Goldville-Hog Mountain District

Region East, Southeast
Mineral systems
Deposit types
Other minerals

Information leading to the delineation of this focus area

Basis for focus area Polygon around mining district from MRDS and the Geological Survey of Alabama's FY19 NGGDPP-Priority 3 critical minerals database. Based on favorable geology and historical gold and sulfide production (for example, Brewer, 1896; Adams, 1930; Park, 1935; Pardee and Park, 1948; Spaine, 1969; Simpson and Neathery, 1980; Rheams, 1984; Green and Lesher, 1987; Lesher and Green, 1987; Lesher and others, 1989).
Identified resources Historical production of gold.
Production The Hog Mountain mine, which was explored and intermittently worked between the 1850-1890s and systematically worked again between 1904-1914 and 1934-1937, is credited with producing about 24,000 troy ounces Au, or approximately 48% of Alabama's 49,495 troy ounce total Au production (Johnson, 1935; 1936; Dean, 1989).
Status Past mining for Au. The Hog Mountain mine is currently actively being prospected, drilled, and assayed for potential gold exploration by the Wellborn Mining Company (
Estimated resources Unknown.
Geologic maps Osborne and others (1989), scale 1:500,000; Beg (1988), scale 1:126,720; Guthrie and Dean (1989), scale 1:24,000; Allison and Stobert (2003), scale 1:24,000; Neal (1986), scale 1:4,800.
Geophysical data Inadequate Rank 4 aeromagnetic and Rank 5 aeroradiometric coverage.
Favorable rocks and structures Gold- and sulfide-bearing quartz veins associated with the Mississippian-aged(?) Hog Mountain tonalite/pluton and the Neoproterozoic(?) to Lower Paleozoic graphitic metasedimentary rocks of the Wedowee Group; see for example, Brewer (1896); Adams (1930); Simpson and Neathery (1980); Green and Lesher (1987); Lesher and Green (1987); Guthrie and Dean (1993); Lesher and others (1989).
Deposits Goldville district (MRDS dep_id: 60001792), Hog Mountain mine (MRDS dep_id: 10089737).
Evidence from mineral occurrences MRDS; Geological Survey of Alabama's FY19 NGGDPP-Priority 3 critical minerals database.
Geochemical evidence Whole-rock geochemical analyses from the Hog Mountain district indicate: <1–125 ppm As, 4–100 ppm Au, 630–2,790 ppm Ba; 37–63 ppm Ce, 3.5–10 ppm Co, 9–19 ppm Cr, 3.8–17 ppm Cs, 0.7–1.1 ppm Eu, 3–5.9 ppm Hg, 17–29 ppm La, 0.2–0.54 Lu, 0.5–3.7 ppm Mo, 16–30 ppm Nd, 7–76 ppm Ni, 29–323 ppm Rb, 6–11 ppm Se, 3.5–6.9 ppm Sm, 0.5–1.0 ppm Ta, 0.37–0.95 ppm Tb, 4–8.3 ppm Th, 1.3–4.0 ppm U, 0.05–26 ppm V, 7–48 ppm Y, 1.3–3.6 ppm Yb, 51–157 ppm Zn, and 94–195 ppm Zr (Stowell and others, 1996).
Geophysical evidence Inadequate aeromagnetic/radiometric data (aeromagnetic data rank 4; radiometric rank 5).
Evidence from other sources Unknown.
Comments Past producer in areas that might be mined again. Geophysical data are likely to be helpful in determining the extent of the source rocks. Geochemical analyses likely to be very helpful. Detailed surficial and bedrock geologic mapping available.
Cover thickness and description Exposed bedrock to thin cover.
Authors Nora K. Foley, J. Wright Horton Jr., Bernard E. Hubbard, Dane S. VanDervoort, John P. Whitmore.
New data needs Geophysical data and geochemical analyses.
Geologic mapping and modeling needs Geochemical analyses to assess the resource quality/grade of copper- and gold-bearing quartz veins.
Geophysical survey and modeling needs High resolution aeromagnetic and aeroradiometric coverage. Geophysical surveys may help delineate the contact of plutons with country rocks that contain veins. Aeromagnetic data may image associated structures and possibly alteration zones. Radiometric data can help with geologic mapping in vegetated terrane. Electromagnetic data may assist with imaging sulfides.
Digital elevation data needs QL2 lidar coverage complete over prospective area.