| Basis for focus area |
Presence of fold-and-thrust belt with carbonate and other appropriate metasedimentary host rocks and appropriate source volcanic rocks. All said, the correct tectonic environment is observed to allow for circulation of fluids of an appropriate composition due to tectonic driving influences. |
| Identified resources |
None. |
| Production |
None recorded. |
| Status |
Unknown; most of belt lies within Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. |
| Estimated resources |
None. |
| Geologic maps |
No modern mapping better than 1:250,000 scale. |
| Geophysical data |
Inadequate aeromagnetic and aeroradiometric coverage. |
| Favorable rocks and structures |
Dolomite and marbles as host rocks, presence of a number of basaltic flows as sources of copper and other critical minerals. |
| Deposits |
None. |
| Evidence from mineral occurrences |
Several ARDF occurrences such as Nanook Creek and Ittkilyariak Creek. |
| Geochemical evidence |
Anomalous Co, Ge, Ga and/or Ag concentrations in stream sediments and rock chips. |
| Geophysical evidence |
No data. |
| Evidence from other sources |
Prospectivity analyses conducted by Karl and others (2016) show large areas of this region containing HUC's with medium to high prospectivity with medium to high certainty. |
| Comments |
Part of this belt is contained within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which is closed to mineral entry. |
| Cover thickness and description |
Unknown. |
| Authors |
Douglas C. Kreiner, James V. Jones III, Melanie B. Werdon. |
| New data needs |
New mapping, geophysics, updated geochemical sampling. |
| Geologic mapping and modeling needs |
Mapping at 1:100,000 scale or better. |
| Geophysical survey and modeling needs |
Aeromagnetics and radiometrics collected at Rank 2. |
| Digital elevation data needs |
IfSAR coverage is complete over entire focus area. |
