The data below represent everything available in the MBMG Abandoned and Inactive Mines (AIM) database.
AIM Id | Name | Alternate Name | District | County |
---|---|---|---|---|
MR003567 | COPPER STATE MINE | DUKE, MAMMOTH, BYRON, MARYROSE | TENDERFOOT | MEAGHER |
MRDS | AMLI | MILS | Latitude | Longitude | Datum |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
30-066 | 300590031 | 46.7119 | -110.71 |
Township | Range | Section | QSection | UTM Northing | UTM Easting | UTM Zone | UTM Datum |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
11N | 08E | 15 | CDBB | 5172976 | 522166 | 12 |
Average Elevation | Elev Units | Land Owner | 250K Quad | 100K Quad | 24K Quad |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
F | WHITE SULPHUR | WHITE SULPHUR | VOLCANO BUTTE |
Property Type | Update Date | Who Updated |
---|---|---|
LODE | 6/24/1998 | RKM |
Commodities Identified |
---|
LEAD ZINC |
Information |
---|
Agency: NF Region District: R1 Ranger District: KINGS HILL Forest Service Tract: Watershed Code: 10030103 Forest or Resource Area: LEWIS AND CLARK Owner: P Impact: U Report: The Copper State is located several hundred ft west of an ephemeral tributary to Sawmill Creek. The site consists of the Duke, Mammoth, Byron, and Mary Rose patented claims. The mine workings consisted of four shafts. The main shaft on the Duke claim was reported to be 200 ft deep; the other shafts were shallow (Roby 1950). The vein consists of quartz and calcite and occupies a steeply dipping fissure in thin-bedded Belt shales. The vein is reported to be 1 to 14 ft wide. Ore on the dump at the Duke shaft consists of dark sphalerite, or possibly marmatite, with some galena and a little chalcopyrite. Oxidized copper minerals also are present. A U.S. Bureau of Mines sample collected from an ore bin assayed 0.01 oz/ton gold, 0.33 oz/ton silver, 31.0 % zinc, 5.9 % lead, and 0.8 % copper. A Bureau of Mines sample from dump at the Duke shaft assayed a trace of gold, 0.2 oz/ton silver, 6.85 % zinc, 0.9 % lead, and 0.3 % copper (Roby 1950). The mine operated sporadically from 1920 to 1927. Two small shipments of sorted zinc ore were made to a custom mill in Salt Lake City, Utah (Roby, 1950). The site is also described in Dahl (1971). The site was visited in June 1998 by the MBMG, and no environmental or safety hazards were noted. Location: CDBB sec. 15, T11N, R8E. |
Information |
---|
Mill Tailings: N Adit Discharge: N Metal Leaching: N Water Erosion: N Residence: N Hazardous Materials: N Open Adit: N Visit: Y Comments: Two collapsed shafts and some mineralized waste rock |
Information |
---|
Investigator: R. Marvin Date: 6/24/1998 Photos Available?: Access: Nearest Wetlands/Bog: Drainage Basin: GUISE CREEK Water Contact Stream: Nearest Surface Water Intake: Number of Surface Water Intake(s) observed within 15 miles downstream: Uses of Surface Water Intake(s) observed within 15 miles downstream: Nearest Wells (miles): Number of Wells within 4 miles: Uses of Wells within 4 miles: Nearest Dwelling (miles): Number of Months Occupied: Number of Houses within 2 miles: Recreational Usage on Site: Nearest Recreational Area (miles): Name or Type of Recreational Area: Safety Risk from Open Adit/Shaft: Safety Risk from Highwall or Unstable Slopes: Safety Risk from Unstable Structures: Safety Risk from Chemicals: Safety Risk from Solid Waste (includes sharp rusted items): Safety Risk from Explosives: Sensitive Environments within 2 miles of Site or 15 miles Downstream: Population within 0-0.25 miles: Population within 0.25-0.5 miles: Population within 0.5-1 miles: Population within 1-2 miles: Population within 2-3 miles: Population within 3-4 miles: Public Interest: |
End of report. Retrieved 8/24/2024 11:35:02 PM.
The preceding materials represent the contents of the databases at the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology at the time and date of the retrieval. The information is considered unpublished and is subject to correction and review on a daily basis. The Bureau warrants the accurate transmission of the data to the original end user at the time and date of the retrieval. Retransmission of the data to other users is discouraged and the Bureau claims no responsibility if the material is retransmitted. There may be data in the request area that are not recorded at the Bureau.