Barneys Canyon is a sediment-hosted, disseminated gold deposit located 7 km from the large, gold-rich, Bingham porphyry copper deposit. Host rocks for gold mineralization are the Permian Park City dolomite and siltstone and the Kirkman-Diamond Creek sandstone. The gold deposit is approximately 430 m long, 370 m wide, up to 90 m thick and contains 8.5 million metric tons (t) of reserves averaging 1.6 g/t gold. Intrusive igneous rocks are conspicuously absent. The gold deposit is located on the northern flank of the northeast-trending Copperton anticline, an overturned box fold. A small east-striking, south-dipping thrust fault, the Barneys Canyon thrust fault, with 200 m displacement, repeats the Park City Formation, and north-south-striking steep normal faults form a graben in which the gold deposit is located. The Barneys Canyon thrust fault predates mineralization and the Phosphate normal fault postdates mineralization.

The Mercur gold district of north-central Utah includes several sediment-hosted disseminated gold deposits which are located in the lower member of the Mississippian Great Blue Limestone. Argillic alteration of host limestone consists of illite (R3 illite-smectite <10% S) + kaolinite + quartz ± Fe oxides or pyrite. Argillized limestone has identical clay mineralogy in both oxidized and unoxidized rock. Unlike some other sediment-hosted disseminated gold deposits, variations in the Kubler index and illite/kaolinite ratios show no spatial relationship to faults or to gold distribution within the mineralized areas.

The Relief Canyon gold deposit in the Humboldt Range of western Nevada is a low-grade, high-tonnage orebody of Tertiary or younger age. The host rocks include limestones of the Triassic Cane Spring Formation, which are overlain by shales of the Triassic Grass Valley Formation. The rocks were folded and metamorphosed to greenschist grade during Jurassic and Cretaceous regional tectonic activity. Mesozoic thrusting may have occurred along the shale-limestone contact, but evidence has been obscured by later hydrothermal activity. The sedimentary rocks were nominally offset along several Late Tertiary normal faults related to uplift of the range.

The geology of northwestern Mexico is complex and is similar in many respects to that of southeastern California and southern Arizona. The region (Fig. 1), typical of the southern basin-and-range physiographic province of which it is a part, is characterized by elongate, northwest-trending ranges separated by wide alluvial valleys. Basement rocks in the area include Precambrian gneisses, metamorphosed andes-ites, and granites. These rocks are overlain by younger Proterozoic quartzites and limestones, Paleozoic and Mesozoic carbonate rocks, and Mesozoic volcanic, clastic, and carbonate sedimentary rocks. Mesozoic plutonic rocks and Tertiary extrusive and intrusive rocks related to volcanic activity of the Sierra Madre Occidental are widely distributed. Broad areas are underlain by plutonic and associated volcanic rocks of the Sonora-Sinaloabatholith of Cretaceous to early Tertiary (Laramide) age. The outcrop areas of the plutonic rocks are smaller in northwestern Sonora, west of Magdalena de Kino where many of the gold deposits are concentrated, than they are farther to the east and south (Fig. 2).

Sedimentary rock-hosted disseminated gold ores lithologically and chemically similar to those of Carlin-type deposits of the western United States are present in the Yauricocha district, central Peru. The Purisima Concepcion deposit is located in the core of a steeply plunging anticline several hundred meters beyond large pipe-shaped Cu-Zn-Pb-Ag-Au replacement orebodies in limestone bordering a late Miocene granodiorite stock. The central part of the stock is potassium-silicate altered and contains high-salinity fluid inclusions.

The term "Carlin-type" deposit has been applied to a number of low-grade, sedimentary rock-hosted gold deposits that have been discovered and brought into production in the western United States since the 1960s. Carlin-type deposits are characterized by replacement of carbonate and silty carbonate rocks by silica, pyrite, barite, various arsenic, mercury, antimony, and thallium minerals and by introduction of micron-size gold (Radtke and Dickson, 1974). These deposits are believed to have formed in the upper few kilometers of the earth's crust under conditions that are similar in some respects to present-day geothermal systems.

The Mercur mining district in west-central Utah contains a number of gold deposits of this type. The district is located approximately 90 km southwest of Salt Lake City in the southwest portion of the Oquirrh Mountains, a typical north-south-trending range of the Basin and Range physiographic province (Fig. 1). Two major orebodies, Mercur-Sacra-mento and Marion Hill, are present in small hills in the center of the steep, east-west-trending Mercur Canyon. Initial production of silver in the Mercur district was from an interval of silicified limestone known as the "Silver ledge" (Spurr, 1895), a term which was later changed to "Silver chert." Fine gold was discovered in 1883 in a stratigraphic interval 30 m above the Silver chert. Production terminated in 1917 after more than 1.2 million ounces of gold had been produced (Butler et al., 1920). The district was reopened in 1983 with the Getty Mining Company as the principal operator.

The first geologic description of the Mercur district was given by Spurr (1895). Butler et al. (1920) gave a concise, accurate review of the geology, stratigraphy, and mineral production at Mercur. Gilluly's (1932) work remains the most comprehensive published study of the southern Oquirrh Mountains. Lenzi (1973) published data on the background geochemistry at Mercur. Tafuri (1976) described the general geology and mineralization at Mercur.

This communication gives a detailed discussion of the hydrothermal alteration of the Mercur deposits. The discussion will provide a framework for continuing studies of the paragenesis and geochemistry at Mercur as well as allowing comparison with alteration assemblages of other Carlin-type deposits.

Apatite fission-track analysis is used to demonstrate that the timing of gold mineralization at the Carlin East and Betze-Post deposits is 37.3 ± 1.5 Ma, based on the weighted mean of measured fission-track ages, and 41.6 ± 1.6 Ma, based on the weighted mean of the ages of the oldest fission tracks retained. Regional measured apatite fission-track ages cluster between 28 and 41 Ma to the south of the Carlin East deposit whereas measured ages are greater than ~56 Ma to the north. The regional trend of the apatite fission-track ages and the pattern of gravity and magnetic anomalies suggest that the thermal center for gold mineralization along the Carlin trend was south of the Carlin East deposit, near the 37 Ma Welches Canyon stock. Modeling of apatite fission-track-age data on both sides of the Post fault indicates that the Little Boulder stock was approximately 35°C cooler at 40 Ma relative to similarly positioned samples in the Goldstrike stock. It is unclear whether this thermal history difference across the Post fault is due to post-40 Ma differential exhumation or differential heating across the fault at the time of gold mineralization. Comparison of apatite fission-track and whole-rock 40Ar/39Ar ages from altered dikes in the ore zone at Carlin East demonstrates that 40Ar/39Ar ages do not reflect the age of gold mineralization, whereas the apatite fission-track ages were completely reset at the time of hydrother-mal activity. (U-Th)/He ages are younger than the inferred mineralization age and may reflect weak hy-drothermal activity associated with Miocene volcanism.

A variety of techniques have been used in attempts to date the mineralization in Carlin-type deposits in the Great Basin, with highly variable results. These techniques and results are reviewed in this paper, along with presentation of two new dates, for the Rodeo deposit on the Carlin trend and for the Barneys Canyon deposit in Utah. Complete resetting of sericite by hydrothermal fluids of the temperature and duration of hydrother-mal activity that form Carlin-type deposits is considered highly unlikely. Therefore, dates from sericite are generally of questionable value unless that sericite can be shown to have formed during the same hydrothermal event during which Au was deposited. For the deposits that have been investigated to date, sericite dates rarely, if ever, record the age of Au mineralization. However, sericite ages do appear to record pre-Au events in some districts. Such events may have contributed to ground preparation and, to a much lesser extent, to the tenor of the ore. Fission-track and U/Th-He techniques provide important age constraints on mineralization in some districts but also suffer from a less than clear association with Au. Rb-Sr dating of galkhaite, an Hg sulfosalt, provides the only direct age of mineralization, but galkhaite has been recognized in only a few locations (and dated in only two deposits). In a similar manner, adularia is contemporaneous with Au at Twin Creeks, but Twin Creeks is the only Carlin-type deposit where adularia has been reported. Several other techniques (U-Pb, Re-Os, Sm-Nd) have been used in attempts to date the deposits but with limited success.

The orebodies at the Getchell and Twin Creeks mines were studied through mineral paragenesis, geologic relationships, and 40Ar/39Ar dating. Mineral paragenetic relationships are based on observations made during the logging of 18,000 m of drill cuttings and core and crosscutting relationships recognized in the field and Main pit at the Getchell mine. Ages for igneous and mineralizing events were determined through 40Ar/39Ar incremental heating analyses of 15 samples of biotite, K feldspar, sericite, and vein adularia. A thermal history for the area was also developed using K feldspar multiple diffusion domain results and age determinations on cogenetic minerals, which have different argon closure temperatures.

Arehart et al. (1993) set out to date hydrothermal Au mineralization at the Post-Betze deposit in an attempt to place the formation of this deposit into a metallogenetic setting. Toward this end they have used many modern dating techniques including 40Ar/39Ar, K/Ar, and fission track geochronology. Based on the 39 measurements presented, they conclude that "based upon what we consider to be the most reliable" data this deposit formed at 117 Ma. This date is said to be consistent with similar ages for other intrusions in northeastern Nevada, and although one is not seen at the deposit, it is implied that a major nearby pluton is responsible for the formation of Post-Betze. By extrapolation, it is then suggested that Carlin-type Au systems are all of similar age, and thus, are the result of compressional tectonics operating prior to development of the current extensional environment. Because of the inescapable importance of the inferences and conclusions generated by the assignment of a 117 Ma age to the formation of the Post-Betze deposit, I would like to discuss the data and conclusions presented by Arehart et al. (1993).