King Solomon Mine, Copper Camp, Greenwood Mining Division, British Columbia, Canadai

Regional Level Types
King Solomon Mine	Mine (Inactive)
Copper Camp	Mining Area
Greenwood Mining Division	Division
British Columbia	Province
Canada	Country

The former King Solomon mine is one of a number of former small mines and copper occurrences in the so-called “Copper Camp”, located on Copper Mountain in the area of the headwaters of Ingram and Wallace creeks, 11 kilometres west of Greenwood, British Columbia. Also included in the Camp were the Big Copper and other occurrences (Minfile No. 082ESE 053).

There are descriptions of several of these deposits in the general locality on the British Columbia “Minfile” sites, current to 2020. Relevant portions for the King Solomon are quoted below:

“The rocks most commonly exposed on the property are lavas, breccias and feeder dikes and sills of the Penticton Group. These Tertiary rocks rest unconformably on a thick sequence of southeasterly dipping Brooklyn limestone (Triassic). Distal parts of the property are underlain by sharpstone conglomerate intercalated with the limestone and, below the Triassic assemblage, massive chert of the Knob Hill Group (Paleozoic).

A zone of oxidation and enrichment marks the unconformity at the base of the Tertiary in Copper Camp. This zone includes regolithic copper showings that are believed to have formed by Tertiary concentration from sulphide bodies previously developed within the Brooklyn limestone.

On the King Solomon claim, the main deposit occurs at the contact between an alkali porphyry dike and crystalline limestone. These rocks are much fractured and traversed by little slips and in places the limestone is reduced to small blocks. Locally the main fissures in the limestone are filled with oxidized iron and copper sulphides. Where the Tertiary volcanic rocks have been stripped away by glacial erosion, the upper surface of the deposit is characterized by earthy red hematite. The edges of the limestone blocks are commonly corroded and encrusted by red hematite, yellow limonite and copper ore minerals. Specimens can be gathered showing a nucleus of chalcopyrite surrounded by bornite and a periphery of chalcocite. Malachite, azurite, native copper, chrysocolla are some of the associated accessory minerals. The ore is said to have run several per cent copper accompanied by appreciable gold and silver values.”

At this point, I (Giles Peatfield) believe it is appropriate to present some information regarding the principal copper deposits of the region – the so-called Boundary District – and some speculations regarding the presence of secondary copper minerals in the Copper Camp:

In the period from the last years of the 19th century until 1919, there was important copper production from two large and a number of smaller satellite deposits in the district. These mines produced direct smelting ores that were transported by two railway systems to three separate smelters (Peatfield, 1978). The principal deposits were in the Phoenix Camp, east of Greenwood (LeRoy, 1912) and at the Deadwood (Motherlode) Camp, west of Greenwood (LeRoy, 1913). Ore in these deposits was contained in calc-silicate “skarn” bodies, hosted by a distinctive stratigraphic sequence (the Brooklyn Formation) of Triassic age, consisting of limestone and siliceous pebble (“sharpstone”) conglomerate. The Brooklyn stratigraphy is widespread, in several isolated areas, throughout a large area (Peatfield, 1978). The important point to be made here is that, with the exception of the Copper Camp, the area of concern here, the deposits have very little of secondary copper mineralization, with generally fresh chalcopyrite and pyrite at the grass roots. There is good evidence to suggest that the metal concentrations in the sedimentary package are old, probably coeval with the sedimentation (see, Peatfield (1978) on the Emma deposit east of Phoenix); in any event, the deposits are generally considered to have formed long before the deposition of the Eocene sedimentary and volcanic packages – the basal Kettle River, and overlying Marron formations.

This leads one to the conclusion that in most cases the surfaces of the deposits were exposed to scouring in the last ice age. J.E. Stockwell (in Newell, 1970) mapped the Copper Mountain area at a scale of 1:12,000. His work shows scattered areas of Brooklyn Formation limestone and sharpstone conglomerate with local calc-silicate skarn occurrences, especially in the areas of the King Solomon and Big Copper deposits. In both areas, there are closely associated overlaps of Kettle River continental clastic sedimentary rocks, and overlying Marron Formation volcanic flows. The region is cut by numerous major dykes of Tertiary intrusive rocks, generally regarded as feeders for overlying Marron flows. The supposition is that the (probably relatively small) skarn-hosted copper deposits were exposed to pre-Tertiary weathering and formation of secondary copper minerals, subsequently protected from erosion by the Kettle River and Marron strata. Post-glacial erosion would have removed some of the clastic sediments, and exposed the secondary copper minerals to view. This concept was first suggested in print by Brock (1905, p. 65A) who wrote “That this zone of oxydation (sic) and enrichment should be found in the Copper camp and not in other parts of the district, is in part explained by the local topography and the broken nature of the country rock, but a cap of volcanic rock which covers the hilltops all around and extends almost to the King Solomon ledge, has been, in all probability, a factor. This capping, in glacial times is likely to have extended a little farther, in which case it would have protected the deposit from the scouring effects of the ice-sheet which has been shown above to have covered this area.”

Production from the King Solomon and Big Copper deposits has been sporadic, between 1901 and 1955, with the majority between 1901 and 1918. A small amount of ore was shipped from the Copper Queen occurrence in 1954 and 1955, which is included in the King Solomon totals. Annual shipments ranged in grade from about 2.6% copper from the Big Copper in 1916 to as high as 15.3% copper from the King Solomon in 1917. It is important to stress that most of this material was probably carefully hand-sorted ore, and that the reported production figures represent metal recovered at various smelters or other treatment facilities.

According to Minfile records, the overall production for the Camp, over the total time period, was 3,454 tonnes which yielded about 3,072 troy ounces of silver, 253 troy ounces of gold, and 130,244 kilograms of copper.

Comments by Giles Peatfield on several of the minerals reported from the locality:
Azurite: Hoffmann (1903) wrote that “Very pretty specimens of a fine berlin-blue azurite in the form of crystalline incrustations and small spherical crystal aggregates, have been obtained at the King Solomon mine, in the Copper Camp, . . . .”
Birnessite: The Pacific Museum of Earth at the University of British Columbia has a specimen (Catalogue No. 6126) of birnessite with azurite and malachite, from the King Solomon mine. This is a complex manganese-bearing secondary mineral (refer to Mindat minerals). Of interest here is that Hoffmann (1903); Brock (1906); and Johnston (1915) reported a complex hydrated material that Hoffmann described as “cupreous manganese” or wad and that Johnston called a “Hydrated mixture of various oxides, chiefly of manganese, cobalt, copper and iron.” The name given to this material was “lampadite”; this has subsequently been discredited by the IMA. It seems likely that what Hoffmann saw and called lampadite was actually birnessite. Finally, Boronowski (1990) reported geochemical analyses (ICP) of a number of copper-rich samples from the King Solomon and Big Copper occurrences – these samples show moderate enrichment in manganese.

Copper: In describing the King Solomon deposit, McMynn (1899) commented “This ore showed native copper freely, and, being very pretty specimen ore, was much talked of.”

Chalcocite: Reported by Hoffmann (1903) and by Brock (1906).

Chrysocolla: Reported by Brock (1905, 1906), but not by Hoffmann (1903).
Cuprite: Hoffmann (1903), referring to cuprite in specimens collected by Mr. R. W. Brock, described “. . . occasional small fissures or cavities lined with minute, translucent, cubic crystals of the mineral, having a fine crimson-red colour by transmitted light, which are in some instances elongated to very slender prisms.”
Malachite: Hoffmann (1903) described the malachite at the King Solomon mine as “. . . an earthy coating, also as a fine velvety incrustation, as likewise in small spherical crystal aggregates, and occasionally in small groups of verdigris-green and emerald-green, radiating, slender acicular prisms, . . . .”
Pyrite: This is not common on surface in the mineralized areas. Brock (1905) did see, on a small vein north of the King Solomon workings, pyrite and chalcopyrite a few feet below the surface.
Tenorite: This copper oxide mineral was originally described at this locality as melaconite (Hoffmann, 1903; Johnston, 1915).

Comment by Giles Peatfield on the rock types reported from the locality:
The rock types reported for the Copper Camp are listed, with the exception of chert, in the detailed mapping by J. E. Stockwell (for Newell, 1970). Stockwell did, however, report siliceous argillite in his lowest stratigraphic units. Longe (1980) reported cherts in diamond drill core in a similar setting, and the two rocks are probably the same.

Other Databases

Link to British Columbia Minfile:	082ESE054

Other Regions, Features and Areas containing this locality

References