Hunter Mine, Khutze River, Skeena Mining Division, British Columbia, Canadai

Regional Level Types
Hunter Mine	Mine
Khutze River	River
Skeena Mining Division	Division
British Columbia	Province
Canada	Country

On the Khutze River about 19 kilometres from the head of Khutze Inlet, some 95 kilometres south of Kitimat, British Columbia; Skeena Mining Division.

The following quote is from B.C. Government site “Minfile”- Minfile No. 103H 034:
“Biotite granitoid gneiss occurs as part of a northwest trending roof pendant of metavolcanics, between cupolas of a granitic pluton consisting of biotite quartz diorite gneiss belonging to the Tertiary-Jurassic Coast Plutonic Complex. The rocks are cut by numerous pegmatite, aplite and felsic dikes.
Six gold-bearing, quartz-pyrite veins lie primarily within the roof pendant of metavolcanics of which the best exposed are the Main and River veins. Mineralization consists of pyrite, chalcopyrite, gold and tetradymite with ankerite and orthoclase gangue. Chloritic and sericitic alteration are associated with the veins.
The Main vein, at 690 metres elevation, cuts across all rocks and has been exposed along surface for 130 metres and to a vertical depth of 70 metres by underground workings. The vein has a 021 degree strike, dips of 30 to 80 degrees east and an average width of 23 centimetres. Six samples taken across this width over a 17.4 metre length averaged 35.35 grams per tonne gold and 87.1 grams per tonne silver (Assessment Report 13398). An ore shoot within the Main vein has an apparent plunge of 035 degrees towards 210 degrees.
Quartz veins intermittently exposed 200 to 500 metres northeast of the Main vein include the Parallel veins, 15 centimetres wide and 0.3 metre apart with moderate southeast dips, and the Cross Vein, striking 165 degrees for 200 metres and up to 40 centimetres wide. The Burnt Tree vein and No. 4 vein, about 500 metres apart, lie 600 metres east of the Main vein. The No. 4 vein occurs in a 1-metre wide, 050 degree striking fault zone.
The River vein, 1400 metres northeast of the Main vein and 300 metres elevation, occurs within all rock types and partly within a quartz-orthoclase pegmatite dike. The vein strikes 020 to 035 degrees for 150 metres and dips 55 to 70 degrees east for a known 42 metres downdip. The vein is commonly 8 to 20 centimetres thick and 6 samples along a 12.5-metre length averaged 67.0 grams per tonne gold, 32.57 grams per tonne silver and 0.67 per cent copper over an average width of 0.19 metre (Assessment Report 11937).
The No. 2 vein, 50 metres west of the River vein, is in excess of 43 metres within a narrow pegmatite dike striking 032 degrees and dipping 80 degrees east in biotite gneiss.”

Comments by Giles Peatfield regarding some of the minerals reported and other items of interest:
Ankerite: This was reported only by Dolmage (1931) and should be regarded as tentative.
Dolomite: This was reported only by Scott (1984) and should be regarded as tentative.
Sylvanite?: This telluride was reported as tentative by Warren and Cummings (1937), but careful reading of their paper shows that they did not specifically mention the location of the material they were considering, and other evidence in the paper suggest that it might have been from the Surf Point property rather than from the Hunter Veins. No other workers have identified sylvanite from the Hunter property, and its presence must be considered as unlikely – I have not included it. Recently, a specimen has been located in a private collection that is labelled as “sylvanite” and for which the location given puts it at the Hunter Mine. Recent re-examination of the specimen has cast doubt on the identification, and confirmatory test-work is planned.
NB. In March 2022 “sylvanite” from Butedale BC was analyzed by the Canadian Museum of Nature -PXRD+EDS-- and found to be tellurobismuthite. The specimen erroneously labelled 'sylvanite' from Butedale is almost certainly from the Hunter Mine, thus confirming tellurobismuthite from this locality.

Tetradymite: This mineral was reported by Warren and Cummings (1937), and by Scott (1984). However, it is likely that this identification was in error – see following comment for tellurobismuthite. I have not included tetradymite in the list.
Tellurobismuthite: This mineral was first reported by Warren and Davis (1940), who remarked that it “is locally known as tetradymite.” Professor Forward at the University of British Columbia analysed the material and found it had no sulfur, which would preclude tetradymite. The mineral was then X-rayed by Professor Peacock at the University of Toronto, who confirmed tellurobismuthite (or as it was then known, tellurbismuth). This identification was subsequently reported by Thompson (1949) and by Berry and Thompson (1962). Its identity at the Hunter property is considered valid, and I have included it in the list.
One last point to be made is that the Crown Granted Claims at the Hunter property have been subject to expropriation by the British Columbia Government, as part of the process of establishing the Khutze Conservancy (Price, 2014). Further mineral collecting at the property would be difficult if not impossible.

Other Databases

Link to British Columbia Minfile:	103H++034

Other Regions, Features and Areas containing this locality

References