable form to techniques or by subsurface drilling. These like those used currently by NMBMMR, to
policy makers who generally are not trained two terms do not have any resource or eco- complex quantitative and statistical methods
in geology but who must evaluate mineral- nomic implications. Amineral ilepositis a suf.- (Harris and Euresty, 1969;Harris, 1959; Harresource values as compared with other re- ficiently large concentration of a valuable or ris and Agterberg, 1981).However, it is rare
sourcessuch as wildlife, timber, archaeology, useful mineral or material that may be ex- that an adequate data base for all commodwilderness, and agriculture. Furthermore, tracted under current or future economic ities is available for complex statistical treatmany resourceassessmentsdo not include conditions. A mine is any prospect that pro- ment, especiallyfor preliminary assessments.
evaluation of nonmetallic minerals. To alle- duced or is currently producing a useful min- Furthermore, a simple classification scheme
is more versatile for uses such as exploration
viate these problems and provide data on eral or material.
potentialof an area is for new deposits and land-use planning.
The mineral-resource
future mineral availabilitv, the New Mexico
B u r e a u o f M i n e s a n d M i n e r a l R e s o u r c e s the probability that a mineral will occur in Mineral-resource potential is classified at
(NMBMMR), in cooperation with the U.S. suffiiient quahtities so that it can be ex- NMBMMR as high, moderate,low, verylow,
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), has
Undiscovered
ldentified
prepared a preliminary assessmentof the
I
n
f
e
r
r
e
d
n
s
l
/
o
l
e
d
0
e
m
o
mineral-resourcepotential of TorranceCounty
Hypothelicol
I Speculolive
Meosured
I
lndicoled
(Mclemore, 1984)and of the BLM's northern
Rio Puerco resource area, which includes -E
Inferred
Sandovaland Bernalillo Counties and adja- e E c o n o m i c
R a a a tu, aa
r e s e rv es
I
cent parts of McKinley, Cibola, and SantaFe
I
Counties (Mclemore et al., 7984).Prior as- E
+
o
sessmentsof the mineral-resourcepotential o
Inf e r r e d
o r g i n ol l y
Morginol
R e s o u cr e s
m o r g i n oI
of several areas have been completed
bv oo M
^
r e s er v es
e c o n o mt c
reserves
(Table
1970
NMBMMR since
1) althougir o
I
+
NMBMMR has been involved with evalua- oO
ting mineral resourcessincethe Bureau'sfor- oo
!
Subeconomic
S u b e c o n o m i rce s o u r c e s
mation in 1927.
o
Preliminary evaluations of the mineral-re- ' 6
source potential are useful not only for estimating mineral availability and helping
Olher
N o n c o n v e n l i o n oo
l n d l o w - g r o d em o t e r i o l s
government officials plan land use, but they
occurrences
also provide a basic background of geologic
data, an index to geologic mapping, and an
In6vs6sing
degreeof geologicossuronce
inventory of known mineral occurrences,
prospects,deposits,mines, and oil and gas FIGUREl-Classification of mineral resources(modified from U.S. Bureau of Mines and U.S. Geological
tests within the study area. In addition, Survey, 1980).
T
August 1985 New Mexico Geology
or unknown according to availability of geoIogic data and relative probability of occurrence (Fig. 2).
potenflal is assignedto
High mineral-resource
areas where there are known mines or deposits where the geologic, geochemical,or
geophysical data indicate an excellent probability that mineral deposits occur. All active
and producing properties fall into this class
as well as identified depositsin known mining districts or in known areas of mineraliz a t i o n . S p e c u l a t i v ed e p o s i t s , s u c h a s
reasonableextensionsof known mining districts and identified deposits or partially
known deposits within geologic trends or
areasof mineralization,are classifiedas high
mineral-resource potential when sufficient
data indicate a high probability of occurrence. Information, such as quantity, quality,
grade, past and present production, depth
to deposit, and reserves, is important, although not always essential,in determining
that an areahas a high potential. Exploration
may be in progressor expectedto occurwithin
L0 years.
potential is asModeratemineral-resource
signedto areaswhere geologic,geochemical,
or geophysical data suggest a reasonable
possibility that undiscovereddepositsoccur
in formations or geologic settings known to
contain economicdepositselsewhere.Speculative depositsin known mining districtsor
mineralized areas are assigneda moderate
potential if evidence for a high potential of
economicdeposits is inconclusive.This assessment,like other classifications,can be
revised when new information, new genetic
models, or changesin economicconditions
develop.
Low mineral-resource
potentialis assignedto
areas where available data imply the occurrence of mineralization, but indicate a low
probability for the occurrence of a deposit.
This includes speculative deposits in geologic settings not known to contain economic
deposits,but which are similar to geologic
settings of known economic deposits. Additional geologic data may be needed to better classifysuch areas.
Very low mineral-resource
potentialis assigned to areaswhere sufficient information
indicates that an area is unfavorable for eco-
Eo
o9
gq
€g
o0
Eo
za
;e
L O
-Ea
-
+
Increosing
degreeof probobilify
FIGURE 2-Classification of mineral-resourcepotential (modified from Tavlor et al.. 1984and Goudtzr, i9W1. A-D represent four levels of geologic
assurance.Bv definition, shaded areas cannot be
rated.
nomic deposits.This evaluationmay include
areaswith dispersedbut uneconomic mineral occurrencesas well as areas that have
beendepletedof their mineralresources.Use
of the very low potential classificationrequires a high level of geologic assuranceto
support such an evaluation, but it is assumed for potential depositsthat are too deep
to be extracted economically, even though
there may not be a high level of geologic
assurance.These"economic"depthsvary according to the commodity and current and
future economic conditions.
potentialis reUnknown mineral-resource
served for areaswhere necessarygeologic,
geochemical,and geophysicaldata are inadequateto classifyan area otherwise.This
assessmentis assignedto areas where the
degreeof geologicassuranceis low and any
other classification would be misleading.
Theseareasshould receivehigh priority for
additional study.
The mineral-resource potential of some
areascannot be assessedbecauseof lack of
useful data. Detailed geologicmapping at a
scaleof 1:24p00 may be required before the
mineral-resourcepotential can be assessed.
The lack of data does not imply a very Iow
mineral-resource potential. The difference
clasbetweenan unknownresource-Potential
arcais that some
sification and an uneaaluated
data existsin an area of unknown resource
potential that implies the possibility of mineral-resourceoccurrences.
This classificationschemeis similar to that
used by Brobst and Goudarzi (1984)where
a high mineral-resourcepotential corresponds to substantiatedresource potential
and a moderate mineral-resourcepotential
correspondsto a probable resourc-epotential. Goudarzi (1984),of the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS), proposed a classification
schemesimilar to the one used by NMBMMR.
In addition to evaluation of the mineralresource potential, NMBMMR staff geologists assessthe potential for development.
The potential for development is classified
simply as high, moderate, or low, and economic factors such as grade, tonnage, current market conditions, transportation, and
operatingstatusare taken into account.Hlf
indicates that a compotentialt'or deaelopment
modity is being produced currently or economic conditions suggestthat production of
the deposit is economically feasiblecurrently
or in the near future. Moderatepotentialt'or
indicates that production of the
deaelopment
deposit would occur if certain geologic or
economic conditions became favorable. Low
potentialfor deaelopment
indicates only a slight
possibility, if any, for production of the deposit. The potential for development classification is a highly subjective judgment, but
it does offer an evaluation of the economic
feasibilityof an area.
A dual rating classificationhas been proposed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory
(Voelkeret al., L979),which is being used by
the USGS(Tayloret al., 1984;Goudarzi,1984)
and the BLM. This system involves rating
the geologicenvironmentas high, moderate,
low, or none (or as 1-4 with 4 the highest
rating) and rating separatelythe certainty or
availability of geologic data (expressedas 14 or A-D with 4 and D the highest degrees
of certainty). Therefore, a high mineral-resource potential corresponds to a 414or 4lD
and a very low potential correspondsto a l./
'J.lD.
However, this classificationscheme
4 or
can be awkward to use. The availability of
geologicdata has been incorporatedinto the
NMBMMR classificationscheme(Fig 2).
Evaluation process
The evaluationof mineral-resourcepotential involvesa complexprocessbasedon geologic analogy of promising or favorable
geologic environments with geologic settings (geologic models) that contain known
economic deposits. Such subjective assessments or judgments depend not only on the
availableinformation concerning the area to
be evaluated, but also on the current knowledgeand understandingof known deposits.
Assessmentsof the resourcepotential also
depend on the experienceand knowledge of
the researchersand the date of the assessment. Therefore,mineral-resourcepotential
is assessedby a team of NMBMMR geologists who specializein specific commodities
and then the assessmentis reviewed by other
commodity specialists. Not all mineral-resource assessmentsby other agencies involve teamwork or subsequentreview.
The process of evaluating mineral-resourcepotential'usedcurrently by NMBMMR
is similar to that used by the USGS (Shawe,
1981;Goudarzi, 7984)and Oak Ridge National Laboratory(Voelkeret aL, t979).However, little field investigation is incorporated
becauseof time
into NMBMMR assessments
conshaintsimposed by the BLM. Additional
data provided by future field investigations
will help refine these preliminary evaluations.
The most important stagein any geologic
investigation, and especially in these evaluations, is compilation of all availablepublished and unpublished information. A
completebibliography of geologic references
and an index to geologicmapping are essential. Evaluation of mineral-resourcepotential
involves integration and interpretation of
several data sets maintained by various federal and state agencies,including: 1) MRDS
(Mineral ResourcesData Systems; formerly
CRIB, Computerized Resource Information
Bank, and MILS, Mineral Industry Location
System);2) DMEA (DefenseMinerals Exploration Administration); 3) NURE (National
Uranium ResourceEvaluation) data, including HSSR (Hydrogeochemical and Stream
and ARMS (AerSedimentReconnaissance)
ial Radiometric and Magnetic Survey); 4)
NCRDS (National Coal Resource Data System); 5) AML (AbandonedMine Lands);and
6) various file data from state and federal
agencies.Using these data, known mineral
occurrences/prosPects,mines,deposits,and
oil and gas tests are identified and plotted
on topographicmaps. Geochemicaland geo-
NewMexicoGeolo3y August 1985
physical anomalies are identified and described.
After compilation of all availablegeologic
data, the fypes of mineral deposits and favorable geologic environments are identified
and compared with appropriate geologic
models. It is important to include all types
of metallic, nonmetallic, and energy-fuel deposits in the area.A preliminary evaluation
of the mineral-resourcepotential is performed by using all available data and then
determining what additional data are required for assessment.A number of factors
must be evaluated, including: 1) host-rock
"favorability," 2) structural controls, 3) evidence of mineralization, 4) previous mining
and production, 5) geochemicaland/or geophysicalanomalies,6) regional geologicsetting,7) time of mineralization,8) alteration,
9) mineralogyand mineral assemblages,10)
processesaffecting mineralization since their
formation, and 11) geologichistory. Lack of
data in a particular area does nof imply no
potential, but should be classified as unknown or not evaluated.
The evaluation of the preliminary mineralresourcepotential should be followed by field
investigations and more detailed mapping,
geochemical sampling, and geophysical
studies.Preliminary assessmentsare essential for determining which areasneed additional work and what types of data are
needed.
Repeated evaluation of the mineral-resourcepotential is required. New data on the
study area should be incorporated into the
database.New geologicconceptsand models
and more sophisticated exploration techniques could drastically alter the assessments.New technologiesthat require different
commodities and changes in mining, milling, and processingcould allow exploration
and developmentof lower-gradeor new types
of deposits. Political and economic conditions change rapidly and can transform today's mineral curiosity into tomorrow's
mineral deposit. Therefore, mineral-resource
potential assessmentsmust be revised periodically and updated on a timely basis.
S o n d o v|o . l a
McKinley
r---_I
ll
f__J
Cibolo
'tq
-5
a,
l V o l e n c i oI
I
ot
38
2l
____l
FIGURE3-Approximate locations of mineral-resourcepotential assessmentsin New Mexico. Numbers refer to location of areas listed in Tables1-3.
terminousUnited StatesMineral Assessment
Program). Resultsof CUSMAP include numerousreports concerningthe geology,mineraldeposits,geochemistry,and geophysical
characteristicsof the area.
or developmenttechniquesare found. Political and economicconditions may alter these
assessments.Repeatedevaluation of the
mineral-resourcepotential is essential for
land-use planning, mineral availability, or
planning for exploration programs.
Summary
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS-DiScussions
with
Although it is difficult to compare mineral JamesTurner (BLM) and Richard Chamberresourceswith other resourcessuch as tim- lin (NMBMMR) helped define the need for
ber, wildlife, and others, government offi- evaluating mineral-resourcepotential and
Available assessmentsin New Mexico
cialsare required to make decisionsregarding how to make the evaluations. The manuA number of mineral-resource-potential theseresources.Mineral availabilityand ex- script was reviewed by Frank Kottlowski
evaluations for parts of New Mexico have ploration programs also require a knowledge (NMBMMR), James Turner (BLM), Susan
been completed by NMBMMR (Table 1; Fig. of mineral resources.One meansof fulfilling Marcus (USGS),and Gus Goudarzi (USGS),
3), USGS (Table 2), U.S. Bureau of Mines theseneedsis to assessthe mineral-resource and their commentsare greatly appreciated.
(Table2), and BLM (Table3). NMBMMR has potential of an areafor all types of minerals.
been involved with assessmentsof two wilAssessmentof the mineral-resourcepoReferences
derness study areas, the WIPP (Waste Iso- tential depends on the available geologic, Brobst,D A , and Goudarzi,G H, 1984,Introduction;
lation Pilot Plant) site, and severalregional geochemical,and geophysicaldata and the
in Wildernessmineral potential, assessmentof mineralevaluations(Table1; Fig. 3). Someof the wil- experienceand knowledgeof the researchers resourceDotential in U S Forest Servicelands studied
1964-1,984:
U.S. Geological Survey, ProfessionalPaper
dernessareas,wildernessstudy areas,road- evaluatingthe area.NMBMMR usesa simple
1300,pp. 1-10.
lessareas,and national wildlife refugeswere classificationscheme,which is based on in- Cruver, S. K., Wodzicki, A., and Krason, ,7982, GeolJ
evaluatedby the USGSand the U.S. Bureau creasing degree of probability of occurrence
ogy, energy, and mineral resourcesassessmentof the
area,
New
Mexico:
Humphrey
Canyon
U
S Bureau of
of Mines (Table2; Fig. 3). The BLM has as- and geologic assurance. The potential is
Land Management, report, 47 pp
sessedseveral wilderness areas as well as classifiedas unknown, very low, low, modEveleth, R. W., and Bieberman,R. A., 1984,Mineral and
other BLM lands (Table3, Fig. 3). The re- erate,or high. Some areascannot be evalumineral-fuel oroduction activities in New Mexico durmaining wildernessareasnot evaluatedpre- ated becausedata are lacking or insufficient.
ing 7982:New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral
Resources,Annual Report lrtly 1.,1982,to June 30, 1983,
viously are being assessedcurrently or will
Reassessment
of the mineral-resourcepopp.27-33
be assessedin the future.
tential will be required periodically as new Eveleth,
R W, Bieberman,R. A., Mclemore, V T, and
The USGS also evaluated the Silver Citv technologies are developed, different comRoybal, G H.,7984, Mineral and mineral-resourceproLox 2oquadrangleaspart of CUSMAP (Cori- modities are required, and new exploration
duction in New Mexico, 1983:New Mexico Bureau of
August 1985 Nat: MexicoGeology
TABLE 1-Assessments of mineral-resource potential by NMBMMR; OF : Open-file report.
No. on
Fig. 3
Mineral-resource
area
NMBMMR
teference
East-centralNew Mexico
oF-28A (1970)
Waste Isolation Pilot Plani
(WIPP) site
oF-87
PetacaPinta Wilderness
study area
oF-161 (1981)
Siena Ladrones Wilderness
study area
oF-1,79 (1982)
Tonance County
oF-1e2 (1e84)
Northern Rio Puerco
resourceafea
oF-211 (1e84)
Valencia,Cibola, McKinley,
San fuan, and western Rio
Arriba Counties
in preparation
(1.978)
Mines and Mineral Resources,Annual Report July 1,
1982,to June 30, 1983,p. 34
Goudarzi, G. H., 1984,Guide to preparation of mineral
suruey reports on public lands: U.S. GeologicalSurvey,
Open-file Report 84-787, 50 pp.
Hanis, D. P., 1969, Alaska's base and precious metals
resources-a probabilistic regional appraisal: Colorado
School of Mines Quarterly, y. &, pp. 295-328.
Hanis, D. P, andAgterberg,F.P.,1981,The appraisalof
mineral resources: Economic Geology, 75th Anniversary Volume, pp. 897-938.
Hanis, D. P., and Euresty, D., 1959,A preliminary model
for the economic appraisal of regional resources and
exploration basedupon geostatisticalanalysisand computer simulation: Colorado School of Mines Quarterly,
v. 64, pp. 71.-98.
Krason,J., Cruver, S. K., and Wodzicki,A., 1982,GeoloBy, enerry/ and mineral resourcesassessmentin the
Carrizozoarea,New Mexico: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, report, 71 pp.
Krason, J., Wodzicki, A., and Cruver, S. K., 1982a,Geology, energy, and mineral resources assessmentof the
mineral-resoutce potential studies of wilderness areas, wilderness studv areas,
TABLE 2-Detailed
n a t i o n a l w i l d t i f e r e f u g e s , a n d r o a d l e s si r e a s b y t h e U . S . G e o l o g i c a l S u r v e y ( U S G S ) a n d t h e U . S . B u r e a u
of Mines (USBM). * Mineral-resource potential is summarized in Marsh et al. (1984); MF, Miscellaneous
Field Studies; Bull., Bulletin; OF, Open-file report.
No. on
Fig. 3
7
8
7
o
10
11
t2
13
74
15
16
t7
7
18
79
20
21
22
ZJ
24
25
26
27
IJ
28
29
30
31
JZ
JJ
76
34
34
72
35
Mineral-resource
area
USGS
reference
USBM
reference
Ah-shi-sle-pah
oF 83-889
MLA 40-83
MLA72-83
MLA 40-83
Apache Kid
Bisti
+Black Range
*Blue Range
Bosque del Apache
*Bunk Robinson Peak
*Caballo
Capitan Mountains
*Chama Rivel Canyon
* Columbine-Hondo
oF 83-889
8u11.1319E(1970)
Bull. 1261E(1969)
Bull. 12608(1967)
MF 1425-8 (1983)
MF 1516(1983)
MF 15238(1983)
MF 1s70A(1983)
Cruces Basin
De-na-zin
oF 83-889
Dome
El Malpais
* Gila
*Guadalupe Escarpment
*Hells Hole
Latir Peak
*Little Dog and Pup
Canyons
*Lower San Francisco
*Manzano
* Pecos
*Polvadera
*Ryan Hill
Salt Creek (Bitter Creek)
*Sandia Mountains
*San Pedro Parks
oF 81-557(1981)
Bull. 1451(1979)
MF 1s60A(1e83)
MF 1344E(1982)
*White Mountain
White Mountain addition
*Whitmire Canyon
Withington
DD.
MLA
MLA
MLA
MLA
MLA
MLA
20-84
108-82
143-82
15-84
40-83
106-83
MLA 41-83
MLA 1,37-82
MLA 102-83
Shaie, D. R., 1981,U.S. GeologicalSurueyworkshop on
non-{uel mineral-resourceappraisal of wilderness and
CUSMAP areas: U.S. Geological Suwey, Circular 845,
18 PP
Taylor,R. 8., and Steven,T. A., 1983,Definition of minpotential: EconomicGeology,v.78, pp.
eral-resource
1268-1270.
Taylor,R. 8., Stoneman,R. J., Marsh, S. P, and Dersch,
potential
of mineral-resource
J. S., 1984,An assessment
of the San IsabelNational Forest, south-centralColorado: U.S. GeologicalSurvey,Bulletin 7638,42pp.
U.S. Bureauof Mines and U.S. GeologicalSurvey,1980,
Principles of a resource/reserueclassificationfor minerals:U.S. GeologicalSurvey,Circular831,5 pp.
Voelker,A. H., Wedow, H., Oakes,E., and Scheffler,P.
K., 1979,A systematicmethod for resourcesrating with
two applicationsto potential wiidemessareas:Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Report ORNL/TM-5739, 65 pp.
D
MF 1468(1983)
MF 1463C(1982)
MF 1464C(1983)
oF 80-382
MF 1516(1983)
MF 16344 (1984)
Bull. 1260A(1967)
MF 1631A(1984)
Bull. 1385C(1975)
Sacramento Mts. (west
face)
Silver City 1'x 2'
quadrangle (CUSMAP)
*Wheeler Peak
Manzano area,New Mexico: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, report, 46 PP.
Krason, J., Wodzicki, A., and Cruver, S. K., 1982b,Geology, energy, and mineral resourcesassessmentin the
Socorro alea, New Mexico: U.S. Bureau of Land Management,rcport,74 pp.
Krason,J., Wodzicki,A., and Cruver, S. K., 1982c,Geology, energy, and mineral resources assessmentin the
Atmendaris area, New Mexico: U.S. Bureau of Land
Management, report, 65 PP.
Marsh,S. P.,Kropschot,S. J., and Dckinson, R. G. (eds.),
1984,Wilderness mineral potential, assessmentof mineral-resourcepotential in U.S. Forest Service lands
studied 1954-i984: U.S. Geological Suwey, Professional Paper 1300,1183pp.
Mclemore, V.T.,19U, Preliminaryreport on the geology
and mineral-resource potential of Tonance County, New
Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources,Open-file Report 792, 21,7pp.
Mclemore, V T., Roybal,G. H., Broadhead,R. F., Chamberlin, R. M., North, R. M., Osburn, J. C., Arkell, B.
W, Colpitts,R. M., Bowie, M. R., Anderson, K., Barker, J. M., and Campbell,F.,1984,Preliminaryreport
on the geology and mineral-resource potential of the
northern Rio Puercoresourceareain Sandovaland Bernalillo Counties and adjacentParts of McKinley, Cibola,
and SantaFe Counties,New Mexico:New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources,Open-file Report
21.7,817pp.
Roberts,D. 8., Krason,J., and Rizo,J.A., 1982a,Geology,
energy and mineral resources assessmentof the Salt
Lake area, New Mexico: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, report, 39 pp.
Roberts,D. 8., Krason,J., and Rizo,J. A., 1982b,Geology,
energy, and mineral resources assessmentof the San
Augustin area,New Mexico:U.S. Bureauof Land Management, report, 43 pp.
Roberts,D. 8., and Rizo, D., 7982,Geology, energy, and
mineral resourcesassessmentin the SanLuis area,New
Mexico:U.S. Bureauof Land Management,rePort, 54
MLA 13-82
MLA 116-82
TABLE 3-Assessments of mineral-resourcePotential contractedby the U. S. Bureau of Land Management(BLM).
No.on
Fig. 3
MLA 78-82
Humphrey
37
Canizozo
Krason, Cruver, and
Wodzicki, 1982
38
Manzano
Krason, Wodzicki, and
Cruver, 1982a
39
Socorro
Krason, Wodzicki, and
Cruver, 1982b
40
Armendaris
Krason, Wodzicki, and
Cruver, 1982c
47
Salt Lake
Robertset al.,1.982a
42
San Augustin
Robertset al.,1.982b
43
San Luis
Roberts and Rizo,
7982
Canyon
MLA 27-83
Bull. 1453(1979)
oF 83-594
MF 14258(1983)
MLA127-82
MLA 33-83
MLA 72-83
Cruver et a1.,1,982
36
MLA 119-82
oF 83-924(1983)
BLM
reference
Mineral-resource
area
NewMexicoGeology August 1985