Vote for your favorite mineral in #MinCup26! - Quartz vs. Asagiite
It's a classic vs a newbie as the most common named mineral in the crust Quartz is up against an exceedingly-rare sea foam-green mineral discovered just a few years ago Asagiite.
Log InRegister
Quick Links : The Mindat ManualThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryMindat Newsletter [Free Download]
Home PageAbout MindatThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusWho We AreContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatCorporate SponsorshipSponsor a PageSponsored PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryGeologic TimeExplore Fossils
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryMineral Visual ExplorerAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralRandom LocalitySearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
Keyword(s):
 
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
Mining CompaniesStatisticsUsersMineral MuseumsClubs & OrganizationsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice SettingsThe Mineral QuizTime Machine
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesSearch by ColorPhoto Colour ExplorerNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day GalleryPhotography

Cub Bear Prospect, Nome Mining District, Nome Census Area, Alaska, USAi
Regional Level Types
Cub Bear ProspectProspect
Nome Mining DistrictMining District
Nome Census AreaCensus Area
AlaskaState
USACountry

This page is currently not sponsored. Click here to sponsor this page.
PhotosMapsSearch
Latitude & Longitude (WGS84):
64° 42' 41'' North , 165° 44' 52'' West
Latitude & Longitude (decimal):
Köppen climate type:
Nearest Settlements:
PlacePopulationDistance
Nome3,806 (2018)28.5km
Mindat Locality ID:
197116
Long-form identifier:
mindat:1:2:197116:6
GUID (UUID V4):
0


Location: The Cub Bear prospect is on the west side of Cripple River, about 4,000 feet northwest of the mouth of Snowshoe Gulch; the prospect is mainly on a steep easterly slope between about 750 and 1,000 feet in elevation in section 18, T. 9 S., R. 35 W., Kateel River Meridian. The location is approximately half-way between two northerly aligned masses of iron minerals (Herreid, 1970; Bundtzen and others, 1994). The prospect is locality 7 of Cobb (1972 [MF 463], 1978 [OFR 78-93]); Cobb's map location (1972 [MF 463]) appears to be about three quarters of a mile north-northeast of the true location.
Geology: The Cub Bear prospect is a ferruginous zone about 3,000 feet long and as much as 200 feet across that strikes north-northwest (Herreid, 1970, figure 6). The prospect contains a mineralized zone near Herreid's samples 1, 2, and 3 that contains anomalous zinc. The main concentration of iron is near Herreid's samples 4, 5, and 6, approximately 1,500 feet north of the zinc-bearing samples. Bedrock exposure is poor at the prospect. According to Herreid (1970, p. 28), the rubble overlying the deposit consists of goethite, dark yellow-brown ferruginous marble, crackled dolomite, medium-grained marble, and fine-grained ferruginous material. Crackled dolomite locally has goethite veinlets, with goethite psuedomorphic after pyrite. Dolomite breccia appears to form a discontinuous envelope around the iron-rich deposit. The mineralized zone is essentially in marble of the massive marble unit of Bundtzen and others (1994); it occurs along a high-angle fault that separates the massive marble unit to the west from the graphitic schist unit to the east. The mineralized unit is most likely the lowermost massive marble, a unit that Herreid (1970) mapped in thrust contact with underlying mica schist. The prospect has a small iron resource estimated by Shallit (1942; Mulligan and Hess, 1965, table 3) to be 10,000 long tons with 10 to 20 percent iron and a small tonnage of material containing 30 to 45 percent iron. A sample of goethite collected by Herreid contained 16 percent iron. The prospect also is locally anomalous in zinc. Samples from the south part of the prospect (Herreid's localities 1 to 3) contained as much as 2.4 percent zinc in a 10-foot chip sample. A 100-foot-long sample, collected near Herried's samples 3 to 6, contained 1,650 ppm zinc. The lead content of these samples did not exceed 67 ppm, and silver content did not exceed 1.3 ppm; no gold was detected. The iron deposits of the Sinuk River area have generally been interpreted as gossan developed on oxidized sulfide deposits. At the Cub Bear prospect, there is some iron oxide (goethite) psuedomorphic after pyrite, consistent with this mode of origin. Alternatively, the deposits are primarily hypogene iron oxide deposits that are transitional into the carbonate-hosted base metal-fluorite-barite deposits of the area, such as at the Quarry prospect nearby (NM135). The relatively high zinc content of the Cub Bear prospect is consistent with the latter possibility. The age of the deposit is almost certainly post mid-Cretaceous, the age of metamorphism of the host marble. A Late Cretaceous origin was argued for the Quarry prospect by Brobst and others (1971).
Workings: The Cub Bear prospect was developed by a series of pits and trenches before 1915 (Eakin, 1915 [B 622-I, p. 361-365]). Mertie (1918 [B 662-I, p.446]) reported that no recent work was evident in 1916. Cathcart (1922, p. 261), however, reported exploration by 12 trenches, 20 to 30 feet long and about 3 feet deep. The prospect was visited by Shallit (1942) and Mulligan (Mulligan and Hess, 1965) who estimated resources of iron at the prospect. Herreid (1970, figure 6) prepared a map of the prospect at 1:6000 scale. Herreid also assayed samples for gold, silver, copper, lead, and zinc.
Age: Post mid-Cretaceous, the age of metamorphism of the host schist and marble.
Alteration: Dolomitization peripheral to iron oxide mineralization.
Reserves: The prospect has been estimated to contain 100 tons of material with 30 to 45 percent iron and 10,000 tons with 10 to 20 percent iron (Shallit, 1942). There is some manganese oxide.

Commodities (Major) - Fe, Mn; (Minor) - Ag, Pb, Zn
Development Status: None
Deposit Model: Iron oxide veins and replacement of marble and schist.

Select Mineral List Type

Standard Detailed Gallery Strunz Chemical Elements

Commodity List

This is a list of exploitable or exploited mineral commodities recorded at this locality.


Mineral List


9 valid minerals.

Gallery:

List of minerals arranged by Strunz 10th Edition classification

Group 2 - Sulphides and Sulfosalts
Sphalerite2.CB.05aZnS
Galena ?2.CD.10PbS
Pyrite2.EB.05aFeS2
Group 4 - Oxides and Hydroxides
Goethite4.00.Fe3+O(OH)
Hematite4.CB.05Fe2O3
Quartz4.DA.05SiO2
Pyrolusite4.DB.05Mn4+O2
Group 5 - Nitrates and Carbonates
Dolomite5.AB.10CaMg(CO3)2
Group 9 - Silicates
Muscovite9.EC.15KAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
var. Sericite9.EC.15KAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2

List of minerals for each chemical element

HHydrogen
H GoethiteFe3+O(OH)
H MuscoviteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
H Muscovite var. SericiteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
CCarbon
C DolomiteCaMg(CO3)2
OOxygen
O DolomiteCaMg(CO3)2
O GoethiteFe3+O(OH)
O HematiteFe2O3
O MuscoviteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
O PyrolusiteMn4+O2
O QuartzSiO2
O Muscovite var. SericiteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
MgMagnesium
Mg DolomiteCaMg(CO3)2
AlAluminium
Al MuscoviteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
Al Muscovite var. SericiteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
SiSilicon
Si MuscoviteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
Si QuartzSiO2
Si Muscovite var. SericiteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
SSulfur
S GalenaPbS
S PyriteFeS2
S SphaleriteZnS
KPotassium
K MuscoviteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
K Muscovite var. SericiteKAl2(AlSi3O10)(OH)2
CaCalcium
Ca DolomiteCaMg(CO3)2
MnManganese
Mn PyrolusiteMn4+O2
FeIron
Fe GoethiteFe3+O(OH)
Fe HematiteFe2O3
Fe PyriteFeS2
ZnZinc
Zn SphaleriteZnS
PbLead
Pb GalenaPbS

Other Databases

Link to USGS - Alaska:NM133

Other Regions, Features and Areas containing this locality

North AmericaContinent
North America PlateTectonic Plate

This page contains all mineral locality references listed on mindat.org. This does not claim to be a complete list. If you know of more minerals from this site, please register so you can add to our database. This locality information is for reference purposes only. You should never attempt to visit any sites listed in mindat.org without first ensuring that you have the permission of the land and/or mineral rights holders for access and that you are aware of all safety precautions necessary.

References

Brobst, D.A., Pinckney, D.M., and Sainsbury, C.L., 1971, Geology and geochemistry of the Sinuk River barite deposits, Seward Peninsula, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 750-D, p. D1-D8. Bundtzen, T.K., Reger, R.D., Laird, G.M., Pinney, D.S., Clautice, K.H., Liss, S.A., and Cruse, G.R., 1994, Progress report on the geology and mineral resources of the Nome mining district: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, Public Data-File 94-39, 21 p., 2 sheets, scale 1:63,360. Cathcart, S.H., 1922, Metalliferous lodes in southern Seward Peninsula: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 722-F, p. 163-261. Cobb, E.H., 1972, Metallic mineral resources map of the Nome quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-463, 2 sheets, scale 1:250,000. Cobb, E.H., 1978, Summary of references to mineral occurrences (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) in the Nome quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File report 78-93, 213 p. Eakin, H.M., 1915, Iron-ore deposits near Nome: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 622-I, p. 361-365. Herreid, G.H., 1970, Geology and geochemistry of the Sinuk area, Seward Peninsula, Alaska: Alaska Division of Mines and Minerals Geologic Report 36, 61 p., 3 sheets, scales 1:42,000 and others. Mertie, J.B., Jr., 1918, Lode mining and prospecting on Seward Peninsula: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 662, p. 425-449. Mulligan, J.J., and Hess, H.D., 1965, Examination of the Sinuk iron deposits, Seward Peninsula, Alaska: U.S. Bureau of Mines Open-File Report 8-65, 34 p. Shallit, A.B., 1942, Report on Sinuk River iron-ore deposits, Seward Peninsula, Alaska: Alaska Territorial Department of Mines Minerals Investigation 52-1, 46 p., 2 maps, scales 1:31,250, 1:4,800.
 
and/or  
Mindat.org® is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. Mindat® and mindat.org® are registered trademarks of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2026, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph and Ida Chau.
Content on this site may not be used to train, fine-tune, or otherwise develop artificial intelligence or machine learning models without prior written permission - see our Terms & Conditions.
To cite: Ralph, J., Von Bargen, D., Martynov, P., Zhang, J., Que, X., Prabhu, A., Morrison, S. M., Li, W., Chen, W., & Ma, X. (2025). Mindat.org: The open access mineralogy database to accelerate data-intensive geoscience research. American Mineralogist, 110(6), 833–844. doi:10.2138/am-2024-9486.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: September 6, 2026 06:09:49 Page updated: August 9, 2025 00:20:59
Go to top of page