Prospector’s Guide to

Drift Prospecting for Diamonds

Northern Ontario

Ontario Geological Survey

Miscellaneous Paper 167

1997
Prospector’s Guide to
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds
Northern Ontario

Ontario Geological Survey

Miscellaneous Paper 167

T.F. Morris and C.A. Kaszycki

1997
EDNO

CANADA
ONTARIO This publication was funded under the Minerals program of the
• Northern Ontario
Development Agreement
Canada-Ontario Northern Ontario Development Agreement (NODA),
N O DA

Entente de développement
du nord de l'Ontario
a four year joint initiative signed November 4, 1991.
Minerals • Minéraux
© Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 1997 ISSN 0704-2752
ISBN 0-7778-5854-1

All publications of the Ontario Geological Survey and the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines are avail-
able for viewing and purchase at the following locations:

Mines and Minerals Information Centre (MMIC)

Macdonald Block, Room M2-17
900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 1C3
Telelphone: 1-800-665-4480 (within Ontario)
(416) 314-3800
Fax: (416) 314-3797

Publication Sales
933 Ramsey Lake Road, Level B2
Sudbury, Ontario P3E 6B5
Telephone: (705) 670-5691
Fax: (705) 670-5770
E-mail: pub_sales@torv05.ndm.gov.on.ca

Digital data (Data Sets and MRDs) are available only at Publication Sales, Sudbury.

Use of Visa or Mastercard ensures the fastest possible service. Cheques or money orders should be made payable to
the Minister of Finance.

Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data

Morris, Thomas Findlay

Prospector’s guide to drift prospecting for diamonds, Northern Ontario. Rev. ed.

(Ontario Geological Survey miscellaneous paper, ISSN 0704-2752; no. 167)

First ed. published 1995.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 0-7778-5854-1

1. Prospecting–Ontario, Northern 2. Diamond–Ontario, Northern. I. Kaszycki, Christine Anne II. Ontario. Ministry
of Northern Development and Mines. III. Ontario Geological Survey. IV. Title. V. Series.

TN271.D5M67 1996 622.18’82’097131 C96-964068-4

Every possible effort is made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this report, but the Ministry of
Northern Development and Mines does not assume any liability for errors that may occur. Source references are
included in the report and users may wish to verify critical information.

If you wish to reproduce any of the text, tables or illustrations in this report, please write for permission to the
Manager, Publication Services Section, Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, 933 Ramsey Lake Road,
Level B4, Sudbury, Ontario P3E 6B5.

Cette publication est disponible en anglais seulement.

Parts of this publication may be quoted if credit is given. It is recommended that reference be made in the following form:
Morris, T.F. and Kaszycki, C.A. 1997. Prospector’s guide to drift prospecting for diamonds, northern Ontario; Ontario
Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 167, 63p.

Edited/Produced by: Geomatics International Inc.

ii
Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1
What is a Diamond?.......................................................................................................................................... 1
Where Diamonds Are Mined ............................................................................................................................ 1
Why Diamonds Are Important.......................................................................................................................... 2
Gem-Grade Diamonds .............................................................................................................................. 2
Industrial-Grade Diamonds........................................................................................................................ 2
Synthetic Diamonds .................................................................................................................................. 2
Where Diamonds Are Found and Where They Form ...................................................................................... 2
Economics of Exploration and Mining ............................................................................................................ 3
Selecting an Area ...................................................................................................................................... 3
Heavy Mineral Surveys.............................................................................................................................. 4
Geophysical Surveys.................................................................................................................................. 4
Detailed Exploration .................................................................................................................................. 5
Bulk Sampling .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Mining ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
Production and Revenue from a Large Diamond Mine ............................................................................ 5

Chapter 2. Host Materials for Diamonds ................................................................................................................ 7

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 7
Kimberlite.......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Definition .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Kimberlite Identification............................................................................................................................ 8
Field .................................................................................................................................................... 8
Geochemistry ...................................................................................................................................... 8
Morphology ........................................................................................................................................ 9
Lamproite .......................................................................................................................................................... 9
Definition .................................................................................................................................................. 9
Identification of Lamproite ........................................................................................................................ 10
Field .................................................................................................................................................... 10
Geochemistry ...................................................................................................................................... 10
Morphology ........................................................................................................................................ 10
Lamprophyre .................................................................................................................................................... 10
Definition .................................................................................................................................................. 10
Identification of Lamprophyre .................................................................................................................. 10
Field .................................................................................................................................................... 10
Geochemistry ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Morphology ........................................................................................................................................ 12
Unconsolidated and Consolidated Sediments .................................................................................................. 12
Transport and Sorting of Diamonds in Fluvial and Eolian Environments ................................................ 13

Chapter 3. Ontario’s Diamond Potential .................................................................................................................. 14

Geologic Constraints Relative to Location of Economic Diamond-Bearing Kimberlite ................................ 14
Archean Cratons ........................................................................................................................................ 14
Diamond Preservation................................................................................................................................ 14
Structural Associations .............................................................................................................................. 14
Association with Other Intrusive Rocks .................................................................................................... 14
Potential Sites for Diamond Exploration in Ontario ........................................................................................ 15
Ottawa–Bonnechere Graben—Lake Timiskaming Fault System .............................................................. 15
Kapuskasing Structural Zone .................................................................................................................... 16
James Bay Region...................................................................................................................................... 16
Float Diamonds ................................................................................................................................................ 16

iii
Chapter 4. Geophysics as a Tool for Kimberlite Exploration.................................................................................. 17
Geophysical Signature of Kimberlite................................................................................................................ 17
Geophysical Detection Techniques .................................................................................................................. 18
Electromagnetic-Electric Techniques ........................................................................................................ 19
Potential Field ............................................................................................................................................ 20
Examples of Geophysical Signatures of Kimberlite.................................................................................. 20

Chapter 5. Drift Prospecting for Diamonds ............................................................................................................ 26

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 26
Glacial History of Northern Ontario ................................................................................................................ 26
Glacial Sediments: Use and Limitations in Drift Prospecting Programs ........................................................ 26
Glaciers as Agents of Erosion and Transportation .................................................................................... 27
Glacial Till ................................................................................................................................................ 28
Subglacial Till .................................................................................................................................... 28
Englacial or Supraglacial Till ............................................................................................................ 29
Glacial Dispersal ................................................................................................................................ 29
Use in Kimberlite Exploration............................................................................................................ 30
Ice-Marginal Deposits and Landforms ...................................................................................................... 31
Recessional Moraine .......................................................................................................................... 31
Ice-Contact Stratified Drift ................................................................................................................ 31
Use in Kimberlite Exploration............................................................................................................ 31
Proglacial Deposits and Landforms .......................................................................................................... 31
Glaciofluvial Sediments...................................................................................................................... 31
Glaciolacustrine Sediments ................................................................................................................ 31
Use in Kimberlite Exploration............................................................................................................ 32
Recent Deposits ........................................................................................................................................ 32
Use in Kimberlite Exploration............................................................................................................ 32
Overburden Sampling Methodologies .............................................................................................................. 33
Sampling Design ........................................................................................................................................ 33
Sampling Protocols .................................................................................................................................... 33
Till Sampling ...................................................................................................................................... 34
Modern Alluvium Sampling .............................................................................................................. 35
Other Sampling Media........................................................................................................................ 36

Chapter 6. Kimberlite Heavy Mineral Indicators .................................................................................................... 37

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 37
Identification of Kimberlite Indicator Minerals................................................................................................ 37
Pyrope Garnet .................................................................................................................................... 37
Physical Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 37
Geochemical Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 37
Chromite ............................................................................................................................................ 37
Physical Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 37
Geochemical Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 37
Magnesium-Rich Ilmenite .................................................................................................................. 39
Physical Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 39
Geochemical Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 39
Chrome Diopside ................................................................................................................................ 39
Physical Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 39
Geochemical Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 39

Chapter 7. Application of Overburden Studies to Kimberlite Exploration ............................................................ 40

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 40
Boulder Tracing ................................................................................................................................................ 40
Heavy Mineral Tracing .................................................................................................................................... 40

iv
 Alluvium .................................................................................................................................................... 40
Till ............................................................................................................................................................ 44
Other Sediments ........................................................................................................................................ 45
Geochemical Signatures.................................................................................................................................... 45
Till Geochemistry ...................................................................................................................................... 47
Biogeochemistry ........................................................................................................................................ 47

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................................. 48

Appendix 1: Till field note form .............................................................................................................................. 49

Appendix 2: Alluvium field note form .................................................................................................................... 52
Appendix 3: Glossary of field note terminology .................................................................................................... 55

References ............................................................................................................................................................ 60

Conversion Factors for Measurements in Ontario Geological Survey Publications .................................................... 63

FIGURES
1. Common forms of diamond crystals ................................................................................................................ 1
2. Diamond stability field...................................................................................................................................... 3
3. World map of primary and secondary diamond deposits ................................................................................ 4
4. Age ranges of diamondiferous host rocks ........................................................................................................ 7
5. Idealized model of a kimberlite magmatic system .......................................................................................... 9
6. Diatreme-root zone relationships as exhibited by cross sections .................................................................... 9
7. Idealized model of a lamproite magma system ................................................................................................ 11
8. Major regional structures in Ontario associated with alkalic, carbonatite and kimberlite intrusive rocks .... 15
9. Importance of line spacing in aeromagnetic surveys........................................................................................ 17
10. Positive ground gravity anomaly from kimberlite............................................................................................ 18
11. Negative ground gravity anomalies from kimberlite........................................................................................ 19
12. Variation in ground magnetic responses from diamondiferous kimberlites .................................................... 21
13. Total field magnetic contours for the C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake ...................................................................... 22
14. Induced polarization data for the C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake ............................................................................ 23
15. Filtered VLF data for the C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake ........................................................................................ 24
16. A plot of VLF-resistivity data for the C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake ...................................................................... 25
17. The Laurentide ice sheet .................................................................................................................................. 27
18. Glacier flow and debris transport over an irregular bed .................................................................................. 28
19. Examples of type I and type II sediment dispersal curves .............................................................................. 29
20. Examples of dispersal in different geologic and topographic settings in the Wawa area ................................ 30
21. Glacial controls on kimberlite indicator mineral dispersal within fluvial systems .............................................. 33
22. A regional-scale sampling grid, Wawa area...................................................................................................... 34
23. Local-scale till sampling over a hypothetical anomaly, Wawa area ................................................................ 35
24. Summary of laboratory procedures required for the isolation of kimberlite heavy mineral indicators .......... 38
25. Geochemistry of G10 and G9 chrome pyrope garnets .................................................................................... 39
26. Geochemistry of chromite inclusions within diamond .................................................................................... 39
27. Dispersal of kimberlite and related heavy minerals from the Buffonta kimberlite dike, Kirkland Lake ........ 41
28. Fluvial dispersal of kimberlite indicator minerals from the area of the Jack kimberlite, British Columbia .. 42
29. Dispersal of pyrope garnet and chrome diopside grains in the Sloan District drainage basin, Colorado........ 43
30. Regional distribution of kimberlite indicator minerals, Wawa area ................................................................ 44
31. Dispersal of chrome pyrope in till, C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake area .................................................................. 45
32. Dispersal of kimberlite indicator minerals, Cobalt area .................................................................................. 45
33. Regional till sampling of the southern Canadian prairies for peridotitic garnets.................................................. 46
34. Regional distribution of chrome pyrope garnet in till, Beardmore–Geraldton area ........................................ 47

v
PHOTOGRAPHS
1. Examples of chrome pyrope garnets .................................................................................................. back pocket
2. Chromite, magnesium-rich ilmenite and chrome diopside grains ...................................................... back pocket

TABLES
1. Time and financial requirements for exploration and development of diamond mines .................................. 5
2. Economic profile of high-grade diamond mines .............................................................................................. 6
3. Minerals found in kimberlite and lamproite .................................................................................................... 10
4. Geophysical prospecting and data enhancement techniques ............................................................................ 18
5. Summary of properties for lodgement, melt-out and flow tills ........................................................................ 28

vi
Prospector’s Guide to
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
T.F. Morris1 and C.A. Kaszycki2
1
Geologist, Ontario Geological Survey, Sedimentary Geoscience Section
2
Supervisor, Ontario Geological Survey, Sedimentary Geoscience Section, Geochemistry and Mapping
Manuscript approved for publication and published with the permission of the Senior Manager, Ontario
Geological Survey, Sedimentary Geoscience Section, March 1997.

Abstract
This guidebook was developed to provide an easy reference tool to prospectors interested in exploring for kim-
berlite, specifically in northern Ontario. The intent is to provide the basic reference materials to guide prelim-
inary exploration. The guidebook consists of 7 chapters and an extensive reference section. The first chapter is
a review of diamond properties and summarizes the economics of diamond exploration and mining.

The second chapter discusses the host materials for diamond. Kimberlite and lamproite are the most econom-
ically important host rocks for diamond and are considered to be “primary” hosts. Alluvial, or placer, diamond
deposits are considered “secondary” hosts and closely mimic the distribution of the primary hosts. This chapter
discusses the mineralogical, geochemical and morphological characteristics of the primary hosts.

The third chapter provides an overview of Ontario’s diamond potential. The location of diamond-bearing
kimberlite appears to be controlled by a number of geologic constraints. These constraints include a) location of
host rock within cratons of Archean age, b) conditions related to diamond preservation, c) structural associations,
and d) association of diamonds with other types of intrusive rocks. Most of northern Ontario lies within the
Archean craton of the Canadian Shield. Presently, there are 3 main areas within the province where the above con-
ditions are met and active exploration is ongoing. These include a) the Ottawa–Bonnechere Graben—Lake
Timiskaming fault system, b) the Kapuskasing structural zone, and c) the James Bay lowland region.

The fourth chapter reviews the use of geophysics in kimberlite exploration. Geophysical techniques are com-
monly used once the geologic setting of an area has been assessed for kimberlite potential. Various geophysical
techniques are discussed as are the factors that control the geophysical response from a kimberlite target.

The fifth chapter focusses on how drift prospecting has been used for diamond exploration in northern
Ontario. Investigating the physical dispersal of kimberlite indicator minerals in surficial materials is an impor-
tant tool in prospecting for kimberlite. In Ontario, most surficial sediments are either glaciogenic in origin, or
have been derived from glacial materials (e.g., modern stream sediments derived from erosion of pre-existing
glaciofluvial deposits). The guidebook not only discusses the relative merits of sampling different types of over-
burden materials, but touches on a) the glacial history of Ontario; b) how glaciers act as agents of erosion,
transportation and deposition; and c) overburden sampling methodologies.

The sixth chapter reviews the physical and geochemical properties of the major heavy mineral kimberlite
indicators. Kimberlite hosts a suite of heavy minerals with unique chemical and physical characteristics. Several
of these minerals are resistive, that is, they survive weathering, erosion and transport by ice and water over con-
siderable distances. The most important of these indicators include a) pyrope garnet, b) magnesium-rich ilmenite,
c) chromite, and d) chrome diopside.

The application of overburden studies to kimberlite exploration is summarized in the seventh chapter. Publicly
available data sets focussing on overburden exploration for kimberlite are rare. Those that do exist focus on the recovery
of heavy mineral kimberlite indicators from a variety of surface sediments, including a) modern alluvium, b) till,
c) lacustrine sediments, d) glaciolacustrine sediments, e) marine sediments, and f) glaciofluvial sediments. The guide-
book highlights a number of these studies to provide examples of how overburden can be used to find kimberlite.

Morris, T.F. and Kaszycki, C.A. 1997. Prospector’s guide to drift prospecting for diamonds, northern Ontario; Ontario
Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 167, 63p.

vii
1 Introduction

WHAT IS A DIAMOND? WHERE DIAMONDS ARE MINED

Diamond, a naturally occurring crystalline form of carbon,
is the hardest natural material known to man. Diamond
derived its name from the Latin word adamas, meaning
“invincible”. A diamond may have a variety of forms that
vary from octahedral to an indented cube with subordinate
tetrahexahedroid form (Figure 1) (Robinson 1979).
Diamond has a greasy lustre, a hardness value of 10,
specific gravity of 3.5 and a conchoidal fracture
(Chesterman 1978). Diamonds are good conductors of heat
and poor conductors of electricity. They fluoresce when
X-rayed, adhere to grease and are brittle. Diamond brittle-
ness is due to, a large degree, the diamond’s cleavage.
Diamonds vary in colour from colourless to various
shades of blue, green, yellow, brown or red (Hasan 1993).
The brilliance of a diamond is a function of its high refrac-
tive index, which causes most of the light entering a stone
to be reflected first internally and then externally to the
viewer (Hasan 1993). A diamond’s “fire” is related to its
dispersive character, or, the array of spectral colours dis-
persed from the gemstone.
The history of diamond mining is well summarized else-
where and will not be repeated here (Northwest Territorial
Government 1993; Janse 1995, 1996; Janse and Sheahan
1995). Commercial diamond deposits are presently found
in only 2 rock types: kimberlite and lamproite. There are
approximately 5000 known kimberlite and lamproite
occurrences worldwide. Of these, about 500 are diamon-
diferous and of these, only 15 host large diamond mines
(Janse and Sheahan 1995). There are also about 4000 allu-
vial occurrences of diamond worldwide (Janse and
Sheahan 1995).
Twenty-two countries presently produce diamonds.
The most important countries in terms of the value of pro-
duction are Botswana, South Africa, Russia, Australia and
Namibia. Since 1950, there have been only 7 major dia-
mond discoveries resulting in mines where annual pro-
duction exceeds 3 million carats. These are the Argyle
Mine in Australia, the Orapa and Jwaneng mines in
Botswana, the Jubilee, Udachnaya and Mir mines in
Russia, and the Venetia Mine in South Africa (Jennings
1995).

a b c d

e f g h

i j k l

Figure 1. Common forms of diamond crystals: a) octahedron; b) to e) various combinations of octahedron and tetrahexahedroid, ranging from an
octahedron with rounded corners to a predominantly tetrahexahedroid form; f) tetrahexahedroid; g) flat tetrahexahedroid; h) elongate tetrahexahe-
droid; i) contact-twinned octahedron (macle); j) contact-twinned tetrahexahedroid (macle); k) layered octahedron (layering can produce striated,
pseudotrioctahedral and pseudododecahedral forms and may be associated with crystal growth, in which case each layer is a triangular plate; these
are sometimes arranged imbricately, as at the lower right surface); l) indented cube with subordinate tetrahexahedroid form (from Robinson 1979).

1
Miscellaneous Paper 167
In North America, diamonds were originally discov-
ered in Arkansas in 1906. However, only 1 economical
diamond mine is presently operational in North America,
the Kelsey Lake Mine in Colorado. Several other promis-
ing areas have recently come to light, particularly in
Canada’s Northwest Territories (including the Lac de Gras
field), and in the Kirkland Lake–Cobalt, Attawapiskat and
Wawa areas of northern Ontario.
WHY DIAMONDS ARE IMPORTANT
In terms of value of worldwide mineral production, dia-
monds generally rank ahead of nickel, uranium, platinum,
palladium and silver, but behind iron, gold, copper and
zinc (Jennings 1995). Jennings (1995) points out that indi-
vidual diamond mines can be more lucrative than any
other type of mineral deposit, with annual revenues
approaching or exceeding a billion dollars US, and in situ
reserves worth as much as US$50 billion. This compares
with the entire Carlin Trend in Nevada, where combined
reserves of about 60 million ounces of gold at US$390 per
ounce are worth US$25 billion. The Carlin Trend is the
world’s second largest reserve of gold after the
Witwatersrand region of South Africa (Jennings 1995).
Diamonds are regarded as being either of gem or
industrial grade. This evaluation depends upon factors
relating to the physical and optical properties of the stone
as they relate to end use. Gem-quality diamonds are eval-
uated on the basis of both physical and optical properties,
whereas industrial-grade diamonds are graded only on
physical properties.
The units of measure for a diamond are weight and
size. The carat is the unit of measure for weight. One carat
is equal to 0.2 g. In terms of size, a diamond is regarded as
being either a microdiamond (less than 0.5 mm in size) or
macrodiamond (greater than 0.5 mm).
In 1991, the world production of diamonds stood at
105 million carats valued at US$5 billion. Of this, 15%
consisted of gem-quality diamonds, about 20% were of
near-gem quality and the rest were suitable for industrial
use. In dollars, gem diamonds accounted for 75% of the
gross value of production, with an average price of over
US$200 per carat for rough gems and about US$2 per carat
for industrial material (Hasan 1993).
Gem-Grade Diamonds
Gem-grade diamonds are highly sought after for their
beauty, durability and rarity. Their most common use is in
jewellery. Worldwide, some 300 million people own at
least 1 piece of diamond jewellery. Annually, almost
US$40 billion is spent on about 60 million pieces containing
some 15 million carats of diamonds (Wannenburgh and
Johnson 1990).
2
The beauty of gem diamonds is determined by cut,
colour and clarity. These 3 qualities, combined with the
carat weight of the stone, determine its value. Diamond
evaluation begins with the sorting of rough diamonds recov-
ered from mines and separation processes. The “roughs”, as
they are termed, are sorted according to their colour, form
and size into gems and nongems (Hasan 1993).
Industrial-Grade Diamonds
About two-thirds of all the natural diamonds mined are
too flawed or simply too small to be cut and polished into
jewels. These industrial-grade diamonds are sought after
for a variety of industrial uses such as cutting, grinding
and polishing. Because diamond is a very good conductor
of heat, it is also used as a heat sink in electronics appli-
cations. Industrial diamonds are considered to be a strategic
mineral and are stockpiled by some governments (Northwest
Territorial Government 1993).
Synthetic Diamonds
Synthetic diamonds have been produced in laboratories
since 1956. To date, the technology to produce gem-quality
synthetic diamonds has not yet been established. This is
due to the inability of present technologies to eliminate
nitrogen from the process, which almost invariably pro-
duces a yellow-coloured synthetic diamond. Metallic
inclusions are also caused by solvents used in the process.
Although the largest synthetic diamond produced to date is
35 carats, the most common size is 2 to 4 carats.
About 90% of the demand for industrial diamond
(estimated at US$600 million per year) is met by syn-
thetics. Synthetic diamonds are preferred over natural
industrial-grade diamonds because of predictable size and
shape.
WHERE DIAMONDS ARE FOUND
AND WHERE THEY FORM
Diamonds have been found in a variety of host materials.
These include
• unconsolidated sediments (Pleistocene to Recent
placers)
• consolidated sedimentary rocks (paleoplacers)
• kimberlite and related igneous rocks (lamproite)
• ultramafic xenoliths in kimberlite
• other volcanic rocks (such as nephelinites, monchiq-
uites and carbonatites)
• ultramafic massifs
• medium-grade metamorphic rocks
• meteorites (Helmstaedt 1993; Nixon 1995)

Kimberlite (and lamproite) are the principal host rocks for
economic diamond deposits, but they are not the primary
source of diamonds in the sense that diamond originated
(or grew) within them. Diamonds in kimberlite have been
incorporated into the kimberlite’s igneous assemblage from
surrounding source rocks and are referred to as xenocrysts.
The kimberlite or other host rock simply provides the trans-
port medium for the diamond as it is transferred from its
original upper-mantle source rock to the surface (Kirkley et
al. 1992; Helmstaedt 1993; Bulanova 1995).
The source rocks for diamonds are concentrated in the
roots of Archean cratons. In these areas, a thickened lithos-
phere causes a downward deflection of the surface of the
asthenosphere. Diamond formation occurs within the upper
mantle (asthenosphere) and is commonly associated with
2 rock types: garnet peridotites (in which garnet harzburgites
predominate over lherzolites) and eclogites. This conclusion
is based on studies of mineral inclusions within diamonds
and of mineral assemblages in diamond-bearing xenoliths.
The general predominance of diamonds with peridotitic
inclusions (P-type diamonds) over those with eclogitic
inclusion minerals (E-type diamonds), and the chemical
composition of the inclusion minerals suggest a source
region in the upper mantle, consisting of chemically highly
depleted harzburgites with lenses of eclogitized mafic
rocks (Helmstaedt 1993; Bulanova 1995).
Assuming that the peridotitic inclusion minerals were
at equilibrium with their diamond hosts at the time of
inclusion, it has been estimated from geothermobarometry
that diamonds form at pressures corresponding to depths
of 150 to 200 km and temperatures generally not exceeding
1200°C. Temperature estimates for eclogites are generally
consistent with those for peridotites (Helmstaedt and
Gurney 1995).
Diamonds form and are maintained within a fairly tight
pressure and temperature range. This range of temperature
and pressure values is referred to as the diamond stability
field. This corresponds to a “diamond window” defined as
the area associated with convex-downward warping or
deflection of the asthenosphere surface in response to a
thickened Archean root zone, and the corresponding convex-
upward deflection of the diamond stability field (Figure 2)
(Helmstaedt 1993; Helmstaedt and Gurney 1995).
Transport of economic quantities of diamond from
this diamond window in the upper mantle to the surface
requires a) that kimberlite, lamproite or any other mag-
matic host rock originate deep enough in the mantle to
sample the source rock, and b) that the intrusive event
occurs fast enough for the diamonds to survive transport to
the surface. The concentration of diamond in the host rock
is diluted as the xenoliths are broken apart during transport
to or by subsequent weathering and erosion at the earth’s
surface. Once the diamonds reach the earth’s surface they
may be recycled repeatedly by sedimentary processes
and become reconcentrated locally in placer deposits
(Helmstaedt 1993).
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
ECONOMICS OF EXPLORATION
AND MINING
A kimberlite pipe is not easy to find. In terms of cross-
sectional area at surface, they commonly range from 0.4 to
146 ha in size, with a maximum size of 200 ha being
recorded by the MI in Botswana (Jennings 1995).
Kimberlite, being composed of minerals that are inherently
unstable at surface temperature and pressure, decomposes
rapidly and is easily eroded. As such, kimberlite generally
forms a recessive topographic feature and is rarely exposed
at surface.
The following outlines common steps taken in the
exploration for and development of a diamond mine. This
sequence was derived largely from Coopersmith (1993)
and Jennings (1995).
Selecting an Area
The first step in diamond exploration is selecting an area
to explore. For this, it is critical to understand the geologic
setting for kimberlite or lamproite formation. As previously
discussed, diamond-bearing kimberlite and lamproite are
restricted to the earth’s cratonic areas (Figure 3). These
represent huge areas to explore for such small targets.
After choosing a region, areas for exploration must be pri-
oritized based on available structural, tectonic, geophysical
(magnetic and gravity), geological, geomorphic, topographic
and cultural data (Coopersmith 1993; Jennings 1995).
Crust
50
Lithosphere
100
Depth (km)
Mantle
150
Gr
ap
Root
Di
hi
am
200
te
on
d
250
Asthenosphere
Figure 2. Diamond stability field (shaded area). Diagram illustrates the
relationship between the deep lithosphere mantle root and downward
deflection of the asthenosphere surface relative to the diamond stability
field (modified from Helmstaedt and Gurney 1995).
3
Miscellaneous Paper 167
Major primary
?
Minor primary
Secondary
Cratonic areas
Figure 3. World map of primary and secondary diamond deposits (from Helmstaedt 1993).
Heavy Mineral Surveys
Heavy mineral prospecting commonly occurs after an area
has been selected for diamond exploration. Kimberlite
contains perhaps 0.1% or more of certain unique “indicator
minerals”, specifically pyrope garnet, chrome diopside,
magnesian ilmenite, chromite or diamond. A heavy-mineral
sampling program tests for these hard, dense, distinctive
mineral grains which may have been eroded and trans-
ported by water or ice from a kimberlite pipe. Overburden
materials commonly collected in North America include
products of glaciation, such as till and glaciofluvial
deposits, and modern stream sediments (Jennings 1995).
Normally 10 to 25 kg of material is collected for indicator
mineral surveys (Morris et al. 1994).
For lamproite exploration, heavy-mineral indicators
may include all of those for kimberlite plus zircon, phlo-
gopite, potassium-rich richterite and priderite + tourma-
line (Fipke 1994). Depending upon the type of overburden
sampled, anywhere between 10 to 200 kg of material is
collected and processed for lamproite indicator minerals.
This is commonly followed by sampling for diamonds,
which may involve 15 to 200 t samples of overburden
(Coopersmith 1993).
Initially, heavy-mineral sampling is carried out at a
reconnaissance scale, widely spaced over major drainage
basins or till sheets. At this scale, sampling will define back-
ground and anomalous concentrations of the various types
of kimberlite indicators present in the region. By taking into
4
account the direction, distance and style of indicator trans-
port, and the age and depositional history of the material
being sampled, indicator minerals may be traced upstream
or up-ice to their source. In general, concentration increases
with proximity to source.
Once samples are collected for heavy mineral analysis,
exhaustive and expensive procedures are used to isolate
and identify the indicator minerals (Averill and
McClenaghan 1994; Towie and Ho Seet 1995). Such
processes may cost in excess of $150 per sample (1995
prices), not including shipping costs. Following initial
identification and isolation of indicator grains, electron
microprobe analysis is required to determine the precise
grain geochemistry. This can cost an additional $100 per
hour (1995 prices) of machine time.
Geophysical Surveys
In addition to heavy-mineral sampling, geophysics can play a
key role in identifying potential kimberlite targets.
Geophysics, the application of physics to geology, is used to
examine the measurable properties (magnetism, gravity, con-
ductivity, radioactivity) of rocks. Geophysicists can “look”
through overburden into underlying bedrock to a depth of
several hundred metres below the overburden surface.
Although expensive, an airborne geophysical survey
flown by fixed-wing aircraft or helicopter may be used to
quickly evaluate a large area and locate targets with suitable

geophysical responses. Once a target has been identified,
more detailed ground geophysics can be done. Geophysical
data must always be confirmed by drilling, which provides
samples for analysis as well as for subsurface mapping.
Detailed Exploration
Detailed exploration commences once the reconnaissance
heavy mineral and/or geophysical surveys have defined a
target. This may involve detailed heavy-mineral sampling
near or around a site, detailed ground geophysics or
drilling. Commonly, relatively large concentrations of
kimberlitic material in a 10 kg sample indicate a transport
distance of less than 1 km from a kimberlite pipe.
Therefore, an indicator mineral anomaly identified during
a regional sampling program likely indicates a nearby
point source. Once a potential site is selected, detailed
geophysical surveys followed by diamond drilling are then
carried out to evaluate whether the site consists of kimberlite
and is the source of the indicator mineral anomaly.
Bulk Sampling
Once an in situ kimberlite is confirmed, bulk sampling is
conducted to evaluate the economic potential of the
deposit. This is carried out in 3 stages: a) microdiamond
testing, b) character sampling, and c) true bulk sampling.
These correspond to increasing the size or scale of sam-
pling (Coopersmith 1993).
Microdiamond sampling involves collecting samples
20 to 70 kg in size and subsequent laboratory processing.
The purpose of sampling for microdiamonds is to provide
an initial evaluation of the characteristics of the macrodia-
mond population.
The second level of sampling is referred to as dia-
mond character sampling. At this stage, 100 to 500 t of
material is collected and processed. The information
derived from this procedure provides a more complete pic-
ture of the character and approximate diamond grade of
the deposit. Often, several character samples are required
from one kimberlite (Coopersmith 1993).
Table 1. Time and financial requirements for exploration and development of diamond mines.
Deposit Exploration
(years)
Mir, CIS1 6 5
Orapa, Botswana 12
Argyle, Australia 7 6
Venetia, RSA 2
11
Lac de Gras, Canada 113 to date
1
Commonwealth of Independent States (former USSR).
2
Republic of South Africa.
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
The last stage of sampling is referred to as true bulk
sampling, which is similar to character sampling but is car-
ried out at a much larger scale. The results of this sampling
enable definitive characterization of a kimberlite, and the
completion of a feasibility study. Tonnages sampled com-
monly range from 5000 to 100 000 t (Coopersmith 1993).
Mining
To this point, a typical exploration program culminating in
a diamond mine requires an expenditure on the order of
US$500 million. The large diamond mines that have
opened over the past 2 decades have required 11 to 20 years
to complete the exploration, discovery and development
phases, prior to going into production (Table 1).
Kimberlite-hosted diamond mines in South Africa,
Russia and Botswana are long-term operations, capable of
producing diamonds for at least 20 to 50 years from
reserves worked by open pit or underground bulk-mining
methods. Historically, all kimberlite mines have started as
open pit operations with about one-third of the producers
expanding into underground extraction (Northwest
Territorial Government 1993).
Because of the vertical nature of the ore bodies, some
diamond mines have the steepest walls of all open pit
mines in the world. The “Big Hole” at Kimberley, South
Africa, is one of the world’s most impressive excavations.
Russian open pit operations are up to 400 m deep, with
plans to go to a world record depth of 600 m in the
Udachnaya open pit mine (Toronto’s CN Tower could fit
into a 533 m deep open pit). Because of this, diamond min-
ing remains at the forefront of modern mechanized mining,
with an emphasis on using large equipment and bulk min-
ing techniques (Northwest Territorial Government 1993).
Production and Revenue from a
Large Diamond Mine
Recent data from Africa and Australia suggest that a large
diamond mine has an average lifespan of 30 years, processes
150 million t of kimberlite and contains 135 million carats
Development Development Cost
(years) (US$)
?
4 ?
300 million
9 433 million
none as yet 50 to 60 million4
3
Several major pipe deposits are indicated but not proven.
4
Estimated exploration costs to spring 1993.
5
Miscellaneous Paper 167

of diamonds worth US$13.5 billion (based on an average
value of US$100 per carat). Diamond concentration typi-
cally averages 0.90 carats per t with an estimated gem
ratio of 30%. Gem ratio is the ratio between the number of
gem-quality diamonds versus the number of industrial-
grade diamonds. Annually, a large mine recovers an aver-
age of 4.5 million carats of rough diamonds worth US$450
million from 5 million t of ore. Not factored into the cal-
culation is the “bonanza bonus” of diamond mining, which
is the recovery of 1 or more large gem-quality diamonds.
A proportion of larger stones of high gem quality is unre-
servedly a requirement for an economic diamond deposit
and can add substantially to a mine’s earnings (Northwest
Territorial Government 1993).
Jennings (1995) lists the economic profiles of 4 high-
grade diamond mines. This data (Table 2) illustrates how
quickly a diamond mine can pay back expenses once in
production—within 1 year or less of operation.
Using an average value of US$100 per carat, a dia-
mond mining district or single deposit with a 500 million
carat in situ reserve is worth US$50 billion. For comparison,
total gold production and reserves for the Con and Giant
mines in Yellowknife, NWT, total 425 000 kg of gold
worth about US$4.8 billion. A high-grade diamond mine
or mining region is, therefore, worth the equivalent in
value of product of 10 Yellowknife gold mining districts
(Northwest Territorial Government 1993).

Table 2. Economic profile of high-grade diamond mines, examples A through D (modified from Jennings 1995).

Diamond Mine A B C D

Parameters
Grade (carats/100 t) 100 125 150 150
Value per carat (US$) 80 100 100 120
Recovered diamonds (carats) 5.0 million 6.25 million 7.5 million 7.5 million
Gross revenue (US$) 400 million 625 million 750 million 900 million
Expenses (US$) 100 million 100 million 100 million 100 million
Gross margin (US$) 300 million 525 million 650 million 800 million
Net earnings (US$) 160 million 210 million 260 million 320 million
Life 20 years 20 years 20 years 20 years
Payback 1 year 8 months 7 months 6 months
Pretax present value at 10% US$6 billion

Assumptions
Production rate 5 million t per annum
Operating cost per t US$20
Margin 40% after depreciation, interest, royalties, taxes, commissions
Tonnage 100 million
Capital cost US$400 million

6
2 Host Materials for Diamond

INTRODUCTION Kimberlite-hosted deposits account for 75% of the

Helmstaedt and Gurney (1995) summarizes several dia-
mond occurrences on the basis of deposit type (or setting)
and age of formation (Figure 4). Despite the number of
potential settings for natural diamond occurrences, kim-
berlite has historically been regarded as the only signifi-
cant primary host rock for diamonds (Helmstaedt 1993).
world’s diamond production (30% gem and near-gem,
70% industrial), alluvial or placer deposits account for
less than 24% of world production (60% gem and near-
gem, 40% industrial), and beach deposits account for
less than 2% of world production (95% gem and near-
gem, 5% industrial) (Northwest Territorial Government
1993).

TYPE OF DEPOSIT

Age Placer Kimberlite Lamproite Surface Xenoliths Diamonds

(my) Group I Group II
Rocks Eclogite Peridotite E-Type P-Type

Cenozoic 0 55
66 114
Mesozoic
230
245 200

Paleozoic

500 530
570
AGE OF HOST ROCK

1000

990

Proterozoic 1200

1600 ? 1580
1800
1900? 2700
L
2100
2400

Late Archean
2700

3000

Early Archean
H
3300

Figure 4. Age ranges of diamondiferous host rocks. Natural diamond occurrences are compared to the age of minerals included in diamonds from
primary diamond deposits (i.e., kimberlite and lamproite). The terms E-type and P-type refer to diamonds with inclusions of eclogitic and peridotitic
mineral assemblages, respectively; the abbreviations “H” and “L” refer to harzburgite and lherzolite, respectively. A more complete description of
terms is given in the text (from Helmstaedt and Gurney 1995).

7
Miscellaneous Paper 167
During the past decade, lamproite has also been rec-
ognized as an important host rock for diamonds. Since
kimberlite and lamproite are the most economically
important host rocks for diamond production, the follow-
ing discussion will focus on the physical, geochemical and
heavy-mineral properties of these primary hosts.
Lamprophyre will also be discussed, given its abundance
in Ontario and association with kimberlite. Diamond has
been found in certain lamprophyre occurrences; however,
these are poorly documented and have not yielded eco-
nomic quantities of diamonds (Helmstaedt 1993).
Alluvial diamond deposits, or placers, are considered
a secondary diamond host. Most alluvial diamond deposits
have been traced to a kimberlite source. This is reflected
in the distribution of these deposits, which closely mimics
the distribution of kimberlite and lamproite occurrences
(see Figure 3) (Helmstaedt 1993).
KIMBERLITE
Definition
Kimberlite is a rare, volatile-rich, potassic, ultrabasic rock
with highly variable mineralogical compositions and tex-
tures. This variable mineralogy and texture makes defining
kimberlite difficult (Smith 1984). Kimberlite is subdivided
into 2 groups. Group I kimberlite is olivine-rich monticellite-
serpentine-calcite kimberlite. Group II kimberlite is mica-
ceous. Kimberlite differs from lamproite in mineralogy and
mode of near-surface emplacement. However, there is an
overlap in chemical composition between Group II kim-
berlite and lamproite (Dawson 1984, 1987).
Kimberlite contains various types of macrocrystals
that are derived from different sources: xenocrysts, phe-
nocrysts and megacrysts (Mitchell 1986). Xenocrysts are
derived from xenoliths (an inclusion of pre-existing rock
within a rock unit) of mantle source rock that have been
disaggregated during transportation within a kimberlite
magma. Xenocrysts, which may have been subrounded or
fractured during transport to surface, include olivine,
chromium-rich but titanium-poor pyrope, chrome diopside,
enstatite, chromite, chrome spinel, ilmenite, rutile, kyanite,
corundum, amphibole, phlogopite and diamond.
Phenocrysts and microphenocrysts are relatively
large, subhedral to euhedral crystals set in a finer grained
groundmass. These minerals crystallized in situ to form
the kimberlite host rock. Principal mineral phases include
olivine, phlogopite, spinel, ilmenite, perovskite, diopside,
monticellite, apatite, calcite and serpentine.
Megacrysts are large (1 to 20 cm) single crystals,
which may have formed as either xenocrysts or phe-
nocrysts. In kimberlite, these include chrome titanian
pyrope, magnesian ilmenite, subcalcic to calcic diopside,
enstatite, phlogopite and zircon.
8
Kimberlite Identification
FIELD
Kimberlite is not easily identified in the field, as it cannot
be recognized solely in hand specimen or in thin section
(Jago et al. 1993). The following, however, provides a
guideline that allows for initial evaluation from hand spec-
imen (from Jago et al. 1993):
1. reddish-purple and red-wine coloured garnets,
sometimes with brown alteration rims
2. bright green chrome diopside grains
3. rounded to amoeboid, frosted (glassy on a broken
surface) black ilmenite
4. rounded to ovoid xenoliths composed of chrome
diopside, garnet, olivine and orthopyroxene
5. rounded structures that appear to be cored by rock
fragments or large mineral grains (i.e., nucleated
autoliths and pelletal lapilli that are particularly
characteristic of the volcanic process which has
emplaced kimberlite in the earth’s crust)
6. coarse (greater than 1 cm) single grains and grain
aggregates of garnet and/or chrome diopside and/or
olivine
7. weathered kimberlite often looks like a green-yellow
earthy mass, which is easily disaggregated by hand
GEOCHEMISTRY
Geochemically, the following are characteristics of kim-
berlite that can be determined in a laboratory (from Jago
et al. 1993):
1. megacrysts and macrocrysts that contain chromi-
um-rich and niobium-rich magnesian ilmenite,
chromium-poor and titanium-rich pyrope, and cal-
cic to subcalcic, low titanium-aluminum-sodium-
chromium diopside
2. two generations of olivine (Fo85) with grains char-
acterized as either large rounded single crystals or
euhedral groundmass; inequigranular texture
3. two generations of phlogopite macrocrysts, smaller
microphenocrysts
4. groundmass diopside contains less than 1 weight %
of each of TiO2, Al2O3, Na2O and Cr2O3
5. groundmass spinels evolve along 2 distinct compo-
sitional trends; trends are distinct from those dis-
played by lamprophyric spinels
6. perovskites in kimberlite are poor in rare earth ele-
ments (REEs), Na, Fe, Nb and Ta compared to per-
ovskites from carbonatites; minerals such as knopite,
latrappite, dysanalyte, lueshite and loparite are
absent in kimberlite
7. calcite contains less than 1 weight % MgO and less
than 0.5 weight % FeO; exsolution textures are not
present
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

8. calcite-rich kimberlite lacks pyrochlore, bastnae-
site, synchysite, monazite, alkalic amphiboles
and pyroxenes
9. primary serpentine is present
10. feldspars and feldspathoids are absent
11. primary and secondary andradite-schorlomite
garnet are absent
The extent at surface of a kimberlite pipe is a function
of the degree of erosion of the pipe, becoming smaller and
increasingly irregular as the level of the root zone is
approached (Figure 6). The plan view at surface varies
from near-circular or oval to various irregular shapes that
may be controlled by the joint pattern in the country rocks.
The cross-section at depth also varies considerably, ranging
from single to double diatremes and becoming increasingly
more complex towards the root zone.

MORPHOLOGY LAMPROITE

A kimberlite pipe consists of a root zone, a diatreme and Definition

crater-facies sedimentary rocks (Figure 5). The diatreme is
carrot-shaped, flaring from an irregular and complex root
zone occupied by one or more intrusive phases of
hypabyssal-facies kimberlite at depth. The crater phase
commonly consists of a “tuff ring” composed of pyroclastic
rocks. Epiclastic material can be found around the edges
and within the centre of the crater. In Ontario, the crater
facies is not likely to have been preserved due to
preglacial, glacial and postglacial processes that have
eroded and subsequently weathered the relatively soft
material associated with this facies.
Lamproite refers to a “clan” consisting of a group of ultra-
potassic mafic rocks (Mitchell 1985). They are composed
of mixtures of magmatic crystallization products with
upper mantle xenoliths and xenocrysts. However, lam-
proites are peralkalic and typically ultrapotassic (contain-
ing 6 to 8% K2O compared to 0.6 to 2% in Group I kim-
berlite, and up to 5% in Group II kimberlite). Lamproites
are more enriched in the trace elements Zr, Nb, Sr, Ba and
Rb than kimberlite. They exhibit an extremely wide range
in modal mineralogy (Scott–Smith 1992) and contain

Tuff Epiclastics Wesselton Pipe

Ring Pyroclastics Vertical Section Plan

Surface

Pyroclastics Crater
Facies
Diatreme
Facies 130 m 565 m

Sill Diatreme
Complex Zone
285 m 625 m

380 m 660 m
Root
Zone

Root 455 m 785 m

Precursor Zone
Dikes
930m 520 m 930 m

N
“blow” Diatreme-Related
Dikes
0 100 200 300 m

Figure 5. Idealized model of a kimberlite magmatic system (from Figure 6. Diatreme-root zone relationships as exhibited by cross-sections
Mitchell 1986). at depth, Wesselton Pipe, Orange Free State, Republic of South Africa
(from Mitchell 1986).

9
Miscellaneous Paper 167

unusual mineral assemblages that reflect their unusual GEOCHEMISTRY

magmatic compositions (Mitchell and Bergman 1991).
While having several major (olivine, diopside, phlogopite) Geochemically, most lamproites fall within the following
and minor (apatite, perovskite, ilmenite and spinel) mineral compositional ranges:
phases in common with kimberlite, lamproites contain a
number of additional minerals that distinguish them from SiO2 40 to 55% K2O 5 to 10%
kimberlite (Table 3). Al2O 4 to 10% Na2O 0.2 to 1.5%
TiO2 1 to 5% P2O5 0.5 to 2%
Table 3. Minerals found in kimberlite and lamproite (modified from
Kirkly et al. 1991; Scott–Smith 1992). CaO 2 to 10% BaO 1 to 3%

Minerals Kimberlite Lamproite

MORPHOLOGY
Major
Olivine • • Lamproites occur principally as extrusive, subvolcanic
Carbonate • - and hypabyssal rocks. They do not form diatremes and
Phlogopite • • root zones analogous to those of kimberlite pipes. Vents
are shallow and wide, with a structure commonly resem-
Serpentine • -
bling that of a champagne glass (Figure 7). They are prob-
Monticellite • -
ably of phreatomagmatic origin (interaction of magma
Leucite - • with water). The crater facies is commonly intruded by
Amphibole - • magmatic lamproite. Diamonds usually occur within the
Sanidine - • pyroclastic rocks, while the magmatic lamproite phases
are diamond-poor.
Minor
Apatite • •
Perovskite • •
LAMPROPHYRE
Ilmenite • -
Spinel • • Definition
Priderite - • Lamprophyres are porphyritic dike rocks, readily recog-
Clinopyroxene • • nizable in the field. Important characteristics common to
Wadeite - • all members of this extremely heterogeneous group
include 1) late-stage intrusion in any igneous event, 2) the
Xenocryst minerals derived presence of biotite with a distinct chemistry, and 3) a lack
from the upper mantle of felsic phenocrysts. Idiomorphic texture is usual, though
Olivine • • is by no means exclusive to lamprophyre (Rock 1977).
Garnet • •
Clinopyroxene • • A number of ultramafic lamprophyres bear petro-
graphic similarities to kimberlite, and some have been
Orthopyroxene • • labelled kimberlite-like or were considered as being relat-
Chromite • • ed to, or gradational with, kimberlite. Certain types of
ultramafic lamprophyres, notably alnöites, contain ultra-
mafic xenoliths of deep-seated origin and some have even
yielded diamonds (Helmstaedt 1993). The presence of
Identification of Lamproite titanian pargasite, melilite, nepheline and andraditic-
schorlomitic garnet in alnöites emphasizes their lack of
FIELD affinity with kimberlite and suggests an origin at signifi-
cantly shallower depth than kimberlite (Helmstaedt 1993).
As for kimberlite, field identification of lamproites is dif-
ficult. A number of minerals are common to both, particu-
larly xenocrysts derived from the upper mantle. These Identification of Lamprophyre
should be looked for when examining a hand specimen.
However, lamproites also contain important diagnostic FIELD
minerals which enable differentiation from kimberlite.
These include amphibole (potassic and titanian richterite), Lamprophyres contain lustrous plates of biotite, megacrysts
leucite, sanidine, wadeite (K2CaZr(Sio3)4), and priderite of amphibole, or leucocratic ocelli and a clearly altered
((K,Ba)(Ti,Fe)8O16). Another characteristic feature of lam- groundmass. Evidence of explosive emplacement is not
proites is the presence of matrix glass and relatively low uncommon and may be manifest by associated breccias.
CaCO3 content (Helmstaedt 1993). They are invariably porphyritic and characteristically show

10
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

,,,,, ,,
A

,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,, ,
,,,,,, ,,,
N Phlogopite-olivine

,,,,, ,,,,
lamproite

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,
Olivine lamproite

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
C

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Autobrecciated olivine

,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,, ,,
lamproite

,,
,,,,, ,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
Olivine lamproite lapilli

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
tuff

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
Sandy lapilli tuff

,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,

,,
Sandstone (Permian)

,,,,,
,

,, ,
B

,,, ,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,, ,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
A B C D

,,,, ,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,, 0 100 200 300 400 500 m
,,
,,,,
,,,,,
Figure 7. Idealized model of a lamproite magma system (from Helmstaedt 1993).

1) idiomorphic texture, 2) hydrous mineralogy (essential
amphibole and/or biotite), 3) absence of felsic phenocrysts,
4) typically a high degree of alteration, especially of the
groundmass, and 5) frequent xenoliths of country rock
and/or megacrysts of amphibole, pyroxene or alkali
feldspar (Rock 1977).
GEOCHEMISTRY
Chemically, lamprophyres are of intermediate to ultramafic
composition, containing less silica and more calcium than
other silicate rocks. Many varieties have a high modal pro-
portion of alkali feldspar for their colour index (Rock
1977). The following list of minerals and compositions
was compiled by Rock (1990). These appear to be unique
to lamprophyres and thus can be used to differentiate lam-
prophyres from other igneous rocks.
1. High-aluminum pyroxenes: calcic pyroxenes with
Al2O3 greater than 10% occur only in lampro-
phyres, metalimestones, lime-contaminated basalts
or, occasionally, mantle xenoliths. The highest
Al2O3 concentration in a lamprophyre (16.6%) is
among the highest recorded from any natural
pyroxene (Rock 1990).
2. High-titanium pyroxenes, amphiboles and phlogo-
pite: lamprophyres commonly contain pyroxenes
or amphiboles with TiO2 greater than 5% or phlo-
gopite with TiO2 greater than 8%; the maximum
TiO2 contents of lamprophyre pyroxenes (7.4%),
amphiboles (8.6%), and phlogopite (12.6%) are
again among the highest known for these minerals.
Pyroxenes containing elevated concentrations of
both Al2O3 and TiO2 are even more uniquely diag-
nostic of lamprophyres.
3. High-barium amphiboles, phlogopite and potassium-
feldspar: potassium-feldspar with BaO greater than
2%, and amphiboles with BaO greater than 0.5%,
are diagnostic of lamprophyres. Phlogopite with
BaO greater than 5% occurs in carbonatites, a few
nephelinitic rocks and very rarely in marbles, but is
far more common in ultramafic lamprophyres
(UML), underscoring the UML-carbonatite con-
nection.
4. High-fluorine amphiboles and phlogopite: the max-
imum concentration of fluorine in amphiboles
within lamprophyres is 4.1%; in phlogopite, 5.7%.
5. Mica rich in ferric iron (Fe3+): tetraferriphlogopite
(KMg3Si3Fe3+O10(OH)2), although also occurring in
some other peralkalic, silica-poor rocks (e.g., car-
bonatites), is particularly common in UML, kim-
berlite and lamproites; however, among igneous
rocks ferriannite (KFe2+3Si3O10(OH)2) appears to be
restricted to lamprophyres.

11
Miscellaneous Paper 167
6. Magnesium-iron-strontium-barium carbonates:
these also occur in carbonatites but are again
restricted to lamprophyres among silicate igneous
rocks.
7. High-zinc spinels: spinels with ZnO greater than
2% or MnO greater than 2% are diagnostic of lam-
prophyres.
8. Magnesium-manganese ilmenites: those with MgO
greater than 5% or MnO greater than 2% are diag-
nostic.
9. Strontium- and barium-rich apatites: apatites and
fluorine-rich apatites with exceptionally high BaO
and SrO contents are increasingly being reported.
Another peculiarity of many lamprophyres is the
coexistence of one or more minerals normally found in
primitive mafic to ultramafic rocks such as peridotite (e.g.,
magnesian olivine, pyroxene, phlogopite), with one or
more minerals normally typical of highly evolved felsic
rocks such as peralkalic granites (e.g., orthoclase, albite,
sodium-rich pyriboles). No rocks, other than lampro-
phyres, show an apparent paragenesis that encompasses
such strange combinations as forsterite-albite, diopside-
orthoclase or phlogopite-aegirine (Rock 1990).
MORPHOLOGY
Lamprophyres are widely distributed, commonly occur-
ring as dikes that form extensive and dense regional or
radial swarms. More rarely, they may occur as plugs, sills,
vents and lava flows (Rock 1977).
In the Superior Province of the Canadian Shield, lam-
prophyric dikes of Archean age are a volumetrically
minor, yet widespread component of magmatism. They
preferentially occur along major structures that delineate
subprovince boundaries. Lamprophyre swarms are best
developed in fault grabens, where they are associated with
alkalic gabbros and trachytes, and molasse sedimentary
rocks (Wyman and Kerrich 1989). Recently, lamprophyric
dikes of Keweenawan age (middle Proterozoic) have been
recognized. Also, Archean lamprophyres occur in the
northern portion of the Michipicoten greenstone belt and
are not related to subprovince boundaries (R. Sage, OGS,
personal communication, 1996).
UNCONSOLIDATED AND
CONSOLIDATED SEDIMENTS
Different types of sedimentary deposits that host diamonds
include those of fluvial, marine, eolian, lacustrine and
glacial origin (Marshall and Baxter–Brown 1995). These
deposits are either mined directly for diamonds or are used
to find the rock host for diamonds.
Marshall and Baxter–Brown (1995) discuss a number of
factors related to sediment deposition that must be evaluated
12
prior to exploration in sedimentary environments.
These factors include a) geological age, b) stratigraphic
and hydrologic relationship, c) structural controls that
may have affected sediment distribution, d) depositional
and postdepositional processes, e) evolution of trans-
port systems in response to tectonic and climatic changes,
f) drainage reversal and capture, g) gradient change and
system maturity, h) base-level changes due to either eusta-
tic or isostatic adjustments, and i) topographic inversion
due to eustatic and isostatic fluctuation.
When using alluvium as a prospecting medium, the
traditional exploration model involves following an
increase in the number of indicators (diamond or kimberlite
heavy mineral) until the concentration of indicator minerals
suddenly decreases. However, such a technique is often
not straightforward, as evidenced by the search for the
source of diamonds in Brazil.
In the western part of the state of Minas Gerais in
Brazil, diamonds occur in alluvium and colluvium over an
area of 40 000 km2. These materials are related to glacio-
genic Upper Proterozoic and Permian–Carboniferous sed-
imentary rocks. Diamonds within these materials were
thought to have been derived from the erosion of primary
kimberlite pipes that exist in the area. However, the local
kimberlite pipes are largely sterile and are therefore not
likely the source of diamond. Careful study of the distrib-
ution of the deposits, paleocurrents and heavy mineral con-
centrations indicates that the diamonds are not derived from
a local source, but were transported into the area by glacial
events from a neighbouring area (Gonzaga et al. 1994).
Understanding the glacial history of the region is essential
to identifying the unsolved origin of diamonds in western
Minas Gerais.
The importance of understanding geomorphology
when sampling alluvium is emphasized by the distribution
of diamonds in an alluvial system in the Guinean diamond
fields of West Africa. These diamond fields consist of 3
neighbouring drainage basins, all of which contain alluvial
diamonds. The basins are similar in size and underlying
geology and all occur within the same morphogenetic and
tectonic environment. However, despite these similarities
their geomorphological histories are quite distinct. This,
together with variations in the distribution of known
occurrences of kimberlitic diamond sources, results in a
distinct variation in the distribution and concentration of
diamonds in the alluvial deposits of each of the 3 drainage
basins (Sutherland 1993a).
As an example, one of the 3 basins consists of a smaller
drainage basin that was captured and incorporated into a
neighbouring basin through headward stream erosion. This
lowered base level within the captured drainage basin and
resulted in downcutting and reworking of sediment, the
flushing of tributaries and slopes, and the concentration of
diamonds in a trunk channel. In contrast, the other 2 basins
have only been reduced in size by capture of portions of
their headwaters. As a consequence, less sorting of sedi-
mentary material has occurred as base levels within each

basin have not been significantly lowered. As a result,
alluvial diamonds are retained in tributaries close to their
source and only low to moderate concentrations of dia-
monds are found in the related trunk channels (Sutherland
1993a).
Transport and Sorting of
Diamonds in Fluvial and Eolian
Environments
Fluvial systems may transport and subsequently deposit dia-
monds as economically viable deposits up to 600 km away
from their source (Sutherland 1993b). Surface abrasion fea-
tures such as percussion markings and rounded corners may
occur during such long distance transport. However, associ-
ation of worn diamonds with transport processes and dis-
tance is equivocal, as abraded diamonds are also widely
reported from kimberlite (Harris et al. 1975).
A downstream decrease in grain size can result from
either the preferential transport of smaller particles, or
breakage and attrition of larger particles. Both breakage
and attrition are indicated by the disappearance of inferior
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
quality diamonds and the rounding of the corners of more
resistant diamonds (Sutherland 1982).
Transport tends to increase the quality of diamonds,
preferentially removing bort (a granular mass of dia-
mond), mechanically weaker diamonds and cleavage
stones. The greater ease with which more rounded forms
are entrained also contributes to the general increase in
quality because such diamonds are likely to suffer less
weight loss during cutting (Sutherland 1982).
Since diamonds are a heavy mineral, they tend to con-
centrate in areas of reduced flow. These may include the
inside of meander bends, major breaks in slope on the
river or stream floor, behind obstructions such as boulders
or on the avalanche facies of bars.
Deflation processes in arid conditions are also impor-
tant for diamond concentration. This leads to a residual
concentration of clasts and heavy minerals, including dia-
mond. Such a process was responsible for forming eco-
nomic diamond deposits in western Minas Gerais, Brazil
(glacial and periglacial sediments, Upper Proterozoic and
Permian–Carboniferous) (Gonzaga et al. 1994) and in the
Elizabeth Bay area of Namibia (Gurney 1984).
13
3 Ontario’s Diamond Potential
GEOLOGIC CONSTRAINTS
RELATIVE TO LOCATION OF
ECONOMIC DIAMOND-BEARING
KIMBERLITE
The location of economic diamond-bearing kimberlite
appears to be controlled by a number of geologic constraints
that are important to consider when exploring for kimberlite
in Ontario. These include a) location of kimberlite within
Archean cratons, b) conditions conducive to diamond
preservation, c) structural associations, and d) association of
diamonds with other types of intrusive rocks.
Archean Cratons
As previously discussed, the most important geologic con-
straint appears to be the association of kimberlite with
Archean cratons. Diamonds are formed within the upper
mantle in the roots of these cratons. It is in these locations
that a thickened lithosphere causes a downward depres-
sion of the asthenosphere and produces the specific range
of temperatures and pressures that allow for the formation
of diamond.
The one important exception to this rule is the Argyle
Mine deposit in Australia. This diamond-rich deposit is
situated in a Proterozoic fold belt and contains predomi-
nantly E-type, or eclogitic, diamonds. This deposit demon-
strates the existence of large accumulations of post-
Archean eclogitic garnets outside, but adjacent to, an
Archean craton. The lesson here is that Proterozoic oro-
genic belts should not be excluded as potential diamond
exploration targets, especially if they are thin-skinned and
have been overthrust onto an Archean craton.
Diamond Preservation
A second geologic constraint on exploration is the range of
conditions required for diamonds to be preserved.
Diamond preservation requires that the refractive, rela-
tively cool and low-density peridotitic root of an ancient
craton remains insulated against reheating and excessive
tectonic reworking, and remains attached to the craton
during subsequent plate motions. Mantle roots beneath
Archean crust may survive the emplacement of extensive
mafic dike swarms, but are thermally eroded near the sites
of mantle plumes. The challenge of the kimberlite explo-
ration geologist is to distinguish between “mantle-root-
friendly” structures (dike swarms, thin-skinned thrust
belts, etc.) and “mantle-root-destructive” structures (man-
tle plumes, rifts, collision zones) (Helmstaedt and Gurney
1995; Helmstaedt and Schulze 1995).
14
Structural Associations
Kimberlite and lamproite often do not occur on major
tectonic or geophysical structures. Frequently, however,
subsidiary structures associated with the major features
exhibit a spatial association with the intrusions and are
therefore important. Joints, contacts and host rock charac-
teristics appear to control final emplacement and geometry
(Coopersmith 1993).
On a regional scale, there are examples where the
location of kimberlite is controlled by regional fractures or
fault structures. It is rarely possible, however, to determine
if these structures were active during kimberlite intrusion
or merely served as passive pathways. During exploration
area selection, a careful assessment should be made as
to whether such kimberlite-controlling structures have a
mantle-root-friendly geological history (Helmstaedt and
Schulze 1995).
The relationship of kimberlite and lamproite to
regional-scale structures can be demonstrated in eastern
Kansas. There, a major geophysical feature, the Mid-
Continent Gravity High (MCGH) trends north-northeast,
locally paralleling the Namaha Uplift 50 to 100 km to the
east. Between the two is the smaller Abilene Anticline,
within which kimberlite pipes occur. Lamproite occurs
100 km east of the Namaha Uplift (Coopersmith 1993).
Although kimberlite and lamproite occurrences are clear-
ly associated with these regional structural features, their
emplacement is offset by up to 100 km, greatly increasing
the search area for diamond-bearing intrusive rocks.
Association With Other
Intrusive Rocks
Alkalic rocks (such as gabbro, syenite, nepheline syenite
and granite), carbonatites and kimberlite are related in that
they are thought to have been derived from generally the
same area within the mantle, although kimberlite material
is derived from deeper in the mantle. In Ontario, alkalic
rocks form stocks and arcuate ring complexes, carbonatite
intrusions form small circular to elliptical plug-like bod-
ies, and kimberlite forms small dike-like or circular bodies
(Sage 1992).
These rock types have a close structural relationship
to regional crustal fractures. In Ontario these structural
features include the Trans-Superior Tectonic Zone, the
Kapuskasing structural zone and the Ottawa–Bonnechere
Graben—Lake Timiskaming fault system (Figure 8) (Sage
1992). However, the association between these rock types
and regional features, in terms of timing of emplacement
and/or tectonic event(s), is currently unknown.
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

,,,,,,,,,, ,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
90° Winisk River 80° 70°

,,,,
55°
Subprovince
James

ne
Bay

Zo
,
nic
Attawapiskat

m
cto

s te
Quebec

Te
,

Sy
l Zone
Ontario

n
50°

be
,
Gra
ra
ctu
Stru

,
nce
t
50°

on
ng
Wawa J

Fr

re
asi

,
Kirkland lake

w
lle

da
La
usk
La

vi
.

a
St

USA
en
ke

Can
Can Cobalt

Kap

Gr
ada W fa Tim

,
US ul i
t s sk Ot
A
erior

n
ys am ta w e
e Sup te in a-B rab
k m g o n n ech e r e G

,
La line
S y nc 45°
or
eri
one
p
Su

(Midcontinent ift S

Lake
ic Z
ke

P Atlantic
Huron
La

n
to n

Ocean
iga
ec

ich

45° rio
Onta
rT

Lake
Lake M
ri o
pe

R
Su
s-

ys
an

te m ie
) Er
Tr

ke
La
,
90° 80° 70°

Fault Zone Parts of St. Lawrence Graben

System affected by Phanerozoic N
Float Diamond Occurence; faulting and recent earthquakes
J-Jarvi, W-Wawa,
P-Peterborough Midcontinent Rift System

Provincial boundary Structural Zones

0 200 400 km
National boundary

Figure 8. Major regional structures in Ontario associated with alkalic, carbonatite and kimberlite intrusive rocks (modified from Sage 1992; Card and
Ciesielski 1986).

POTENTIAL SITES FOR DIAMOND exploration activity has extended south toward Cobalt.
Both Kirkland Lake and Cobalt are located within the
EXPLORATION IN ONTARIO Ottawa–Bonnechere Graben—Lake Timiskaming fault
system (see Figure 8). More recently, the Kapuskasing
The Canadian Shield in Ontario represents a stable Archean structural zone has attracted exploration activity because
craton. Within this craton there are at least 2 areas, and of its geological characteristics and the discovery of alluvial
possibly a third, characterized by a thick lithosphere diamonds in the Wawa area (see Figure 8).
favourable to kimberlite emplacement. The 2 most promis-
ing areas include the Ottawa–Bonnechere Graben—Lake
Timiskaming fault system and the Kapuskasing structural Ottawa–Bonnechere Graben—
zone. The third possible area is part of the Winisk River Lake Timiskaming Fault System
Subprovince within the James Bay Lowland (see Figure 8).
The early identification of a kimberlite dike and the occur-
There is one established diamond exploration “camp” rence of pyrope garnet grains along a section of the Munro
in Ontario. Exploration activity has and continues to be Esker, north of Kirkland Lake, initially encouraged the
focussed on the Kirkland Lake area, although recent search for kimberlite in the area (Lee 1968). Subsequent

15
Miscellaneous Paper 167
exploration using data from aeromagnetic surveys completed
for the Kirkland Lake Initiatives Program (KLIP) (Fortescue
et al. 1984) resulted in the discovery of 5 kimberlite diatremes
north of Kirkland Lake and another to the south. More recent-
ly, several kimberlite diatremes have been discovered east of
Kirkland Lake near Larder Lake, and south of Kirkland Lake
in the Cobalt area (Brummer et al. 1992a; Sage 1996).
The St. Lawrence Graben system splits into 2 branches
in the vicinity of Lake Nipissing: the west-trending
Ottawa–Bonnechere Graben and the northwest-trending
Lake Timiskaming fault system (Sage 1992). The devel-
opment of this system of graben and fault is associated
with the opening of the Atlantic Ocean (Kumarapeli
1978). Kimberlite diatremes and other alkalic ultramafic
rocks were emplaced along a northwest-trending zone of
regional faults. These alkalic ultramafic rocks cut across
all earlier rock types and range from 121 to 173 million
years in age (Jurassic). The zone of deformation along
which these rocks occur has been named the Lake
Timiskaming fault system (see Figure 8) (Sage 1992). The
ultramafic intrusive rocks emplaced along this fault sys-
tem can be traced northward into the James Bay Lowland
and southward along the Ottawa–Bonnechere Graben to
the north shore of Lake Ontario, a distance of about 1070 km
(Brummer et al. 1992b).
Kimberlite magmatism associated with rift structures
may not be an ideal host for economic diamond pipes. Those
kimberlites known to have intruded into regions of previous
or contemporary rifting and/or mantle plume activity gener-
ally have weak or no mantle-root signatures, suggesting that
these are progressively mantle-root-destructive processes
(Helmstaedt and Schulze 1995).
Kapuskasing Structural Zone
The Kapuskasing structural zone (KSZ) is a narrow, 500 km
long, northerly trending belt of high-grade metamorphic
rocks, characterized by positive gravity and aeromagnetic
anomalies, that interrupts the easterly striking belts of the
Superior Province. This zone extends from the east shore of
Lake Superior to James Bay (see Figure 8). A study by
Percival and Card (1983) suggests that the high-grade rocks
of the southern KSZ are the basal part of a west-dipping slab
of upthrust continental crust, characteristic of the deep
regions beneath the Abitibi–Wawa greenstone belt. In this
area, the KSZ is fault-bounded to the east, whereas the west-
ern contact is complex and gradational. Although exposure is
poor further north, strong lineaments visible on aeromagnetic
maps suggest that the northern portion of the KSZ is fault-
bounded on both the east and west sides (Percival 1985).
In terms of diamond exploration, the KSZ is signifi-
cant as it consists of fractured crustal material that may
host kimberlite (Boland and Ellis 1989). In the Wawa
area, northwest-striking lamprophyre dikes formed by
alkalic magma emplacement are commonly associated
16
with these fractures. Lamprophyre only occurs south of the
Wawa–Hawk–Manitowik lakes fault system (Sage 1994).
Preliminary studies on randomly sampled lamprophyre col-
lected by the Ontario Geological Survey in 1994 suggest
that the lamprophyre dikes studied do not contain kimber-
lite indicator minerals (R. Sage, OGS, personal communi-
cation, 1995). One dike does, however, contain orthopy-
roxene (Mitchell and Janse 1982), the composition of
which is similar to that found in spinel and garnet lherzolite
and harzburgite xenoliths in kimberlite. These fall into the
class of barren harzburgites defined by Hervig et al. (1980).
Recently, regional kimberlite indicator mineral (KIM)
surveys of the Wawa area have identified anomalous concen-
trations of kimberlite indicator minerals (including “G10”
garnets and high-chromium chromites) in alluvium within
several drainage basins (Morris et al. 1994). These indicators
would suggest the existence of kimberlite in the Wawa area.
James Bay Region
In 1994, KWG Resources Inc. and Spider Resources Inc.
issued a joint press release announcing a diamond discovery
in the James Bay Lowland near the Attawapiskat River (see
Figure 8). In this area, kimberlite pipes are covered by a 60 m
thick sequence of Quaternary sediments. The host rocks were
located using geophysical methods. The kimberlite is unusual
in that the mineralogy and geochemistry are different from
known diamond-bearing kimberlite.
A press release reported that 370 diamonds were
recovered from 283 kg of material, with a preliminary
grade estimate of 1.59 carats per tonne. Grades appear to
increase with depth. One hole drilled vertically into the
Kyle Lake pipe yielded 230 diamonds, 79 of which were
classified as macrodiamonds; 21 of these are greater than
0.8 mm in diameter. Two of the recovered diamonds have
a diameter in excess of 2 mm.
Float Diamonds
Other reported diamond occurrences in Ontario are associat-
ed with glacial deposits (see Figure 8). In 1971, the Jarvi dia-
mond was found on the Kettle Lakes esker in Sheraton
Township, east of Timmins. Another diamond was recovered
from the Peterborough area in 1920 (Brummer 1978).
However, little follow-up work accompanied these discoveries.
The third reported diamond find occurred in the fall of
1993 in the Wawa area. Two, possibly 3, diamonds were
recovered from alluvium associated with the Michipicoten
River, south of Wawa. Follow-up investigations by the
Ontario Geological Survey in the fall of 1993 and the summer
of 1994 identified several important associated heavy miner-
als. This, in turn, led to the identification of some promis-
ing areas for kimberlite exploration (Morris et al. 1994).
4 Geophysics as a Tool for Kimberlite Exploration

Geophysics is essentially the application of physics to
geology and is used to examine measurable physical prop-
erties of rocks (e.g., magnetism, gravity, conductivity,
radioactivity) (Reed 1993). The value of geophysical
exploration tools is that they are not limited by poor
bedrock exposure, extensive glacial deposits, or vegetative
ground cover; they can directly detect responses that can
be attributed to different rock types and/or geologic struc-
tures, including diatremes (Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
Once an area has been assessed for kimberlite potential
(e.g., cratonic areas with mantle-root-friendly structure,
heavy mineral surveys, etc.) an airborne geophysical survey
can help to define target anomalies which may be attribut-
able to kimberlite occurrences. Airborne anomalies should
then be checked and refined using more detailed ground
geophysical techniques (Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
Geophysical surveys must be carefully designed, as some-
thing as simple as an incorrect choice of line spacing for an
aeromagnetic survey will limit resolution of potential targets
(Figure 9).
The recognition of kimberlite using geophysical tech-
niques depends on the recognition of a characteristic set of
signatures or responses. The nature and size of a geophysical
response not only depends on the internal character of the
kimberlite diatreme, but also the geophysical contrast of
the diatreme with respect to the host rock.
GEOPHYSICAL SIGNATURE OF
KIMBERLITE
Kimberlite has both electromagnetic and conductive prop-
erties that can distinguish it from surrounding host rock.
Electromagnetic properties commonly associated with
fresh kimberlite reflect the relatively large amount of iron
oxide (5 to 10%) contained within this rock, in the form of
magnetite, ilmenite and minerals intermediate in composi-
tion between the two (Urquart and Hopkins 1993). If the
kimberlite has undergone any substantial degree of weath-
ering, the magnetic signature can be reduced (Reed 1993).

a b

Fort a la
Corne
Provincial
Forest

magnetic contours (interval 10 nT) N

survey flight lines 0 2 4 km

road

Figure 9. The importance of line spacing in aeromagnetic surveys is shown. The illustration compares contoured total field aeromagnetic data for
a) the Fort a la Corne area, Saskatchewan (GSC 1969), with b) a more detailed aeromagnetic coverage of the same area (Lehnert–Thiel et al. 1992).
Flight-line spacing of the GSC data is 1200 m, of the detailed survey, 300 m. Only 9 anomalies are readily apparent on the government data; 25 are
apparent from the detailed survey (from Urquart and Hopkins 1993).

17
Miscellaneous Paper 167
N
800 m
400
0
gravity contours survey
(interval 0.1 mgal) grid
Figure 10. Positive ground gravity anomaly from kimberlite. Ground
gravity contours and a net diagram composed of profiles across anomaly
120, Fort a la Corne, Saskatchewan (Lehnert–Thiel et al. 1992) are
shown. Note the positive anomaly due to contrast between the relatively
high density kimberlite and the less dense clastic host rocks (from
Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
The distinct conductive properties of kimberlite are
related to 2 processes. The first process involves the
weathering of kimberlite, which produces a disc-shaped,
highly conductive, clay-rich horizon depleted in iron, cal-
cium and magnesium. The second process involves the
serpentinization of olivine during initial diatreme
emplacement, which results in a weakly conductive but
detectable anomaly (Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
Geophysical techniques are complicated by a number
of factors. These include tectonism, the depth of kimberlite
erosion and burial, the type and thickness of Quaternary
cover, permafrost, and the variability of kimberlite lithology
or mineralogy (i.e., multiple-phase magma emplacement,
internal magnetite content, xenoliths) (Urquart and
Hopkins 1993).
18
Weathering and local climatic conditions will affect the
ability of geophysical techniques to detect an anomalous
kimberlite signature. Weathering will produce conductive
products such as clay, which tends to mask local conductiv-
ity responses (Macnae 1995). Climate can affect geophysics
in 2 ways. First, vegetation such as peat associated with a
cool wet climate tends to mask local conductivity responses.
Second, frozen soils consisting of fine-grained material,
such as clay, have higher resistivity than thawed soils,
which again effectively masks weak conductivity responses
(Hasegawa et al. 1990).
A kimberlite diatreme may exhibit either a positive or
negative geophysical response, depending largely on the
geophysical contrast between kimberlite and surrounding
country rock. For example, a kimberlite denser than the
surrounding rocks produces a positive ground gravity
anomaly (Figure 10). Conversely, a kimberlite less dense
than surrounding rocks produces a negative gravity anomaly
(Figure 11).
GEOPHYSICAL DETECTION
TECHNIQUES
Geophysical survey techniques can be divided into 2
broad categories: electromagnetic-electric and potential
field. Once data is collected by these techniques, it is com-
monly “cleaned” and smoothed, generating “new” prod-
ucts by data enhancement. Commonly used geophysical
techniques are summarized in Table 4.
Table 4. Geophysical prospecting and data enhancement techniques (from
Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
Technique Value
Apparent Resistivity This mapping works well in areas of conductivity
contrast as it provides a continuous measurement
across a broad area, rather than discreet point val-
ues.
Total Field Magnetic Delineates large-scale structural features, identi-
Maps fies major anomalies and permits generalized sub-
division of an area into separate “geologic” units.
Enhancement of Total Improves anomaly resolution but also magnifies
Field Magnetic Data magnetic noise and artifacts that are not related to
any real magnetic structure.
Reduction to the Transforms aeromagnetic field data to values that
Magnetic Pole would be observed if positioned at the magnetic
pole, thereby centring anomalies over their induc-
tively magnetized causative bodies.
Vertical Derivative Enhances bedrock features in total field magnetic
Mapping data.
Potential Field Data Provides an excellent means of identifying isolated
Preserved as a anomalies without gridding.
Stacked Profile
Euler Deconvolution Used to locate, outline and estimate depth to con-
fined sources, vertical pipes, dikes and contacts.
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

Electromagnetic-Electric niques of potential use in kimberlite prospecting (Urquart

Techniques
Resistivity differs from conductivity in that conductivity is
a measure of how well material will conduct an electro-
magnetic current, whereas resistivity is a measure of how
well a material will resist an electromagnetic current.
Electromagnetic techniques involve use of an antenna
with an alternating current, or pulse, which induces an
electric field in the ground. Time domain electromagnetic,
frequency domain electromagnetic, horizontal loop elec-
tromagnetic, very low frequency (VLF) and VLF-resistiv-
ity methods are all examples of electromagnetic tech-
and Hopkins 1993).
Electric techniques induce a current directly in the
ground. These techniques include resistivity and induced
polarization. Kimberlite has a significantly different resis-
tivity signature than surrounding host rock. This is due to
the permeability (due to fracturing and porosity of kim-
berlite) or more highly altered state of kimberlite, relative
to the surrounding host rock, which allows it to break
down into clay weathering products and sediments usually
having resistivities 1 to 3 orders of magnitude less than
those of igneous and metamorphic rocks (Urquart and
Hopkins 1993).

Gravity survey of Maxwell no.1 Gravity survey of kimberlite pipe,

kimberlite pipe Sekameng, Lesotho

west east satellite pipe main pipe

Identified Suspected
0.05
kimberlite kimberlite
gravity (mgal)

0.00

-0.50
120 60 0 60 120 0 300 m

Station no.
19.0
gravity (mgal)

0 90 m
18.5

18.0

17.5

Gravity survey of kimberlite pipe, Gravity survey of Mwadui

Jwaneng area kimberlite pipe
contour
outline of pipe pipe
interval
1 mgal

contour interval
0.05 mgal

0 100 m

Figure 11. Negative ground gravity anomalies from kimberlite are illustrated. Profiles and contoured anomalies are associated with kimberlite examples
from Africa (from Urquart and Hopkins 1993).

19
Miscellaneous Paper 167
Induced polarization involves the application of a cur-
rent at ground surface, and the subsequent conversion of
ionic current flow to an electronic current flow between
surfaces of metallic minerals. Kimberlite pipes are identi-
fied through this technique by pronounced resistivity and
chargeability, which defines the edge of the pipe and some
vertical zonation. With time, induced charge increases
polarization and current flow decreases. Induced polariza-
tion charges return to normal positions under their own
electromotive force upon termination of current flow
(Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
Potential Field
Potential field methods involve measuring gravity and
magnetic differences at the earth’s surface. Gravity sur-
veys detect variations in the earth’s gravitational field
due to changes in density of the underlying rocks. In the
case of many kimberlite pipes, densities are not signifi-
cantly different than that of the surrounding rock and
may be difficult to detect. If the host rock (e.g., an unde-
formed clastic sedimentary rock) is of a lower density
than the pipe, a positive anomaly will result. Weathering
of the upper portion of the pipe may reduce density and
result in a negative gravity anomaly (Urquart and
Hopkins 1993).
Magnetic surveys measure either the earth’s total
magnetic field intensity or the change in intensity with
elevation (vertical gradient). The purpose of this type of
survey is to identify spatial changes in the magnetic field
that can be attributed to variations in the underlying geology.
The intensity of underlying anomalies is directly related
to the amount of magnetite or magnetite-ilmenite solid-
solution mineral products present in the rocks. Responses
in diatremes (Figure 12) are complicated by weathering
or zoned multiphase intrusions (Urquart and Hopkins
1993).
Kimberlite and lamproite can give 3 different types of
magnetic responses: a) induced, b) remanent, and c) vis-
cous (Macnae 1995). Induced magnetism results from the
action of the earth’s magnetic field on magnetite in a rock
and will create a “true” anomaly oriented in the direction of
the earth’s present magnetic field. The resulting magnetism
is directly proportional to the strength of the ambient field
and the ability of the material to enhance the local field.
This latter property is referred to as magnetic susceptibility.
Magnetic susceptibility of a rock is directly related to the
amount of magnetite it contains and, consequently, may
vary dramatically (Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
20
Remanent magnetism is magnetization fixed in the
individual magnetite grains of the rock. This internal mag-
netic field is oriented in the direction of the earth’s mag-
netic field at the time of formation. Orientation of that orig-
inal field, and hence the remanent magnetic field, can be a)
the same as today, b) reversed, or c) at any direction in-
between. The total field signature measured at the present
time will be enhanced if remanence is orientated the same
as the current field direction (Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
Remanence is related to the time of kimberlite
emplacement rather than the location of kimberlite. Grain
size and chemistry of magnetite (and of any magnetite-
ilmenite solid solution series minerals present) also affect
the degree of retained remanence and the subsequent mag-
netic response. Much of the magnetite content in kimberlite
diatremes can be attributed to the serpentinization of
olivine, resulting in the generation of secondary magnetite
(Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
Viscous magnetism includes diurnal (daily) variations
and micropulsations in the magnetic field. Magnetic
storms also occur several times per month and are related
to sun spot activity. All these variations must be monitored
during the survey and compensated for in the final result
(Urquart and Hopkins 1993).
Examples of Geophysical
Signatures of Kimberlite
Examples of some of the geophysical responses of kim-
berlite are presented in Figures 13 to 16. The kimberlite
“target” is the C14 pipe in the Kirkland Lake area.
Geophysical methods presented for this example include
ground magnetic intensity (see Figure 13), induced polar-
ization (see Figure 14), VLF (see Figure 15) and VLF-
resistivity (see Figure 16).
In total field magnetic terms, the C14 kimberlite pipe
is characterized as a positive anomaly, asymmetrical in
plan suggesting elongation along a northwest-trending
axis. Drilling results indicate that the magnetic anomaly
results from the presence of a hypabyssal phase that
underlies a breccia of much lower magnetic susceptibility
(see Figure 13). An induced polarization survey across the
diatreme defined the C14 intrusion by low resistivity values.
The results of this survey are shown as vertical profiles
through the C14 diatreme on the upper and lower parts of
Figure 14. The VLF and VLF-resistivity surveys also
clearly delineate the C14 diatreme. Resistivity lows con-
trast markedly with high resistivity measured over the
andesite host rock (see Figures 15, 16; from Pegg 1993).
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

Prairie Creek lamproite pipe, USA Ellendale no. 9 lamproite pipe, USA

pipe
0 500 m

L pipe
L L H
H H
H
H
H
0 300 m

Majhgawan kimberlite pipe, central India Kimberlite pipe, Mali, west Africa

pipe

L pipe
L
H H

L H
L
L
0 500 m
0 100 m

Kolo kimberlite pipe, Zaire Kimberlite pipe, Jwaneng area,

Botswana

pipe
H pipe

H
H
L

0 50 m
0 300 m

Figure 12. Variation in ground magnetic responses from diamondiferous kimberlites is illustrated (H = high response, L = low response) (Atkinson 1989).
Note the internal complexity shown by 5 of the 6 samples. This is a common feature due to the emplacement of multiple magma phases and, to a lesser
extent, weathering variations (from Urquart and Hopkins 1993).

21
22
1400 E 1600 E 1800 E 2000 E 2200 E 2400 E 2600 E

1200 N
1200 N

0
70
58
Miscellaneous Paper 167

1000 N
1000 N

800 N
800 N

0
58700

70
C14 pipe

58
600 N
600 N

400 N
400 N
N

200 N
200 N
0 0
587
0 200 400 m

5870
0 0
0

1400 E 1600 E 1800 E 2000 E 2200 E 2400 E 2600 E

C14 PIPE
magnetic outline of positive C14 pipe flight line
contours magnetic anomaly area (local survey
TOTAL MAGNETIC FIELD
coordinates)

Clifford Tp. NTS 32D/5

Figure 13. Total field magnetic contours for the C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake, are illustrated. The positive anomaly of the pipe is framed by the area of decreased flight-line spacing over the pipe to increase anomaly
resolution (from Pegg 1993).
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

Local grid
800 N 750 N 700 N 650 N 600 N 550 N 500 N 450 N

Vertical section (contours in Ωm)

335 248 173 145 584 1392 9990 7968

(1285)
390 244 146 633 1342 1684 9500

320 165 835 1225 1225 1219 1381

1292 1560
182 1722 1192 802 221

1780 2759 1867 864 111

Plan view (contours in ms)

0.6 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.5 1.9

(1.1)
1.0 1.5
0.2 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.8 1.4
1.0
0.3 0.9 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.1
1.5
0.4 0.8 1.1 1.4 0.8

0.5 1.2 1.5 1.5 0.7

Vertical section (contours in ms)

3.4 7.0 11 13 3.3 1.2 0.3 0.5

1.6
1.0 7.1 13 3.0 1.6 1.7 0.4 1.7

1.8 10 2.3 1.9 2.5 2.5 1.5

4.2 1.2 1.2 2.2 3.6 6.9

0.5 0.8 1.5 3.3 12

0 250 500 750 m N

Figure 14. Induced polarization data for the C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake, are illustrated. This technique provides a ver-
tical geophysical signature of the pipe. The diagram has 3 parts: the upper and lower parts are vertical profiles of the
pipe (the difference is in measured parameters; the lower part is measured in ms (milliseconds), the upper in Ωm
(ohm-metres)). The middle part represents the surface signature of the pipe measured in ms (from Pegg 1993).

23
24
1400 E 1600 E 1800 E 2000 E 2200 E 2400 E 2600 E

1200 N
40 1200 N
40 20
20
0
Miscellaneous Paper 167

0
0
1000 N
20 0
0 20 1000 N

0
800 N

0
0 800 N
10
20 C14 pipe
20

10
30 40
600 N
0
600 N
20

0
400 N
400 N
20

40
N

0
200 N
200 N
0

0
0 200 400 m
40
20
0
0
1400E 1600E 1800E 2000E 2200E 2400E 2600E

resistivity outline of positive C14 pipe flight line C14 PIPE

contours magnetic anomaly area (local survey
coordinates) FILTERED VLF

Clifford Tp. NTS 32D/5

Figure 15. Filtered VLF data for the C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake, are illustrated. The resistivity lows contrast markedly with high resistivities measured over the andesite country rock (from Pegg 1993).
 1400 E 1600 E 1800 E 2000 E 2200 E 2400 E 2600 E

1200 N
1200 N
3

1000 N 1000 N
3

800 N
800 N

C14 pipe

600 N 600 N

3
400 N
400 N

200 N
200 N

0 200 400 m

0
0
1400 E 1600 E 1800 E 2000 E 2200 E 2400 E 2600 E

C14 PIPE
resistivity outline of positive C14 pipe flight line
contours magnetic anomaly area (local survey VLF-RESISTIVITY
coordinates)
Clifford Tp. NTS 32D/5

25
Figure 16. A plot of VLF-resistivity data for the C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake, is illustrated. Resistivity lows contrast markedly with the high resistivities over the andesite country rock (after Pegg 1993).
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
5 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds
INTRODUCTION
Investigating the physical dispersal of kimberlite indicator
minerals in surficial materials is an important tool in
prospecting for kimberlite (Atkinson 1989; Golubev 1995;
Marshall and Baxter–Brown 1995). The body of literature
describing such techniques is not prolific due to the secre-
cy surrounding diamond exploration (Averill and
McClenaghan 1994). Historically, most literature has
focussed on processes associated with fluvial dispersal of
kimberlite indicators, as observed in South Africa (Mosig
1980; Marshall 1986; Atkinson 1989; Sutherland 1982,
1993a, 1993b; Marshall and Baxter–Brown 1995). More
recent discoveries of kimberlite in Canada’s Northwest
Territories, however, have resulted in the publication of
methodologies focussing on exploration techniques in
glaciated terrains (Wolfe et al. 1975; Thorliefson and
Kristjansson 1990; Brummer et al. 1992a; Craigie 1993;
Thorliefson and Garrett 1993; Thorliefson 1993; Averill
and McClenaghan 1994; Gonzaga et al. 1994; Morris et al.
1994; Stone 1994; Dredge et al. 1995; Golubev 1995; Kerr
et al. 1995; Ward et al. 1995).
In Ontario, most surficial sediments are either glacio-
genic in origin, or have been derived from glacial materi-
als (e.g., modern stream sediments derived from erosion of
pre-existing glaciofluvial deposits). As such, an under-
standing of the local glacial history of an area and the
processes associated with the erosion, transportation and
deposition of glacial materials is essential for the successful
completion of a drift prospecting program.
It is not the intention of this discussion to provide an
exhaustive explanation of glacial dynamics, glacial sedi-
mentation, field sampling techniques, analytical tech-
niques or data interpretation. The most important aspects
of each are highlighted and pertinent references are pro-
vided for the interested reader.
GLACIAL HISTORY OF NORTH-
ERN ONTARIO
An understanding of the local glacial history of an area is
an essential component of any drift prospecting program.
Much of the overburden in northern Ontario was produced
and deposited by glacial and/or proglacial processes asso-
ciated with the Laurentide ice sheet (Figure 17). Although
similar ice sheets may have existed earlier, the Laurentide
ice sheet developed approximately 115 000 years BP, and
at its maximum covered about 80% of the Canadian land-
mass, including all of Ontario. The Laurentide ice sheet
consisted of 3 sectors from which ice accumulated and
flowed: the Labrador, the Keewatin and the Baffin sectors.
Ontario was covered by ice emanating from both the
Labrador and Keewatin sectors.
26
Barnett (1992) provides an overview of the glacial
history of Ontario. Much of this information was derived
from detailed Quaternary maps and reports published by
the Ontario Geological Survey (OGS). These reports sum-
marize local Quaternary history and can be obtained or
viewed at OGS Resident Geologist’s offices, the Mines
and Minerals Information Centre in Toronto, the Mines
and Minerals Library in Sudbury, or may be purchased
from the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines
publication sales facility in Sudbury. Quaternary geolo-
gists on staff with the OGS in Sudbury may also be
reached for direct consultation.
GLACIAL SEDIMENTS: USE
AND LIMITATIONS IN DRIFT
PROSPECTING PROGRAMS
In Ontario, the landscape is dominated by glacial and
glacially derived sediments. Even recently deposited sedi-
ments have been derived largely by erosion and redeposi-
tion of glacial materials. Sediment derived from glaciers
may have undergone one or several cycles of erosion,
transportation and deposition. Success in tracing indicator
minerals back to source depends on proper identification
of the sediment types collected and/or analyzed, and an
understanding of related transport history and deposition-
al processes.
As an example, lodgement till is generally considered
to have undergone a single cycle of erosion, transporta-
tion and deposition representing a relatively simple flow
path. In contrast, glaciofluvial sediment has undergone an
additional cycle of fluvial erosion and transport, and
glaciolacustrine deposits may reflect a third cycle of
nearshore erosion and transportation. The combined
result of several cycles of erosion and transportation may
result in a complex flow path that is very difficult to trace
to source.
Modern or recent sediments are also often sampled
for indicator minerals. A stream deposit (modern alluvium)
is derived from the erosion of sediment and exposed
bedrock within its drainage basin. In drainage basins
dominated by exposed bedrock, the composition of allu-
vial sediments may reflect a relatively simple cycle of flu-
vial erosion and transport of local bedrock. In cases where
a drainage basin is characterized by multiple sediment-fill
sequences, the composition of modern alluvium reflects
all the materials in the basin. The alluvium would have a
complex history, reflecting several different cycles of
glacial, glaciofluvial and/or glaciolacustrine erosion and
transport.

or
S ect
n
ati
ew
Ke
Lau
ren
tide
Figure 17. The Laurentide ice sheet. Note that it consists of 3 sectors. Only the Keewatin and the Labrador sectors directly affected Ontario
(from Fulton and Prest 1987).
Glaciers as Agents of Erosion and
Transportation
Glaciers can be very effective agents of erosion and trans-
portation of bedrock-derived sediment. Various mecha-
nisms by which bedrock is eroded and debris is entrained
within overriding glacier ice have been summarized by
Sugden and John (1976). Once entrained, how and where
debris is transported within an ice sheet may have a direct
impact on the lithological, mineralogical and/or geochem-
ical composition of resulting deposits. As sampling and
compositional analysis of these deposits form the founda-
tion of drift prospecting programs, a brief discussion of
these relationships is presented below.
The internal structure of a glacier is commonly divided
into 3 zones (Figure 18):
1. subglacial zone—the bottom or basal portion of an
ice sheet
2. englacial zone—the middle portion of an ice sheet
3. supraglacial zone—the surface of an ice sheet
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
0 600 km
Baffin
r
Secto
Ice
She
et
r
cto
do r Se
Labra
On a flat surface, bedrock debris is eroded and
entrained at the base of an ice sheet, and is primarily trans-
ported within the subglacial zone, where it stays in close
contact with the glacier bed. Under such conditions, debris
is continually eroded from exposed bedrock along a
glacial flow path. Consequently, debris derived from the
subglacial zone of a glacier typically contains a large com-
ponent of local bedrock material.
In areas where there is a significant amount of relief
on the bedrock surface (typical of most shield terrain),
debris eroded from bedrock highs may be transported into
the englacial zone, where there is very little further contact
with the glacier bed (see Figure 18). As englacial debris
may be transported over great distances with very little
dilution, sediment derived from this zone may not contain
much, if any, debris derived from local bedrock.
Where the flow of subglacial ice is obstructed by topo-
graphic highs, debris eroded from bedrock lows may only
be transported a very short distance. If bedrock valleys are
oriented parallel to ice flow, streaming of ice through these
areas may result in longer transport distances. In any event,
the composition of this material will retain a local bedrock
signature.
27
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Supraglacial
0 5 km

Debris bands

Englacial Glacial
ice

,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,
Supraglacial debris
Subglacial

,,,
, ,,,
,, ,,,
,, ,,
,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

,,,
,,,
, ,,, ,,,
,, ,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,

,,
,,,
Bedrock
Subglacial cavities

,,,
,
,,
Mafic-volcanic-rich Mafic volcanic Subglacial Basal melt- Supraglacial

,,
debris bands rock cavities out till debris

Felsic-intrusive-rich
debris bands
Felsic intrusive
rock ,, Cavity fill
deposits
Lodgement
Till

Figure 18. Glacier flow and debris transport over an irregular bed. This schematic cross section through a glacier illustrates the complexity of glacial
flow and transfer of debris from the subglacial (basal) area of the glacier to englacial (middle) and supraglacial (surface) positions within and on the
ice. See text for discussion regarding material transport distances.

Glacial Till SUBGLACIAL TILL

Till is defined as sediment that has been transported and
deposited by or from glacial ice, with little or no sorting by
water (Dreimanis 1982). Table 5 summarizes the charac-
teristics of various types of glacial till, their environment
of deposition and potential sources of debris (local versus
distal).
The lithologic composition of glacial till is not only a
function of the rock types exposed and eroded along a
glacial flow path, but also of where the debris was
entrained and transported within the ice (subglacial,
englacial, supraglacial).
Sediment that is released from the base of the ice, com-
monly referred to as subglacial or basal till, often has
properties that reflect local bedrock sources. Sediment
types with a local provenance include
1. lodgement till—formed by plastering of material
onto a rock surface by actively flowing ice
2. subglacial melt-out till—formed by slow release
(melt-out) of glacier debris from ice that is not slid-
ing or deforming
3. subglacial flow till—formed by flow (squeezing) of
material into lee-side cavities on the down-ice side
of bedrock obstructions

Table 5. Summary of properties for lodgement, melt-out and flow till.

Till Type Depositional Environment Debris Source Sediment Characteristics Depositional Setting

Lodgement subglacial local strong clast orientation, poorly thin, discontinuous pockets, can fill bedrock
Till sorted matrix, overconsolidated troughs or flank rock knobs

Melt-out subglacial local debris banding (possible), clasts thin (<1 to 2 m), laterally discontinuous,
Till of unlithified sediment, preferred till/sediment flow complex
clast orientation, minor sorting
(sand lenses)

Flow Till a) subglacial (cavity fill) local flow structure (roll-ups, flow noses) cavity fill, down-ice side of bedrock knobs
b) supraglacial ice-marginal distal/local evidence of some degree of sorting thick units forming ice-contact terraces,
(graded bedding) thin units on till, thin units on bedrock

28
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

ENGLACIAL OR SUPRAGLACIAL TILL
Sediment released from the englacial or supraglacial posi-
tion of a glacier may have lithologic characteristics that
reflect distal bedrock sources. The majority of such mate-
rial is deposited as ice-marginal flow tills, formed by flow
of debris down the surface slope of a glacier or by remo-
bilization of sediment at the ice margin. These deposits
may form end or recessional moraines, or may form a thin
veneer resting directly on bedrock.
In a regional till-sampling program, it is often difficult
to distinguish these various types of till in the limited
exposure offered by a small, shallow pit. As a rule of
thumb, in areas of thin drift cover, most till types (collec-
tively referred to as ground moraine) provide a good sig-
nature of local bedrock rock types. Caution should be
exercised when sampling recessional or end moraines, as
much of this debris may be more distally derived than that
of the surrounding ground moraine.
In areas of thick drift cover, till often exhibits a com-
positional zonation, manifested by decreasing concentra-
tion of local bedrock debris upward through the sediment
sequence. Till resting on the bedrock surface commonly
reflects a local source, while till near surface is more dis-
tally derived. Parts of the shield terrain of northern Ontario
are characterized by an extensive cover of carbonate-rich
till, derived from the James Bay and Hudson Bay low-
lands. In these areas, distally derived calcareous till may
Type I trains reflect continuous glacial erosion and
incorporation of bed material down-ice from the source,
resulting in systematic dilution of source debris. The size
and shape of these trains reflects regional ice flow history,
ranging from ribbon to plume shapes (Shilts 1976) in
regions characterized by unidirectional ice flow, to irregular
amoeboid or star shapes in areas influenced by shifting ice
flow directions (Stea et al. 1989). This type of dispersal is
generally represented by an indicator concentration curve
that exhibits a negative exponential decay with distance
from source, characterized by a “head” of high concentration
near source and a “tail” of lower concentration in the down-
ice direction (Figure 19) (Shilts 1976).
Type II trains represent ice dynamic conditions that
result in entrainment and transport of debris throughout a
single ice flow event with little to no dilution in the down-
ice direction, possibly reflecting englacial transport.
Concentration curves do not exhibit a negative exponen-
tial decay with distance from source, but rather maintain a
constant concentration in the down-ice direction with an
abrupt decrease both toward the sides of the train and near
the limit of transport (see Figure 19).
a
100
percentage of indicator

head
rest directly on bedrock and contain little or no locally
derived bedrock material.
rock types

ice flow
GLACIAL DISPERSAL
Glacial dispersal can be mapped at a variety of scales, rang- tail
ing from regional (hundreds to thousands of kilometres), to background
detailed (less than 1 to several kilometres). The shape, size 0
and compositional expression of dispersal trains is a func- 0 5 10 15 20
source area
tion of a number of variables, including distance from source (km)
1. size, aspect and erodibility of the source area
2. composition and erodibility of rock types down-ice
b
and rate of dilution of indicator minerals
3. ice dynamics dispersal of carbonate erratics
40 northern Manitoba
4. pattern of subglacial and ice-marginal sedimentation
(till facies)
weight %

20
5. surface weathering
(clasts 2 to 5.6 mm)

Dispersal trains can be grouped into 2 broad end 0

members: source area 0 50 100 150 200 250

Type I—characterized by a systematic decrease in the distance from source (km)

concentration of source material longitudinally along the
sample point
axis of the train
Type II—characterized by uniformly large concentra-
tions of source material both longitudinally and laterally Figure 19. a) Example of Type I sediment dispersal curve (from Shilts
across the train 1976), and b) Type II dispersal curve derived from Kaszycki (1989).

29
Miscellaneous Paper 167

long-distance englacial transport (e.g., 10 km) over less

a resistant mafic rocks (see Figure 20b). Where relatively soft
mafic volcanic rocks have been transported over resistant
100 granitic rocks, mafic clasts undergo rapid comminution to
direction of
80
finer grain sizes and become the till matrix. At the same
ice flow
% granitic clasts
time, local erosion of granitic materials rapidly dilutes the
% clasts

60 concentration of mafic clasts (see Figure 20c). Under these

conditions, the mode of occurrence of mafic debris rapidly

,,,,
40
shifts from the clast fraction to the matrix fraction of the till

elevation
(feet asl)
20 1400 with increasing distance. Although the distance of transport
of mafic clasts is less than 1 km it is possible that a heavy
,
1300
0
0
1200 mineral or geochemical signature may be traced in the
9
transport distance matrix fraction over a greater distance. This is of particular
distance (km) importance in kimberlite exploration, where kimberlite
indicator minerals are extremely susceptible to abrasion and
degradation in the near-surface environment. In this case, a
b kimberlite heavy mineral signature in the till matrix may be

elevation
(feet asl)
direction of
traced over much longer distances than kimberlite pebbles

,,
100
ice flow in the clast fraction (McClenaghan et al. 1995).
80
% clasts

s
last
tic c
60
,,,

i 1500
40
% gran
20 USE IN KIMBERLITE EXPLORATION
0 1000
18 0 Subglacial till is the preferred medium for sampling due to
transport distance
its widespread occurrence and relatively simple history of
distance (km)
erosion, transportation and deposition. On a regional scale,
Thorliefson (1993) defined potential targets for detailed
c kimberlite exploration by sampling tills collected over the
3 prairie provinces.
% mafic volcanic clasts
100
Similar regional sampling was carried out in the

,,
80 Northwest Territories (Dredge et al. 1995; Kerr et al. 1995;
% clasts

direction of
60
ice flow
Ward et al. 1995) and in northeastern Ontario (Craigie
1993). In these studies, kimberlite targets were identified
elevation
(feet asl)

40 1400

20 and dispersal characteristics of kimberlite heavy mineral

1000
indicators were defined. In the Northwest Territories, dis-
0
11 0 tance of transport of KIMs within till was found to vary
transport distance from very local (i.e., one kilometre or less) to regional
distance (km) (tens of kilometres). In the Cobalt area, significant con-

,
centrations of KIMs (i.e., 5 grains per sample) could be
detected in till samples up to 60 km down-ice from source
,,,
,,

granitoid mafic volcanic granite (Craigie 1993).

rocks rocks
Figure 20. Examples of dispersal in different geologic and topographic
settings in the Wawa area: a) illustrates the effect of localized erosion of
a topographic high; b) illustrates the effect of glacial flow and dispersal
of material from a granitic terrain onto a mafic volcanic terrain; and c)
illustrates the effect of glacial flow and dispersal of material from a vol-
canic terrain onto a granitic terrane.
Figure 20 illustrates various aspects of glacial dispersal
in moderate to high relief shield terrain in the Wawa area. In
this region, distances of glacial transport are largely con-
trolled by bedrock topography and the relative hardness of
bedrock types. The effects of local bedrock topography on
till composition are variable, ranging from enhanced local
erosion around topographic highs and deposition of
extremely localized tills on the down-ice side of protuber-
ances (see Figure 20a), to upland erosion of granite and
clasts
In the Kirkland Lake area, McClenaghan et al. (1995)
defined till pebble type, mineralogy and geochemistry
associated with dispersal from a kimberlite dike. Very few
kimberlite pebbles were found down-ice from the dike and
distance of transport was measured in metres (see
“Boulder Tracing”). Kimberlite indicator minerals were
also rare and although the distance of transport was short
(i.e., tens of metres), it significantly exceeded that
observed for kimberlite pebbles. Geochemical analysis of
“B” and “C” horizon tills was not successful in detecting
the geochemical signature of the kimberlite dike or dis-
persal of material away from the source area. The short
distance of transport of kimberlite pebbles and KIMs and
lack of a geochemical signature may be due to the small
size of the target. In contrast, Golubev (1995) defined a
transport distance of 1 to 3 km for KIMs within subglacial
tills sampled in the Archangelsk and Middle Timan
regions of Russia.

30

Ice-Marginal Deposits and
Landforms
RECESSIONAL MORAINE
Recessional moraines are formed at the margin of a
retreating glacier and often represent a temporary halt or
stillstand of the receding ice sheet. The sediment making
up these features is often a complex assemblage of
interbedded flow tills, and glaciofluvial and/or glaciola-
custrine sediments. Flow tills have often undergone some
degree of sorting and may exhibit flow structures such as
flow noses, crudely graded bedding, and clustered and
imbricate boulders, among others. Sediment sequences
vary in thickness from one to tens of metres. Although
commonly associated with recessional moraines, an
irregular blanket of complexly interbedded flow tills may
also form in areas of ice stagnation (hummocky
moraine), near the headwaters of outwash systems or
around the periphery of bedrock depressions. In these
environments, a flow till may be derived from a combi-
nation of subglacial, englacial and supraglacial debris.
The composition of this till may reflect more distal
bedrock sources than subjacent or surrounding subglacial
tills.
ICE-CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT
The term ice-contact stratified drift is used to refer to strat-
ified sediment that has been deposited in contact with the
glacier. This material may have been subjected to varying
degrees of reworking by gravity flow and glaciofluvial
and/or glaciolacustrine processes, and is characterized by
a wide range of sediment types ranging from sandy silt to
boulders. The degree of sorting is variable, ranging from
unsorted flow tills to poorly sorted cobble gravels, to
moderately well-sorted silts, sands and gravels. Related
landforms include eskers, kames, kame terraces, crevasse
fillings, ice-marginal deltas, subaquatic fans and various
types of minor and end moraines.
USE IN KIMBERLITE EXPLORATION
In general, neither supraglacially derived flow till nor ice-
contact stratified drift are preferred sampling media for
drift prospecting at the local scale. Typically, these materi-
als are not widely distributed, are derived from a combi-
nation of subglacial, englacial and supraglacial debris
reflecting a combination of distal and local bedrock
sources, and may have undergone several cycles of ero-
sion and transport that may have acted to concentrate or
dilute the signature of indicator minerals.
At a regional scale, indicator minerals in these mate-
rials have proved useful in kimberlite exploration. For
example, kimberlite indicators recovered from the Munro
Esker (Kirkland Lake area) have been traced back to
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
source along the trend of the esker (Averill and
McClenaghan 1994). In the Middle Timan and Orega
Peninsula areas of Russia, concentrations of kimberlite
indicator minerals within eskers were found to sharply
increase 10 to 15 km down-esker from source, and indica-
tor minerals could be traced up to 25 to 30 km from their
source areas (Golubev 1995). This corresponds to
Golubev’s (1995) long-distance dispersal halo (i.e., 10 to
15 km of transport).
Proglacial Deposits and
Landforms
The proglacial environment refers to that area in front of,
but not in direct contact with, the ice margin. The areal
extent of the proglacial environment can be defined as the
sphere of influence of the various processes acting to dis-
tribute or redistribute sediment derived from a glacier. For
example, where a subglacial meltwater stream issues from
an ice margin, subaerial fluvial processes may act to redis-
tribute that sediment within the proglacial fluvial environ-
ment. Likewise, if subglacial meltwater debouches within
a lake ponded at the ice margin, then sediment may be
redistributed within the proglacial lacustrine environment.
The sphere of influence of these processes is variable,
reflecting the size of the lake or the drainage systems into
which subglacial sediment and meltwater streams are
issued.
GLACIOFLUVIAL SEDIMENTS
Proglacial fluvial sediments, or outwash deposits, are gen-
erally moderately to well sorted, consisting of grain sizes
ranging from silt and fine sand to cobbles and boulders.
These deposits generally form planar, gently graded sur-
faces that may be fan-shaped (outwash fan), ribbon shaped
(valley train) or form a broad planar surface (outwash
plain). The surfaces of these deposits may be pitted with
small kettles having formed in areas where blocks of stag-
nant ice were buried.
GLACIOLACUSTRINE SEDIMENTS
Proglacial lacustrine sediments can be subdivided on the
basis of 2 broad sediment types: fine-grained deposits and
coarse-grained deposits. Fine-grained sediments are char-
acterized by horizontally bedded or laminated silt and
clay. The laminations may consist of rhythmic couplets or
varves reflecting a cyclical style of sedimentation.
Although these deposits may be encountered within any
bedrock depression, they are commonly associated with
large glacial lakes centred in the Lake Superior and Lake
Huron basins (glacial lakes Algonquin, Minong, post-
Minong and Houghton), northwestern Ontario (Lake
Agassiz), and northeastern Ontario and the Hudson Bay
Lowland (glacial lakes Barlow and Ojibway).
31
Miscellaneous Paper 167
Coarse-grained glaciolacustrine sediments range from
fine sands to gravels. Where glacial lakes abutted against an
ice margin or where glaciofluvial channels drained into a lake
basin, sediments may have formed deltas and subaquatic
fans. Terraces may have developed on these features, where
they have been dissected by downcutting in response to
decreasing lake levels. Where the level of glacial lakes was
stable for extended periods of time, beaches, bars and spits
may have formed, marking the position of the paleoshoreline.
Coarse-grained glaciolacustrine sediments were also deposit-
ed in deep-water settings as subaqueous fans; such deposits
are usually transitional to glaciofluvial (esker) deposits.
USE IN KIMBERLITE EXPLORATION
In general, coarse-grained glaciofluvial and glaciolacustrine
sediments are not ideal sample media for local drift prospect-
ing surveys: they are often limited in areal extent, they have
undergone several cycles of erosion and transport, and their
mineralogical composition is a composite derived from other
sediments and bedrock within the drainage basin. At a
regional scale, however, some of these materials (particular-
ly beach deposits) have proved useful in providing a region-
al signature of indicator minerals (Golubev 1995). Studies
within the Archangelsk region of Russia indicate that beach
sediments contain the same kimberlite heavy mineral assem-
blage as the local tills from which they were derived.
Golubev (1995) classified this type of indicator pattern as a
“detached halo”, where indicator minerals cannot be traced
directly back to source. Fine-grained glaciolacustrine sedi-
ments are not of any use in kimberlite exploration.
Recent Deposits
Recent deposits include eolian sediment, colluvium, older
alluvium and modern alluvium (stream sediment). Eolian
sediments, commonly in the form of dunes, are often
located on the downwind side of coarse-grained glaciola-
custrine and glaciofluvial deposits. Colluvium usually
develops on steep slopes where downslope gravity flow
forms colluvial aprons or sheets.
Alluvial deposits (stream sediments) may represent vari-
ous phases of postglacial deposition. Older alluvium is
material that was deposited as a result of downcutting and
redeposition of glacial and proglacial sediment in response
to postglacial isostatic uplift. Modern alluvium is material
in transport or in temporary storage within a modern flu-
vial system. This sediment is derived from the erosion and
sorting of material lining the banks of fluvial systems
and/or from the erosion of exposed bedrock.
USE IN KIMBERLITE EXPLORATION
Eolian deposits and older alluvium are not widespread and
typically are not available as sample media for kimberlite
exploration. Eolian sediments and older alluvium have
32
undergone several cycles of erosion, transportation and
deposition, which complicates identification of potential
source areas. Colluvium has usually undergone limited trans-
port and little if any redeposition. However, it is not wide-
spread and is typically not used in kimberlite exploration.
Heavy mineral indicator signatures derived from
modern alluvium have also often undergone more than one
cycle of erosion, transportation and deposition. Unlike
older alluvium, however, modern alluvium is far more
widespread and is often used in kimberlite exploration. In
many glaciated areas, streams have incised to bedrock
over at least part of their length. Modern alluvium, there-
fore, often contains at least a small component of locally
derived bedrock debris. Indicators in this material can
often be traced upstream to source, and for this reason, are
commonly used as a means of gaining a fast, relatively
inexpensive, heavy mineral signature for individual
drainage basins (Wolf et al. 1975; Mosig 1980; Sutherland
1982, 1993a, 1993b; Marshall 1986; Gonzaga et al. 1994;
Morris et al. 1994). For example, kimberlite indicators
have been traced up to 2 km downstream from their source
area in the Archangelsk region of Russia (Golubev 1995).
Marshall and Baxter–Brown (1995) summarize many
of the processes that disperse and concentrate diamonds and
related kimberlite heavy mineral indicators within fluvial
systems. These include a) regional geomorphology, b) axis
of uplift, c) tectonic setting, d) structural controls, e) post-
depositional modification of alluvium, f) paleotopography,
g) sedimentology, and h) fluvial geomorphology. Although
much of their discussion focusses on fluvial systems situated
in tropical climates, the controls on dispersion and concen-
tration of diamonds and kimberlite heavy mineral indicators
are valid in northern Ontario.
There are 2 specific considerations relevant to stream
sediment sampling in the shield terrain of northern Ontario
worth considering when sampling modern alluvium. Studies
in the Wawa area have demonstrated that a sample col-
lected at the mouth of a drainage basin provides a heavy
mineral signature of the overburden and bedrock over
which the stream flows, between the sample site and the
first significant sediment trap (e.g., a standing body of
water such as a lake) (Morris et al. 1994). Therefore, to
maximize the area being “fingerprinted”, it is advisable to
choose a sample site that maximizes the length of a stream
between a lake and a sample site.
Second, it is also critical to recognize the orientation
of the drainage basin relative to ice flow. When the basin
is oriented parallel or subparallel to ice flow, the kimber-
lite heavy mineral signature recovered from a modern allu-
vium sample may reflect a target farther upstream within
the drainage basin. If the drainage basin is not aligned in
the direction of ice flow, or a target exists outside the
drainage basin but up-ice of the sample site, the heavy
mineral signature may represent a target located up-ice but
in a neighbouring (or farther removed) drainage basin
(Figure 21). Such a problem was recognized in a sampling
program in Brazil (Gonzaga et al. 1994).

a b
ice
w w
flo
drainage
basin
kimberlite pipe
Figure 21. Glacial controls on kimberlite indicator mineral dispersal within fluvial systems: a) demonstrates the ideal orientation of drainage basins
with respect to ice flow; b) demonstrates problems associated with drainage basin orientation perpendicular to ice flow and the effect of a lake which
stops the downstream dispersal of heavy minerals.
OVERBURDEN SAMPLING
METHODOLOGIES
Sampling Design
Commonly, overburden materials are sampled at 2 differ-
ent scales, regional and local. Regional-scale sampling for
KIMs often involves the collection of samples from
glaciofluvial deposits (e.g., eskers, outwash, etc.), glacio-
lacustrine deposits (e.g., paleobeaches), modern alluvium
(e.g., stream sediments) and lacustrine deposits (e.g., mod-
ern beaches). This scale of sampling allows evaluation of
a large area relatively quickly and inexpensively. The sam-
ple density at this scale varies depending on the availabil-
ity of sample media and exploration budget (Figure 22).
Local-scale sampling is usually carried out once a
regional-scale anomaly has been identified. The relative
merits of sampling different overburden materials were
previously discussed. Subglacial till is often selected as
the medium for local-scale sampling, due to its relatively
simple depositional history, local signature and wide dis-
tribution. If till is chosen as the sampling medium, sample
collection sites are often based on an artificial grid placed
over the KIM anomaly and aligned in the direction of ice
flow. Grid spacing varies according to the size of area to
be investigated, commonly ranging from 25 to 500 m
(Figure 23). Grids should extend up-ice of target.
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
ice
flo
indicator
lake
drainage drainage
basin 1 basin 2
sample with kimberlite indicator minerals
Sampling Protocols
Consistently sampling the same material in an overburden
sampling program is critical to the meaningful interpreta-
tion of kimberlite heavy mineral data. Too often, individuals
collect whatever material exists at a prescribed sampling
site without taking time to evaluate the site or the material
being sampled. The different depositional histories of var-
ious sediments may produce different kimberlite heavy
mineral signatures. It is more important to consistently
sample the same medium than to sample a prescribed site.
Because of this, it is essential to take the time to make
relevant and consistent sample site observations. This can
be done quickly and accurately by providing the sampler
with a checklist of observations. These observations, if
completed correctly, may be invaluable during data col-
lection and interpretation.
Appendixes 1 and 2 illustrate 2 site observation sheets
and Appendix 3 presents a list of related term definitions.
Although there is always room for improvement, these
observation sheets prove useful in providing an outline for
some of the fundamental observations that should be made
at either a till (sand and gravel) sample site (see Appendix
1), or a modern alluvium sample site (see Appendix 2).
Most kimberlite heavy mineral indicators are fairly
robust (except olivine) in the near-surface weathering
33
Miscellaneous Paper 167

48°22'N

84°00'W
Wabatongushi
Lake Lochalsh

Goudreau Dog
Lake Lake

84°30'W
48°15'N
Cawdron
Lake
85°00'W

Dickenson
Lake

Matchinameigus
r
ive

Manitowik Lake
R

Lake
gpie

Fletcher Dalton
Ma

Lake

48°07'N

Hawk Junction
Molybdenite Hawk
Lake Lake

Gros Cap Wawa highway

IR 49 Lake Whitefish
Wawa Lake railway

town 0 10 km
Michipicoten River
Michipi r
cote n Rive
Lake Superior
Anjigami
47°52'30"N Lake

Figure 22. A regional-scale sampling grid is illustrated for the Wawa area. For a regional sampling program, a sample would be collected from each
of the grid squares emplaced over the Wawa area.

environment. Therefore, when collecting till samples
specifically for kimberlite heavy mineral indicators, it is
not overly critical which soil horizon is collected.
However, kimberlite exploration is a risky and expensive
business so it may be economical to maximize the infor-
mation collected at each sample site. Sampling overburden
for geochemical analysis as well as for kimberlite heavy
mineral indicators may provide information on potential
base metal or gold mineralization. If this is considered,
then it is important to consistently sample not only the
same type of material but also to sample the same soil
horizon.
amount of sand-sized heavy mineral concentrate
(Thorliefson 1993). On the Canadian Shield, a 10 kg sample
of till and/or modern alluvium was collected per sample
site by Morris et al. (1994). Here, the till is very sandy and
fluvial processes concentrate alluvium as sand, providing
ample heavy minerals for concentrating and analysis.
Other considerations are the cost of sample transport to a
lab and the cost of processing large samples.
TILL SAMPLING

The literature suggests a wide range in optimum sam-
ple weight, from 10 kg (Averill and McClenaghan 1994)
to 30 kg (Thorliefson 1993). The key consideration is the
amount of sample required to produce a representative
heavy mineral concentrate. This depends primarily on the
amount of coarse fraction within the sample material. On
the prairies, where till is very fine-grained, 25 to 30 kg
samples were collected in order to obtain a representative
Subglacial till is the preferred till type for detailed kim-
berlite surveys. Time must be taken to evaluate physical
properties and depositional setting at each sample site.
This is essential when it comes to interpreting data, as an
anomalously high concentration of KIMs in a subglacial
till sample can be assumed to come from a local target
rather than through secondary concentration by other
depositional processes.

34
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

48°00'N Wawa types derived from bedrock in the up-ice direction to be

84°44'W
Wawa
reflected in the samples, thus offering a broader response
84°50'30"W
Lake
101 for the area and a better chance of “seeing” a local target.

To maximize the proportion of heavy minerals

extracted from a sample, material should be passed
through a 1 cm2 stainless steel mesh sieve to exclude the
pebble fraction. A subsample of the pebbles should be col-
w lected to provide a summary of the relative abundances of

ek
flo ion
r

v e

Cre
Ri ce t rock types within the area and to characterize how much
e i rec
di material is locally derived. A minimum of 50 pebbles

wa
i
Magp

should be collected at each site.

Wa
17

MODERN ALLUVIUM SAMPLING

Michipicoten Fluvial processes effectively sort and concentrate heavy
River
minerals. Along a stream, sediment is deposited as bars or
sand “traps” at bends or meanders in the stream channel,
where there is a significant drop in the elevation of the
stream bed, or behind an obstacle within the stream channel
(such as a boulder). These areas are preferred sample sites.
Michip
Material should be passed through a 1 cm2 stainless steel
icot mesh sieve to exclude the pebble fraction. Like the pebble
en
fraction of till samples, pebbles from stream sediments can
R
iv

r provide an excellent summary of the relative abundances of

e

rock types within the drainage basin and also characterize

N tem. A minimum of 50 pebbles should be collected.
highway town
railway indicator
source
0 2 km
48°53'30"N
Figure 23. Local-scale till sampling over a hypothetical anomaly, Wawa
area.
Locating till on the Canadian Shield in northern
Ontario can be challenging. A good sample site should
expose at least 50 cm of till (preferably more than 1 m). In
bedrock-dominated terrain, finding 50 cm or more of till
may be difficult. Thicker accumulations are often located
on the down-ice side of bedrock highs, or within depres-
sions or wide fractures in the rock surface.
Since KIMs are resistant to surface weathering
(except for olivine), till samples may be collected from the
B horizon of the soil profile. Care should be taken to
ensure that the material in which the B horizon has devel-
oped is till and not a different sediment facies, such as
glaciofluvial or eolian sand.
Till should be sampled several centimetres above the
bedrock surface to avoid sampling disaggregated bedrock
and to ensure that some component of transported debris
is included in the sample. Till collected from the bedrock
surface may provide a signature for that spot only.
Inclusion of transported material allows a suite of rock
how far pebbles have been transported through a fluvial sys-
Sand within a fluvial system is derived from a) ero-
sion of sediment from the banks or bed of a stream, b) ero-
sion of exposed bedrock, or c) external input such as a
landslide. The amount of sand within a stream system is
dictated by the amount and type of material available for
the stream to erode. A stream flowing over a coarse-
grained glaciolacustrine deposit will erode and concen-
trate more sand than a stream flowing over bedrock-dom-
inated terrain.
Good sample sites are not uniformly distributed
throughout a drainage basin. In the Wawa area, for example,
the upper reaches of local drainage basins flow over
bedrock-dominated terrain and as a result, there is very little
material for the streams to sort and deposit. In the lower
reaches of these drainage basins, streams flow through
coarse-grained glaciolacustrine sediments, resulting in
much more material for these streams to sort and deposit
as sand.
As previously discussed, lakes within drainage basins
are effective sediment traps. In order to maximize the area
represented by a given heavy mineral concentrate, its parent
sample should be collected where water enters a lake, as
opposed to sampling where water exits a lake. This maxi-
mizes the length of the fluvial system over which material
is being eroded and provides a fingerprint for that entire
portion of the drainage basin. A knowledge of the distrib-
ution of overburden materials and bedrock types within
the drainage basin is important when interpreting the data
derived from sampling.

35
Miscellaneous Paper 167
OTHER SAMPLING MEDIA
There are 2 other types of sample media commonly col-
lected in regional sampling programs: beach and esker
sands. Beach sands are derived from the sorting and trans-
port of material from either sandy tills or from coarse-
grained glaciofluvial or glaciolacustrine deposits. Wave
action often concentrates heavy minerals in bands that
36
trend parallel to the shoreline. These should be sampled
after passing the heavy-mineral-rich sand through a 1 cm2
stainless steel mesh sieve to remove the pebble fraction.
If the esker surface is armoured with boulders it is
necessary to dig through the boulder armour to get to the
sand. Again, passing the sand through a 1 cm2 stainless
steel mesh sieve is necessary to eliminate the pebble fraction.
6 Kimberlite Heavy Mineral Indicators
INTRODUCTION
As previously discussed, kimberlite hosts a suite of heavy
minerals with unique chemical and physical characteristics.
Several of these minerals are resistive, that is, they survive
weathering, erosion and transport by ice and water over
considerable distances. The most important of these indi-
cator minerals include pyrope garnet, magnesium-rich
ilmenite, chromite and chrome diopside.
The separation of potential indicator minerals from an
overburden sample is an involved process. The procedure
involved in separating heavy mineral grains from a bulk
field sample is outlined in Figure 24. A detailed discussion
will not be presented here as there are many examples of
such summaries in the literature (Averill and
McClenaghan 1994; Davison 1993; Thorliefson 1993;
Towie and Ho Seet 1995). Once potential indicator grains
have been picked from a sample, a microprobe is required
to determine the precise geochemistry of each mineral,
thus yielding a positive identification.
IDENTIFICATION OF KIMBERLITE
INDICATOR MINERALS
Pyrope Garnet
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Garnets of peridotitic origin typically have a distinctive
wine-red to lilac purple colour (Photo 1a, back pocket).
This colouration is imparted to the garnet if its composi-
tion includes greater than 1 to 2 weight % of Cr2O3. Other
mantle-derived garnets, such as those from eclogite and
chromium-poor megacrysts, are typically chromium-
poor and are various shades of orange to red-orange
(Photo 1b, back pocket). These latter colours are similar to
those associated with crustal garnets. Differentiating gar-
nets can only be accomplished by determining grain geo-
chemistry.
Garnets may be coated or partially coated with a kelyphitic
reaction rim (see Photo 1a, back pocket). These rims are
fine-grained, fibrous alteration zones dominated by alumi-
nous pyroxene and spinel. The rims form as the garnet sur-
face is decomposed within the high-temperature, low-
pressure environment of the kimberlite magma as it rises
to surface (Helmstaedt and Schulze 1995).
GEOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Garnets of peridotitic origin are typically chromium-rich
pyrope. These garnets may originate from many different
types of peridotite, the most important of which are
harzburgite and lherzolite. Eighty-five percent of chrome
pyrope that occurs as inclusions in diamonds are calcium-
depleted and derived from harzburgite (Gurney 1984)
(Figure 25). These types of garnets have been termed
“G10” (Dawson and Stephens 1975) and are considered
very important kimberlite indicator minerals. The recov-
ery of G10 garnets from overburden is important since it
suggests that these minerals originated from harzburgite
peridotite, and are more strongly associated with diamond
than are garnets of lherzolitic (G9) origin (Dawson and
Stephens 1975).
Other pyrope garnets associated with kimberlites are
the megacrystic suite which are not directly associated
with diamond. These may range in composition from low
to moderate levels (2 to 3%) of Cr2O3, and can also be use-
ful indicators when found with other kimberlite indicator
minerals.
The geochemistry of mantle-derived eclogitic garnet
is complex and overlap may exist with garnets of both
peridotitic and deep-crustal origin (Dawson and Stephens
1975). However, eclogitic garnets are typically chromium-
poor and range from pyrope to almandine-pyrope in com-
position. Eclogitic garnet inclusions in diamond have been
found to have elevated sodium concentrations (Na2O
greater than 0.09%) and can therefore, like the G10 garnet,
be considered a valuable kimberlite indicator mineral.
Low sodium eclogitic garnets may also be useful indica-
tors if found in conjunction with other kimberlite indicator
minerals.
Grossular, almandine and spessertine-almandine gar-
nets are not often associated with kimberlite and are there-
fore of little interest to kimberlite exploration.
Chromite
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
The black colour of the chromite grain is not diagnostic, as
it is shared by other heavy minerals including magnesium-
rich ilmenite (Photo 2a, back pocket). Other physical char-
acteristics including a spinel-like crystal habit and lack of
cleavage are used to identify chromite. These physical
characteristics are difficult to distinguish on grains less
than 0.5 mm in size (Averill and McClenaghan 1994).
GEOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Chromite found as inclusions in diamonds differs from most
other chromite by a high Cr2O3 content, generally greater
than 61 weight %, and MgO greater than 10 weight %
37
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Bulk Sample
(±20 kg) 1 Recombined after picking and
submitted for geochemical
analysis as one sample.
Character Sample,
split
2 Picked only for chrome pyrope
300 g
and chrome diopside.
STORE
3 Picked for chrome pyrope, orange
garnet, chrome diopside, magnesium-
Main Sample: disaggregate rich ilmenite (picroilmenite), chromite.
(water/calgon solution)

>2.00 mm Main Sample: wet sieve

STORE at 1.00 and 2.00 mm

<1.00 mm light <1.00 mm shaking table

fraction and gold grain count
STORE

Table Concentrate: panning

and gold grain count

light fraction Table Concentrate: heavy 1.00 to 2.00 mm heavy light fraction
STORE liquid separation (sg 3.20) liquid separation (sg 3.20) STORE

ferromagnetic Heavy Fraction: Heavy Fraction: ferromagnetic

fraction ferromagnetic separation ferromagnetic separation fraction
STORE STORE

1
Nonferromagnetic
<0.25 mm
Fraction: dry sieve
STORE
to 0.50 and 0.25 mm

1
0.25 to 0.50 mm 0.25 to 0.50 mm
strongly para- Nonferromagnetic
magnetic fraction Fraction: paramagnetic
STORE separation (Drum Cerpoo)

0.25 to 0.50 mm 1 2 0.50 to 1.00 mm 1 3 1.00 to 2.00 mm 3

Weakly Paramagnetic Nonferromagnetic Nonferromagnetic

Fraction: indicator Fraction: indicator Fraction: indicator
mineral picking mineral picking mineral picking

Kimberlite Indicators: mount grain and examine using

SEM photograph (35 mm) (future microprobe analysis)

Figure 24. Summary of laboratory procedures required for the isolation of kimberlite heavy mineral indicators. The procedures provide preliminary
identification of kimberlite heavy mineral indicators (from Averill and McClenaghan 1994).

38
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

16
80
14
G10

weight % Cr2 O 3
weight % Cr2O 3 12 70
G9
10 ++ + +
60
8

6 50
4

2 40
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 weight % Mg0

weight % CaO southern Africa samples + (former) USSR samples

Figure 25. Geochemistry of G10 and G9 chrome pyrope garnets. Grains Figure 26. Geochemistry of chromite inclusions within diamond. The
were isolated from modern alluvium samples taken in the Wawa area preferred compositional field, indicated by the large group of symbols
(Morris et al. 1994). within the enclosed line, includes greater than 90% of the data points
(from Fipke 1989).

(Gurney 1984; Fipke 1989) (Figure 26). Finding chromite
of this composition in an overburden or rock sample is just
as significant as finding a G10 chrome pyrope garnet.
Chromites with lower Cr2O3 values are individually less
important; however, they may indicate the presence of
kimberlite if found in association with other kimberlite
indicator minerals.
GEOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Ilmenite found within kimberlite is generally magnesium-
rich, with MgO values that range between 4 and 15 weight
%, and Cr2O3 contents greater than 2 weight % (McCallum
and Vos 1993). Such ilmenites are regarded as useful kim-
berlite indicator minerals.

Magnesium-Rich Ilmenite Chrome Diopside

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Like chromite, the black colour of magnesium-rich
ilmenite is not diagnostic (Photo 2b, back pocket). The
typically euhedral to subhedral single crystals which form
in the kimberlite matrix, and the coarser, deformed or
recrystallized crystals of the macrocrysts or megacrysts,
are more diagnostic (Helmstaedt and Schulze 1995).
These physical characteristics are difficult to distinguish
on grains less than 0.5 mm in diameter (Averill and
McClenaghan 1994).
Fined-grained rims of secondary ilmenite + per-
ovskite can form on the perimeter of magnesium-rich
ilmenite when the macrocrysts and megacrysts react with
the kimberlite magma. This rim creates a bumpy appear-
ance on the grain surface (Helmstaedt and Schulze 1995)
(Photos 2b and 2c, back pocket).
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Chrome diopside is distinguished from other minerals by
a bright emerald green colour (Photo 2d, back pocket).
The mineral exhibits good cleavage in 2 directions length-
wise, at nearly right angles.
GEOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Alone, chrome diopside is not a definitive kimberlite indi-
cator as it occurs within both kimberlite and other basic and
ultrabasic rocks. Chrome diopside associated with lherzo-
lite commonly has high chromium values (greater than 1
weight %; Mitchell 1986; K. Day, Overburden Drilling
Management Limited, personal communication, 1994). For
this reason, chrome diopside with Cr2O3 values greater than
1 weight % is often chosen as a kimberlite indicator mineral.

39
7 Application of Overburden Studies to
Kimberlite Exploration
INTRODUCTION
Publicly available data sets focussing on overburden explo-
ration for kimberlite are rare. Those that do exist focus on
the recovery of kimberlite heavy mineral indicators from a
variety of surficial sediments, including modern alluvium
(Wolfe et al. 1975; Mosig 1980; Sutherland 1982, 1993a,
1993b; Afanasev et al. 1984; Marshall 1986; Dummett et
al. 1987; McCandless 1990; Morris et al. 1994, 1995;
Golubev 1995; Marshall and Baxter–Brown 1995); till
(Thomson and Lourim 1981; Lourim 1982a, 1982b;
Fortescue et al. 1984; Thorliefson and Kristjansson 1990;
Brummer et al. 1992a; Craigie 1993; Thorliefson and
Garret 1993; McClenaghan et al. 1993, 1995, 1996; Averill
and McClenaghan 1994; Stone 1994; Dredge et al. 1995;
Kerr et al. 1995; Ward et al. 1995); lacustrine, glaciolacus-
trine and marine sediments (Afanasev et al. 1984;
Sutherland 1982; Morris et al. 1994; Stone 1994; Golubev
1995); and glaciofluvial sediments (Brummer et al. 1992a;
McClenaghan et al. 1993; Averill and McClenaghan 1994).
Recent attempts to use till geochemical data to identify
kimberlite have been discussed by McClenaghan et al.
(1993), Averill and McClenaghan (1994) and
McClenaghan et al. (1995). In addition, biogeochemical
studies have recently been reported on by Dunn (1993)
and McClenaghan and Dunn (1995).
Data focussing on the dispersal of kimberlite boulders
are very rare (McClenaghan et al. 1995). Most information
on the dispersal of kimberlite consists of a report on the
presence or absence of kimberlite at a sample site (Baker
1985; Brummer et al. 1992a).
BOULDER TRACING
The matrix of kimberlite consists primarily of soft minerals
such as phlogopite, calcite and serpentine. Because of this,
kimberlite is either easily weathered in the near-surface
environment or broken down during transport.
McClenaghan et al. (1995) sampled till over and down-ice
of the Buffonta kimberlite dike, located north of Kirkland
Lake, and noted only 1 kimberlite pebble transported a
distance of 6 m down-ice (Figure 27).
In alluvial sampling, Dummett et al. (1987) noted that
dispersal of kimberlite clasts extended at least 10 km from
the mountain diatreme in the Northwest Territories. They
attributed this long distance of transport to high latitude
climatic conditions where oxidation of the kimberlite is
minimal. In lower latitudes, such as at the Sloan diatremes
in Colorado, kimberlite boulder trains are very rare, as oxi-
dation and other weathering processes are more active.
40
HEAVY MINERAL TRACING
As previously discussed, the 4 most important kimberlite
heavy mineral indicators include pyrope garnet, magne-
sium-rich ilmenite, chromite and chrome diopside.
Obviously, diamonds are their own best indicator and
have been used where diamond-rich sediments exist. Of
these indicator minerals, chrome diopside is the least
resistant mineral to physical and chemical degradation
during transport. The chemical and physical properties of
other indicator minerals make them less susceptible to
disintegration during transport (Helmstaedt and Schulze
1995).
There are several factors common to all sampling
media that control the types and amount of indicator min-
erals within a sample. The most important of these is the
relative abundance of indicators within the source itself.
This is demonstrated in the area of the Jack kimberlite,
British Columbia, where alluvial sediments from 2
stream tributaries contain very different indicator miner-
al assemblages, suggesting 2 different point sources
(Dummett et al. 1987) (Figure 28). In addition, size, ori-
entation to flow and area of outcrop determine how much
kimberlitic material is eroded and carried in the transport
system.
Alluvium
Stream-sediment studies involving kimberlite heavy min-
eral indicators have focussed on a) defining how these
minerals are transported from a known point source, or b)
regional sampling to compare the relative abundance of
indicators between sampling sites. Regional data are used
to define background concentrations of kimberlite indica-
tor minerals and to identify sample sites with anomalous
concentrations of these minerals.
In terms of fluvial dynamics, the distance of dispersal
of indicators from source depends on several factors,
including abundance of favourable sites for heavy mineral
concentration and stream gradient. The rate of flow and
carrying capacity of the stream is related to the latter. For
example, the irregular distribution of indicator minerals
from the Sloan diatremes in Colorado is explained by the
effect of the distribution of preferred sites for indicator
mineral concentration (Dummett et al. 1987) (see Rabbit
Creek, Figure 29). Elsewhere in this area, indicator con-
centration actually increases with distance from source
(see Meadow Creek, Figure 29). Decreasing stream gradient
resulted in decreased flow velocity and carrying capacity of
the stream, causing deposition of the indicators.
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

Trench A south

0
north
166°

1 overburden
m

basalt

kimberlite dike quartz vein 0 2 4 6m

Trench B south

overburden
180°

0 north

1
basalt
m

kimberlite dike quartz vein 0 2 4 6m

Type of indicator mineral Number of grains

Cr pyrope Mg ilmenite Kimberlite pebble 4-5 1-3 0

Cr diopside Chromite 180°

striation measurement

Figure 27. Dispersal of kimberlite and related heavy minerals from the Buffonta kimberlite pipe, Kirkland Lake. Only 2 kimberlite pebbles were
observed, with a maximum transport distance of only 6 m (from McClenaghan et al. 1995).

41
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Br

Al
iti
LYELL

be
sh

rt a
Co
ICE

lu
m
Jack kimberlite FIELD

bi
a
7000

15 PY
0 CD

G88 G87

G89
2 PY
30 CD G90

14 PY G59
30 CD L113

600
0 5 PY
35 CD

N
600
0
topographic contours kimberlite occurrence
(interval 1000 feet)
5 PY indicator mineral grain counts
drainage features 35 CD PY = pyrope garnet, CD = chrome diopside

ice field boundary L113 sample site 0 1 km

Figure 28. Fluvial dispersal of kimberlite indicator minerals from the area of the Jack kimberlite, British Columbia. Samples from 2 tributaries
(G88 and G87) have very different indicator mineral assemblages, suggesting 2 different point sources (from Dummett et al. 1987).

42
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

0
2
N 0 0
0 2 Mea 12 Halligan
1 dow 0
Cree Reservoir
k 20
0
9 0
Sloan 19
5 and 6

Sloan 4 1
1 0 4
22 10 2
500 11 10 20 3
92 38 Ra b b 9
28 20 it C r e e k 1 18
4
21 3
Sloan 3 20
15
Sloan 1 11
2
and 2 6
1

Sloan kimberlites number of chrome

topographic 21
diopside grains
heavy mineral fluvial dispersion contours 20 0 1 2 km
number of pyrope
-60 +120 mesh fraction garnet grains

Figure 29. Dispersal of pyrope garnet and chrome diopside grains in the Sloan district drainage basin, Colorado. The irregular distribution of indicators
along Rabbit Creek is likely due to variation in the location of sediment traps. The increase in the number of pyrope grains along Meadow Creek,
from the Sloan 5 and 6 diatremes to Halligan Reservoir, is likely due to lowering of the stream gradient (from Dummett et al. 1987).

In the shield terrain of northern Ontario it is important
to emphasize that fluvial systems are more “disjunct” than
fluvial systems in mountainous or high relief areas. In
northern Ontario, sampling a stream as it exits a drainage
basin will not provide a fingerprint of the entire basin. It
will only provide a signature of that part of the drainage
basin between the sample point and the first major sedi-
ment trap (lake) upstream from the sample point.
Some studies have focussed on trying to predict dis-
tance of transport of specific indicator minerals from a
point source. Mosig (1980) noted a transport distance of
less than 3 km for chrome diopside collected from alluvi-
um in southern Australia. Mannard (1968) observed that
chrome diopside in alluvium rarely travelled more than 2 km
from a point source in tropical regions, but could be traced
up to 45 km in Arctic regions. Chromite in alluvium was
dispersed less than 2 km from a point source in the
Archangelsk area of Russia (Golubev 1995).
Other studies have attempted to determine distance
of transport from a point source based on the surface fea-
tures of indicator grains. Mosig (1980) developed such a
system for indicator minerals in a nonglaciated terrain in
southern Australia. Magnesium-rich ilmenite and pyrope
garnet were classified as being proximal (less than 1 km),
fresh worn (2 to 4 km) and worn (greater than 4 km)
based on the angularity and degree of pitting on the grain
surface. Proximal magnesium-rich ilmenite was charac-
terized by a thin coating of leucoxene over 80% of the
grain surface.
The presence of a kelyphitic rim on chrome pyrope
garnets or a reaction rim on magnesium-rich ilmenite grains
both suggest proximity to a point source. These rims are
very fragile and do not survive long-distance transport in
stream environments (Helmstaedt and Schulze 1995).
The fluvial transport of diamond from kimberlite
sources has been studied in Africa. Several studies have
focussed on the geomorphology and genesis of drainage
basins in order to gain an understanding of where dia-
monds have come from and how they are concentrated in
placer deposits. Some placer diamond deposits are located
up to 600 km away from their source areas (Sutherland
1982). Factors that control the transport and deposition of
diamonds include location and form of the kimberlite
source, drainage basin capture and subsequent rejuvena-
tion of fluvial systems (Marshall 1986; Sutherland 1993a).
Some of the geomorphologic events controlling fluvial
development within West African basins date back to 1.5 Ma
(Sutherland 1993b).
Other alluvial diamond studies have focussed on the
effects of fluvial transport on diamonds. Important obser-
vations from these studies include a) diamond size decreas-
es with distance of transport from source; b) dodecahedral
forms of diamond tend to be entrained in sediments more
easily than the octahedral forms; c) some abrasion and
rounding of the diamond will occur with distance of trans-
port; and d) distance of transport tends to increase the quality
of diamonds by preferentially removing bort, mechanically
weaker diamonds and cleavage stones (Sutherland 1982).

43
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Other studies have attempted to define areas of kim-
berlite potential through evaluating the relative abun-
dances of kimberlite indicator minerals at sample sites
(Morris et al. 1994) (Figure 30). Areas proposed for kim-
berlite exploration are those where there is a relatively
high number and mix of several types of indicator minerals.
Sites where only low-chromium chromite and chrome
diopside are recovered were discounted as potential explo-
ration sites as these minerals can be derived from other
rock types.
Till
Like alluvium studies, kimberlite indicator studies on till
have focussed on either defining the nature of glacial
transport of these minerals from a known point source or
comparing the relative abundance of indicators between
sample sites to define regional background and anomalous
concentrations of KIMs.
One of the more important differences between indi-
cators derived from alluvium and those derived from till is
grain size. McCandless (1990) has demonstrated from
rotating drum studies that indicator minerals, such as
chrome diopside, which are transported in a fine-grained
matrix undergo less wear as a result of glacial abrasion.
Studies in the Kirkland Lake area have demonstrated
that the distance of glacial transport of most indicator
minerals is short (i.e., less than 2.5 km) and that the effects
of wear on the grains are negligible (Averill and
McClenaghan 1994) (Figure 31). Chrome diopside and
garnet exhibit little wear and exhibit approximately the
same size and shape characteristics as grains from the kim-
berlite source. Chromite grains in till are identical to those
in the source. Kelyphitic rims on garnets are common in
till up to 30 m down-ice of source, but are slightly thinner
than kelyphitic rims on garnets within the source kimberlite.
However, after 2.3 km of transport, the kelyphitic rims
have been removed.

685150 m E 722200 m E

N
5361000 m N

5361000 m N
Lochalsh

Missanabie
Dog
0 10 km Lake

648450 m E
ten 651
ico
5345750 m N

ip Murray
ich
M er Lake
Riv
r
R iv e

17
p ie

5332000 m N
Matchinameigus
ag

Lake
M

Manitowik
Lake

723325 m E

Hawk
Junction 547
percentile number of grains
101

>95 >7.0
Wawa 95 7.0
Lake
Wawa 90 4.0
75 1.0
50 0.0
5307000 m N

Lake
5307000 m N

Superior r signifies a site where either a

Michipicoten Riv e G10 chrome pyrope garnet
17
or high Cr chromite was
recovered
649500 m E 686875 m E

Figure 30. Regional distribution of kimberlite indicator minerals, Wawa area. Indicators were derived from modern alluvium sampling. Note the
concentration of kimberlite heavy mineral indicators south of Wawa (Morris et al. 1994).

44

10000
5000
Hole C14-05
1000
number of chrome pyrope grains
500
100
50
Hole C14-02
10
5 Hole C14-06
1
kimberlite 0 500 1000
pipe
distance from source (m)
Figure 31. Dispersal of chrome pyrope in till, C14 pipe, Kirkland Lake
area. The concentration of chrome pyrope grains in till samples has been
plotted versus distance down-ice from the C14 kimberlite pipe (from
Averill and McClenaghan 1994).
Regional studies in the Kirkland Lake–Cobalt area,
however, indicate that samples within 10 km of a kimberlite
source may contain up to 100 KIMs. These concentrations
decreased to 5 grains per sample 60 km down-ice from
source (Craigie 1993) (Figure 32). In the Middle Timan
region of Russia, dispersal of chromite from a point source
was no more than 2 km (Golubev 1995).
Regional studies attempting to identify potential kim-
berlite exploration targets include the southern prairie
kimberlite study (Thorliefson and Garrett 1993) and the
Beardmore–Geraldton study (Thorliefson and Kristjansson
1990). In the prairie study, a small cluster of peridotitic
garnets occurs in southern Saskatchewan suggesting
potential kimberlite sources in that region (Figure 33).
From the Beardmore–Geraldton study, a slight clustering
of peridotitic garnets suggests potential kimberlite
source(s) in that area (Figure 34).
Other Sediments
Other sediments typically sampled for KIMs include
glaciolacustrine, lacustrine, marine and glaciofluvial
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
Ontario Quebec
N
Kirkland
Lake
0 25 km
Lac Baby
Cobalt
2500 Indicator counts
1500 2000
50 + 21 to 50 5 to 20
Figure 32. Dispersal of kimberlite indicator minerals, Cobalt area.
Regional dispersal trains of kimberlite heavy mineral indicators reflect 3
kimberlite sources areas: Kirkland Lake, Cobalt, and Lac Baby, northeast-
ern Ontario and Quebec (from Craigie 1993). The sample size is unknown.
deposits. Sampling of these materials is useful for gaining
a regional signature of kimberlite heavy mineral indicators
(Sutherland 1982; Baker 1985; Gurney et al. 1991;
Brummer et al. 1992a; Stone 1994; Averill and
McClenaghan 1994; Golubev 1995).
GEOCHEMICAL SIGNATURES
There is very little publicly available geochemical data
related to overburden studies as applied to kimberlite
exploration. The data that is available is derived from
recent government surveys (Dunn 1993; McClenaghan
and Dunn 1995; McClenaghan et al. 1995). These data sets
have focussed on establishing the geochemical signature
that occurs in till or vegetation in samples collected direct-
ly over or down-ice from a kimberlite target. Thorliefson
and Garrett (1993) conducted a regional till geochemistry
study over the southern prairies in conjunction with estab-
lishing regional kimberlite mineral indicator distribution.
To date, they have not published data correlating observed
kimberlite indicator mineral assemblages in the heavy
mineral fraction with till geochemistry.
45
46
N
116° 94°
56° 114° 96°
56°
112° 98°
110° 102° 100°
108° 106° 104°
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Alberta Peridotitic
Saskatchewan garnets
0 100 km Manitoba
N percentile

11 max
54° 54°
1- -95
0- -75
0- -50
0- -25
0- -5
52° 0- min 52°

816 samples

50° 50°

CANAD
A
U.S.A.

Montana North Dakota

48° 48°N
116° 94°W
114° 96°
112° 98°
110° 100°
108° 106° 104° 102°

Figure 33. Regional till sampling of the Canadian southern prairies for peridotitic garnets. Note the elevated concentration of peridotitic garnets in south-central Saskatchewan (from Thorliefson and Garrett 1993).
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

50°N 88°W 86°30' tions in nickel and zinc values were also noted. No signif-
icant increases in the suite of elements within the soil pro-
file were noted. More studies similar to this one are
required to establish the type and significance of geo-
Geraldton chemical signatures related to different types of kimberlite.
Lake
Nipigon

Beardmore
Long
Lake
N
49°30'
sample site where chrome
pyrope isolated from sample
0 10 20 km
Figure 34. Regional distribution of chrome pyrope garnet in till,
Beardmore–Geraldton area. Note the subtle grouping of chrome pyrope
garnets north of Beardmore, suggesting a potential target area for kim-
berlite exploration (from Thorliefson and Kristjansson 1990).
Till Geochemistry
McClenaghan et al. (1996) conducted a till-sampling pro-
gram over and down-ice from a small kimberlite dike in
the Kirkland Lake area, northeastern Ontario (Buffonta
kimberlite dike). They sampled and analyzed unweathered
till and the soil profile and found elevated values of
chromium, calcium, barium, and aluminum in till samples
overlying and just down-ice from the target. Subtle eleva-
Biogeochemistry
Dunn (1993) and McClenaghan and Dunn (1995) con-
ducted vegetation surveys over kimberlites in
Saskatchewan and in the Kirkland Lake area, respectively.
McClenaghan and Dunn (1995) were able to evaluate
materials from various plant species with regard to their
relative sensitivity and ability to accumulate base and
heavy metals. They were able to establish that certain
plant species over different kimberlite pipes in the
Kirkland Lake area had elevated concentrations of differ-
ent elements.
For example, balsam fir twigs collected from trees
growing over the Buffonta kimberlite dike, Kirkland Lake
area, were enriched in strontium, rubidium, beryllium,
molybdenum, gold, chromium, sodium, cadmium, nickel
and aluminum. Pin cherry twigs however, were enriched
only in strontium, rubidium and gold. Like the till geo-
chemistry, additional studies are required to establish the
types, variability and significance of biogeochemical sig-
natures over different types of kimberlite.

47
Acknowledgements
Funding for this guidebook was provided through the indus-
trial minerals program of the Canada–Ontario Northern
Ontario Development Agreement. The authors wish to
thank the countless prospectors and geologists who, through
their discussions with the authors, have contributed tremen-
dously to the content of this guidebook. This publication
would not have been possible without the generosity of the
48
authors and journals who provided approvals to reproduce
many of the figures and tables presented. Excellent reviews
of this manuscript were provided by C.L. Baker, R.P. Sage,
R.H. Mitchell, M.B. McClenaghan and W. Meyer. Most
of the figures were drafted by R.L. Shank, with help from
C.A. Searcy. Modifications to the figures were made by
D.D. Schoeffman.
Appendix 1: Till Field Note Form

Stop Number:__________ UTM Reference: ____________ Airphoto: __________

Sample Number(s): ________________________________________________________

Comment: __________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Site Description

A) Material Type:________________________________________________________________________________

B) Surface Expression:

apron
fan
inclined
rolling
steep
undulating

blanket
hummocky
level
ridged
terraced
veneer

C) Slope
Inclination: ______________________________________ Aspect:______________________________________

D) Drainage:

well drained
moderately drained
poorly drained

E) Vegetation
TYPE

coniferous
deciduous
mixed
scrub
grass
bog

other (clarify): ______________________________________________________________________________________

STATE

virgin
logged
fired
stress

(clarify): __________________________________________________________________________________________

F) Material Thickness: ______________________________________________________________________________________

class 1
1A
2
3

other (clarify): ____________________________________________________________________________________

49
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Material Description

HORIZON: A B C
A) Colour:
Munsell Code:

B) Matrix Texture
Sand: coarse / medium / fine / silty
Silt: sandy / clayey
Clay: silty / clay / organic
Clast Percentage (estimate):

C) Structure:
blocky / platy / fissile / columnar

D) Stratification:
massive (unstratified) / horizontal /
irregular / deformed / flow

E) Consistency
Wet: nonsticky / slightly sticky / sticky
Moist: loose / friable / firm
Dry: loose / soft / hard

F) Plasticity:
nonplastic / slightly plastic / plastic

G) Cementation
Degree: (yes/no) / weak / strong /
indurated
Type: carbonate / iron / other (clarify):

H) Clasts
Abundance: rare / few / common /
abundant
Size:
Shape: rounded / subrounded /
angular / subangular
Striated: (yes/no)
Type: intrusive / extrusive /
sedimentary

I) Lower Contact
Distinctiveness: diffuse / gradational /
/ clear / abrupt / erosional
Form: planar/ wavy/ irregular

J) Unit Thickness:

K) Hole Termination:
boulder / till / bedrock / other (clarify):

50
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

Comments: ______________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Diagram(s):

51
Appendix 2: Alluvium Field Note Form

Stop Number:__________ UTM Reference: ____________ Airphoto: __________

Sample Number(s): ________________________________________________________

Comment: __________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Site Description
A) Material Type:________________________________________________________________________________
B) Surface Expression: __________________________________________________________________________

apron
fan
inclined
rolling
steep
undulating

blanket
hummocky
level
ridged
terraced
veneer
C) Slope
Inclination: ______________________________________ Aspect:______________________________________
D) Stream Flow

strong
moderate
weak
ephemeral
E) Vegetation
TYPE

coniferous
deciduous
mixed
scrub
grass
bog

other (clarify): ______________________________________________________________________________________
STATE

virgin
logged
fired
stress

(clarify): __________________________________________________________________________________________

Material Description
A) Colour:__________________________________ Munsell Code: ____________________________________
B) Matrix Texture
Cobbles: ________________________________________________________________________________________
Gravel: __________________________________________________________________________________________
Sand:

coarse
medium
fine
silty

52
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

Silt:

sandy
clayey
Clay:

silty
clay
organic
Clast Percentage (estimate):
C) Bar Form:
D) Clasts
Abundance:

rare
few
common
abundant
Size Range:
Shape:

rounded
subrounded
angular
Striated

yes
no
Abraded

yes
no
Types: __________________________________________________________________________________________

Comments: ______________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

53
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Diagram(s):

54
Appendix 3: Glossary of Field Note Terminology

Stop Number
Format example HJxx/91.
HJ refers to project NTS map sheet via a project-specific two-digit code
xx refers to sample number; sample numbers run consecutively from 1 to n
/91 refers to the project year

UTM Reference
This fixes the ground sample point to a location on the NTS topographic map (identified in the stop number) in terms
of easting and northing coordinates.

Airphoto
This is the number of the aerial photograph which relates to the sample collection site.

Sample Number
Format example 91FxxTBA.
91 refers to the project year
F refers to the NTS map sheet
xx refers to the sample number; sample numbers run consecutively from 1 to n and each sample has its own number
T refers to material type, i.e., T=till, G=glaciolacustrine sediment, O=outwash, L=lacustrine sediment, etc.
B refers to the fraction sampled, i.e., B refers to bulk, C refers to clasts only
A refers to the soil horizon sampled, i.e., H, A, B, C

Material Type
This describes the mapping unit and landform type from which the sample is being taken.

Surface Expression
This phrase refers to the lay of the land, and shape of the landform feature.
Apron—This refers to a relatively gentle slope at the foot of a steeper slope, and formed from the materials of the steeper slope.
Blanket—This describes a mantle of unconsolidated materials thick enough to mask minor irregularities in the under-
lying unit but which still conforms to the general underlying topography.
Fan—This term describes a fan-shaped form that can be likened to a cross-section of a cone, possessing a perceptible
gradient from the apex to the toe.
Hummocky—This surface consists of a very complex sequence of slopes extending from somewhat rounded depressions
or kettles of various sizes to irregular to conical knolls or knobs. There is a general lack of concordance between knolls
or depressions. Slope gradients are generally between 5° and 35°.
Inclined—This refers to a sloping, planar surface with a generally constant slope not broken by marked irregularities.
Slope gradients are between 1° and 35°.
Level—This terms refers to a flat or gently sloping planar surface with a generally constant slope not broken by marked
elevations and depressions. Slope gradients are generally less than 1°.
Rolling—This type of surface consists of a very regular sequence of moderate slopes extending from rounded, some-
times confined, concave depressions to broad, rounded convexities producing a wavelike pattern of moderate relief.
Slope length is often 0.5 km or greater and gradients are less than 5°.

55
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Ridged—This refers to a long, narrow elevation of the surface, usually sharp crested, with steep sides. The ridges may
be parallel, subparallel or intersecting.
Steep—This term describes erosional slopes, with gradients of less than 35°, on both unconsolidated and consolidated
materials. The form of a steep erosional slope on unconsolidated materials is not related to the initial mode of origin of
the underlying material.
Terraced—This refers to the presence of a scarp face(s) and the horizontal or gently inclined surface (tread) above it.
Undulating—This refers to a very regular sequence of gentle slopes that extend from rounded, sometimes confined con-
cavities to broad rounded convexities, producing a wavelike pattern of low local relief. Slope length is generally less
than 1 km and dominant gradient of slopes ranges from 2° to 5°.
Veneer—This term refers to unconsolidated materials too thin to mask the minor irregularities of the underlying unit sur-
face. A veneer will range between 10 cm and 1 m in thickness and will not possess a form typical of its genesis.

Slope
This describes the slope inclination and aspect.

Drainage
This category describes conditions of surface and shallow ground water flow, as described in greater detail below.
Well drained—Water is (readily) removed from the soil downward into underlying material or laterally as subsurface
flow. Soils have a low to intermediate water moisture storage capacity.
Moderately well drained—Water is removed somewhat slowly in relation to supply. Excess water is removed slowly
due to low permeability, shallow water table, lack of gradient or some combination of these. Soils have intermediate to
high water-storage capacities.
Poorly drained—Water is removed so slowly in relation to supply that the soil remains wet for a comparatively large
portion of the time that soil is not frozen. Excess water is evident in the soil for a large part of the time.

Stream Flow
This category is used to characterize the nature of stream flow at the sample site, by means of the following simple classes.
Strong—flow is turbid, with breaking wave crests
Moderate—water surface is rippled
Weak—flow is placid, no rippling of water surface
Ephemeral—flow in channel is seasonal

Vegetation
This category is used to describe the type of vegetation cover, coverage and vegetation state, and may be further cate-
gorized as follows.
Type
Coniferous—more than 80% coniferous cover
Deciduous—more than 80% deciduous cover
Mixed—mix of coniferous and deciduous cover with one or the other making up greater than 80% of the cover
Scrub—less than 50% canopy; mixture of open grass or bushland and trees
Grass—greater than 50% grass cover
Bog—greater than 50% wetland

56
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

State

Virgin—no evidence of recent cutting or forest fire; forest is mature

Logged—evidence of recent logging activity; mature forest cover largely logged
Fired—evidence of recent fire; mature forest cover largely burned
Stress—evidence that vegetation is stressed by environment, i.e., drought, insects, pollution, etc.

Material Thickness

This category refers to the thickness of unconsolidated material over the bedrock surface, by means of classes.

Class 1—virtually bare bedrock; may be thin drift within undulations of the bedrock surface

Class 1A—thin drift (less than 1 m) over bedrock; does not obscure the bedrock topography

Class 2—pockets of drift within bedrock depressions greater than 1 m thick; bedrock crests are covered by less than 1 m
of drift

Class 3—bedrock surface expression obscured by unconsolidated material greater than 1 m thick

Colour

This category refers to the colour of a specific unit based on the Munsell Soil Colour Chart (Munsell Color Company 1949).

Matrix Texture

This category is used to characterize the representative grain size of a particular unit.

Coarse sand—contains 25% or more very coarse or coarse sand, and less than 50% any other one grade of sand

Sand—contains 25% or more very coarse or coarse sand and medium sand, and less than 50% fine or very fine sand

Fine sand—contains 50% or more of fine sand, or less than 25% very coarse, coarse or medium sand

Silty sand—contains greater than 50% sand and less than 50% silt

Sandy silt—contains greater than 50% silt, and less than 50% sand

Silt—contains at least 80% silt and less than 2% clay

Clayey silt—contains greater than 50% silt, and less than 50% clay

Silty clay—contains greater than 50% clay and less than 50% silt

Clay—contains at least 40% clay, less than 45% sand and less than 40% silt

Organic—contains at least 30% organic material

Structure

This category is used to describe the physical characteristics of the unit.

Structureless—simply no structure

Blocky—has distinct blocklike shape consisting of 4 or more sides

Platy/fissile—ped(s) are arranged horizontally to give a platelike structure

Columnar—peds are longer than wide giving a columnar or peaked shape, with the peak towards the top of the ped

57
Miscellaneous Paper 167

Stratification

This category is used to characterize the depositional layering in the sediments.

Massive (unstratified)—more or less homogeneous-looking material

Horizontal—horizontal or shallowly dipping laminae

Irregular—laterally discontinuous laminae

Deformed—consists of contorted bedding and various types of small-scale folding and faulting

Flow—structures indicative of flow are present. e.g., flow cones; stringers; injections; rip-ups; flame, flaser, ball, pillow
and dish structures; planar crossbedding; trough crossbedding; ripples; and graded bedding

Consistency

This term refers to the degree and kind of cohesion and adhesion, or to the resistance, of the soil to deformation or rupture.
Wet
Nonsticky—after release of pressure, practically no soil material adheres to thumb and finger
Slightly sticky—after pressure is applied, the soil material adheres strongly to both the thumb and forefinger, but comes
off rather cleanly; the soil is not appreciably stretched when the digits are separated
Sticky—after pressure is applied, the soil material adheres strongly to both the thumb and forefinger and tends to stretch
somewhat and pulls apart rather than pulling free from either digit
Moist
Loose—noncoherent soil material
Friable—the soil material crushes easily under gentle to moderate pressure between the thumb and forefinger and
coheres when pressed together
Firm—the soil material crushes under moderate pressure or greater, but resistance is distinctly noticeable
Dry
Loose—noncoherent soil material
Soft—the soil material is weakly resistant to pressure and easily broken between the thumb and forefinger
Hard—the soil material is moderately resistant to resistant to pressure, and can be broken in the hands with moderate
to some degree of difficulty

Plasticity

This is the property of changing shape continuously under the influence of an applied stress and of retaining the new
shape after removal of that stress.

Nonplastic—a roll 4 cm long and 4 mm thick cannot be formed

Slightly plastic—a roll 4 cm long and 2 mm thick can be formed but will not support its own weight

Plastic—a roll 4 cm long and 2 mm thick can be formed and will support its own weight

Cementation

This refers to whether or not the soil is cemented and the degree to which the sedimentary unit is cemented. The typi-
cal types of cements include iron and carbonate minerals and silica.

58
 Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario

Clasts

This category describes the type and relative abundance of each type, shape and size of clasts present in the material.

Abundance
Rare—less than 5% Few—10% Common—15 to 20% Abundant—greater than 20%

Size—the commonest and largest size

Shape—rounded, subrounded, subangular, angular

Striated—yes or no

Type—as detailed pebble counts are usually done per sample site, it is only necessary to describe the clasts generally as
granitic, volcanic, metamorphosed or sedimentary in provenance

Lower Contact Boundary

This category describes the characteristics of the sampled unit’s lower contact, in the following broad terms.
Distinctiveness
Diffuse—vertical change in sediment type occurs over less than 15 cm
Gradational—systematic vertical change occurs over 5 to 15 cm
Clear—vertical change occurs over 2 to 5 cm
Abrupt—vertical change occurs in less than 2 cm
Form
Planar—nearly a plane
Wavy—pockets are wider than deep
Irregular—pockets are deeper than wide

Unit Thickness

The thickness of each horizon is stated in this category.

Hole Termination

This category describes the parent material encountered at the bottom of the hand-dug or borrow-pit.

59
References
Afanasev, V.P., Varlamov, V.A. and Garanin, V.K. 1984. The abrasion of
minerals in kimberlite in relation to the conditions and distance of
their transportation; Geologila i Geofizika, v.25, p.119-125.
Atkinson, W.J. 1989. Diamond exploration philosophy, practices and
promises: a review; in Kimberlite and Related Rocks, Volume 2:
Their Mantle/Crust Setting, Diamonds and Diamond Exploration,
Proceedings of the Fourth International Kimberlite Conference,
Perth, Australia, 1986, p.1075-1107.
Averill, S.A. and McClenaghan, M.B. 1994. Distribution and character of
kimberlite indicator minerals in glacial sediments, C14 and Diamond
Lake kimberlite pipes, Kirkland Lake, Ontario; Geological Survey
of Canada, Open File 2819, 46p.
Baker, C.L. 1985. Quaternary geology of the Kirkland Lake area; Ontario
Geological Survey, Open File Report 5553, 144p.
Barnett, P.J. 1992. Quaternary geology of Ontario; in Geology of
Ontario, Ontario Geological Survey, Special Volume 4, Part 2,
p.714-904.
Boland, A.V. and Ellis, R.M. 1989. Velocity structure of the Kapuskasing
uplift, northern Ontario, from seismic refraction studies; Journal of
Geophysical Research, v.94, no.B6, p.7189-7204.
Brummer, J.J. 1978. Diamonds in Canada; Canadian Mining and Metal-
lurgical Bulletin, v.71, p.67-79.
Brummer, J.J., MacFadyn, D.A. and Pegg, C.C. 1992a. Discovery of
kimberlite in the Kirkland Lake area, northern Ontario, Canada,
part I: early surveys and the surficial geology; Exploration, Mining
and Geology, v.1, no.4, p.339-350.
——— 1992b. Discovery of kimberlite in the Kirkland Lake area, northern
Ontario, Canada, part II: kimberlite discoveries, sampling, diamond
content, ages and emplacement; Exploration, Mining and Geology,
v.1, no.4, p.351-370.
Bulanova, G.P. 1995. The formation of diamond; Journal of Geochemical
Exploration, v.53, p.1-23.
Card, K.D. and Ciesielski, A. 1986. Subdivisions of the Superior
Province of the Canadian Shield; Geoscience Canada, v.13, no.1,
p.5-13.
Chesterman, C.W. 1978. The Audubon Society field guide to North
American rocks and minerals; Random House of Canada Ltd.,
Toronto, 850p.
Coopersmith, H.G. 1993. Diamond mine discovery; in Diamonds:
Exploration, Sampling and Evaluation, proceedings of a short
course presented by the Prospectors and Developers Association of
Canada, Toronto, Ontario, 1993, p.73-108.
Craigie, E. 1993. Sampling techniques and the distribution of kimberlite
indicator minerals in glacial tills and sediments; in Diamonds:
Exploration, Sampling and Evaluation, proceedings of a short
course presented by the Prospectors and Developers Association of
Canada, Toronto, Ontario, p.237-248.
Davison, J.G. 1993. Diamond exploration samples: laboratory processing;
in Diamonds: Exploration, Sampling and Evaluation, proceedings
of a short course presented by the Prospectors and Developers
Association of Canada, Toronto, Ontario, 1993, p.313-342.
Dawson, J.B. 1984. Petrogenesis of kimberlite; in Kimberlite Occurrence
and Origin: A Basis for Conceptual Models in Exploration,
University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, publica-
tion no.8, p.103-111.
60
——— 1987. The MARID suite of xenoliths in kimberlite: relationship to
veined and metasomatised peridotite xenoliths; in Mantle
Xenoliths, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, United Kingdom,
p.465-473.
Dawson, J.B. and Stephens, W.E. 1975. Statistical classification of gar-
nets from kimberlite and associated xenoliths; Journal of Geology,
v.83, no.5, p.589-607.
Dredge, L.A., Kjarsgaard, I.M., Ward, B.C., Kerr, D.E. and Stirling,
J.A.R. 1995. Distribution and chemistry of kimberlite indicator
minerals, Winter Lake map area, Northwest Territories (86A);
Geological Survey of Canada, Report 3081, 37p.
Dreimanis, A. 1982. Genetic classification of tills and criteria for their
differentiation: progress report on activities 1977-1982, and defini-
tions of glacigenic terms; in Report on Activities 1977-1982,
INQUA, Commission on Genesis and Lithology of Quaternary
Deposits, Zurich, Switzerland, p.12-31.
Dummett, H.T., Fipke, C.E. and Blusson, S.L. 1987. Diamond explo-
ration geochemistry in the North American Cordillera; in
Geoexpo/86, proceedings of an exploration symposium focussing
on Cordilleran environments, Vancouver, British Columbia,
Canada, p.168-176.
Dunn, C.E. 1993. Diamondiferous kimberlite in Saskatchewan, Canada—
a biogeochemical study; Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v.47,
p.131-141.
Fipke, C.E. (ed.) 1989. The development of advanced technology to dis-
tinguish between diamondiferous and barren diatremes; Geological
Survey of Canada, Open File Report 2124, 90p.
Fipke, C.E. 1994. Significance of chromite, ilmenite, G5 Mg-almandine
garnet, zircon and tourmaline in heavy mineral detection of dia-
mond bearing lamproite; in Diamonds: Characterization, Genesis
and Exploration, Proceedings of the Fifth International Kimberlite
Conference, Araxa, Minas Gerais, Brazil, p.366.
Fortescue, J.A.C., Lourim, J., Gleeson, C.F., Jensen, L. and Baker, C.
1984. A synthesis and interpretation of basal till geochemistry and
mineralogical data obtained from the Kirkland Lake (KLIP) area
(1979-1982); Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5506,
parts 1 and 2, 630p.
Fulton, R.J. and Prest, V.K. 1987. The Laurentide ice sheet and its sig-
nificance; Geographie Physique et Quaternaire, v.41, no.2, p.181-
186.
Geological Survey of Canada 1969. Aeromagnetic series map sheet 73H,
Prince Albert, Saskatchewan; Geological Survey of Canada,
Geophysics Paper 7743.
Golubev, Y.K. 1995. Diamond exploration in glaciated terrain: a Russian
perspective; Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v.53, p.265-275.
Gonzaga, G.M., Teixeira, N.A. and Gaspar, J.C. 1994. The origin of dia-
monds in western Minas Gerais, Brazil; Mineralium Deposita, v.29,
p.414-421.
Gurney, J.J. 1984. A correlation between garnets and diamonds in kim-
berlite; in Kimberlite Occurrence and Origin: A Basis for
Conceptual Models in Exploration, University of Western
Australia, Perth, Western Australia, publication no.8, p.143-166.
Gurney, J.J., Levinson, A.A. and Smith, H.S. 1991. Marine mining of
diamonds off the west coast of South Africa; Gems and Gemology,
v.27, p.206-219.

Harris, J.W., Hawthorne, J.B., Oosterveld, M.M. and Wehmeyer, E. 1975.
A classification scheme for diamond and a comparative study of
South African diamond characteristics; Physics and Chemistry of
the Earth, v.9, p.765-784.
Hasan, Z. 1993. Gem diamond evaluation; in Diamonds: Exploration,
Sampling and Evaluation, proceedings of a short course presented
by the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada, Toronto,
Ontario, 1993, p.379-384.
Hasegawa, K., Davidson, G.I., Wollenberg, P. and Iida, Y. 1990.
Geophysical exploration for unconformity-related uranium
deposits in the northeastern part of the Thelon Basin, Northwest
Territories, Canada; Mining Geology, v.40, p.83-95.
Helmstaedt, H.H. 1993. Natural diamond occurrences and tectonic set-
ting of “primary” diamond deposits; in Diamonds: Exploration,
Sampling and Evaluation, proceedings of a short course presented
by the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada, Toronto,
Ontario, 1993, p.1-72.
Helmstaedt, H.H. and Gurney, J.J. 1995. Geotectonic controls of primary
diamond deposits: implications for area selection; Journal of
Geochemical Exploration, v.53, p.125-144.
Helmstaedt, H.H. and Schulze, D.J. 1995. Kimberlite and diamond indi-
cator minerals; short course/workshop for graduate students and
senior undergraduates, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario,
115p.
Hervig, R.L., Smith, J.V., Steele, I.M. and Dawson, J.B. 1980. Fertile and
barren Al-Cr-spinel harzburgites from the upper mantle: ion and
electron probe analyses of trace elements in olivine and orthopy-
roxene, relation to lherzolites; Earth and Planetary Science Letters,
v.50, p.41-58.
Jago, B., Thorliefson, H. and Reed, L.E. 1993. Diamond exploration
short course; proceedings of a short course presented by the
Geological Association of Canada, Sudbury Prospectors and
Developers Association, Ministry of Northern Development and
Mines, Sudbury, Ontario, 1993, 48p.
Janse, A.J.A. 1995. A history of diamond sources in Africa: part I; Gems
and Gemology, v.31, no.4, p.228-255.
——— 1996. A history of diamond sources in Africa: part II; Gems and
Gemology, v.32, no.1, p.2-31.
Janse, A.J.A. and Sheahan, P.A. 1995. Catalogue of world-wide diamond
and kimberlite occurrences: a selective and annotative approach;
Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v.53, p.73-111.
Jennings, C.M.H. 1995. The exploration context for diamonds; Journal of
Geochemical Exploration, v.53, p.113-124.
Kaszycki, C.A. 1989. Surficial geology and till composition, northwest-
ern Manitoba; Geological Survey of Canada, Open File Report
2118, 40p.
Kerr, D.E., Kjarsgaard, I.M., Ward, B.C., Dredge, L.A. and Stirling,
J.A.R. 1995. Distribution and chemistry of kimberlite indicator
minerals, Alymer Lake map area, Northwest Territories (76C);
Geological Survey of Canada, Report 3080, 44p.
Kirkly, M.B., Gurney, J.J. and Levinson, A.A. 1992. Age, origin and
emplacement of diamonds: a review of scientific advances in the
last decade; CIM Bulletin, v.84, no.956, p.48-57.
Kirkly, M.B., Gurney, J.J., Otter, M.L., Hill, S.J. and Daniels, L.R. 1991.
The application of C isotope measurements to the identification of
the sources of C in diamonds: a review; Applied Geochemistry, v.6,
p.477-494.
Drift Prospecting for Diamonds, Northern Ontario
Kumarapeli, P.S. 1978. St. Lawrence paleo-rift system: a comparative
study; in Tectonics and Geophysics of Continental Rifts,
Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute, v.2, p.367-383.
Lee, H.A. 1968. An Ontario kimberlite occurrence discovered by appli-
cation of the glaciofocus method to a study of the Munro esker;
Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 68-7, 3p.
Lehnert–Thiel, K., Loewer, R., Orr, R.G. and Robertshaw, P. 1992.
Diamond bearing kimberlite in Saskatchewan, Canada: the Fort a la
Corne case history; Exploration and Mining Geology, v.1, no.4,
p.391-403.
Lourim, J. 1982a. Mid-density (SG 2.81 to 3.32) mineralogy of glacial
overburden as an indicator of gold mineralization in Benoit,
Maisonville, Grenfell, Eby, Otto, Boston and McElroy townships;
Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5394, 120p.
——— 1982b. Mid-density (SG 2.81 to 3.32) mineralogy of glacial over-
burden as an indicator of gold mineralization in Melba and
Morrisette townships and portions of Lebel, Eby, Bisley and Arnold
townships; Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5395, 104p.
Macnae, J. 1995. Applications of geophysics for the detection and explo-
ration of kimberlite and lamproites; Journal of Geochemical
Exploration, v.53, p.213-243.
Mannard, G.W. 1968. The surface expression of kimberlite pipes;
Geological Association of Canada, Proceedings, v.19, p.15-21.
Marshall, T.R. 1986. The alluvial diamond fields of the western
Transvaal; Economic Geology Research Unit, University of the
Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, Information Circular
no.188, 13p.
Marshall, T.R. and Baxter–Brown, R. 1995. Basic principals of alluvial
diamond exploration; Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v.55,
nos.1-3, p.277-292.
McCallum, M.E. and Vos, W.P. 1993. Ilmenite signatures: utilization of
paramagnetic and chemical properties in kimberlite exploration; in
Diamonds: Exploration, Sampling and Evaluation, proceedings of a
short course presented by the Prospectors and Developers
Association of Canada, Toronto, Ontario, 1993, p.109-146.
McCandless, T.E. 1990. Kimberlite xenocryst wear in high-energy flu-
vial systems: experimental studies; Journal of Geochemical
Exploration, v.37, p.323-331.
McClenaghan, M.B. and Dunn, C.E. 1995. Biogeochemical survey over
kimberlites in the Kirkland Lake area, northeastern Ontario;
Geological Survey of Canada, Open File Report 3005, 69p.
McClenaghan, M.B., Kjarsgaard, I.M., Crabtree, D. and DiLabio,
R.N.W. 1995. Mineralogy and geochemistry of till and soil overly-
ing the Buffonta kimberlite dike, Kirkland Lake, Ontario;
Geological Survey of Canada, Open File Report 3007, 111p.
McClenaghan, M.B., Kjarsgaard, I.M., Schulze, D.J., Stirling, J.A.R.,
Pringle, G. and Berger, B.R. 1996. Mineralogy and geochemistry of
the B30 kimberlite and overlying glacial sediments, Kirkland Lake,
Ontario; Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 3295, 245p.
McClenaghan, M.B., Kjarsgaard, I.M., Stirling, J.A.R., Pringle, G. and
Crabtree, D. 1993. Chemistry of kimberlitic indicator minerals in
drift from the Kirkland Lake area, northeastern Ontario; Geological
Survey of Canada, Open File Report 2761, 63p.
Mitchell, R.H. 1985. A review of the mineralogy of lamproites;
Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa, v.88, p.411-437.
——— 1986. Kimberlites: mineralogy, geochemistry and petrology;
Plenum Press, New York, 442p.
61
Miscellaneous Paper 167
Mitchell, R.H. and Bergman, S.C. 1991. Petrology of lamproites; Plenum
Press, New York, 447p.
Mitchell, R.H. and Janse, A.J.A. 1982. A harzburgite-bearing monchiq-
uite from Wawa, Ontario; Canadian Mineralogist, v.20, p.211-216.
Morris, T.F., Bajc, A.F., Bernier, M.A., Kaszycki, C.A., Murray, C. and
Stone D. 1995. Kimberlite heavy mineral data release; Ontario
Geological Survey, Open File Report 5934, 91p.
Morris, T.F., Murray, C. and Crabtree, D. 1994. Results of overburden
sampling for kimberlite heavy mineral indicators and gold grains,
Michipicoten River–Wawa area, northeastern Ontario; Ontario
Geological Survey, Open File Report 5908, 69p.
Mosig, R.W. 1980. Morphology of indicator minerals as a guide to prox-
imity of source; in Kimberlites and Diamonds, University of
Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, publication no.5, p.81-88.
Munsell Color Company 1949. Munsell Soil Color Charts; Munsell
Color Company, Baltimore, unpaged.
Nixon, P.H. 1995. The morphology and nature of primary diamondifer-
ous occurrences; Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v.53, p.41-71.
Northwest Territorial Government 1993. Diamonds and the Northwest
Territories, Canada; Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources,
Government of the Northwest Territories, 52p.
Pegg, C. 1993. The ABC diamond district—Kirkland Lake: regional set-
ting, geophysics and potential; Haileybury School of Mines,
Haileybury, Ontario, Geophysical Workshop, 72p.
Percival, J.A. 1985. The Kapuskasing structure in the Kapuskasing–
Fraserdale area, Ontario; in Current Research, Part A, Geological
Survey of Canada, Paper 85-1A, p.1-5.
Percival, J.A. and Card, K.D. 1983. Archean crust as revealed in the
Kapuskasing uplift, Superior Province, Canada; Geology, v.11,
p.323-326.
Reed, L.E. 1993. The geophysics of kimberlite; in Diamonds:
Exploration, Sampling and Evaluation, proceedings of a short
course presented by the Prospectors and Developers Association of
Canada, Toronto, Ontario, 1993, p.289-304.
Robinson, D.N. 1979. Diamond and graphite in eclogite xenoliths from
kimberlite; in The Mantle Sample: Inclusions in Kimberlites and
Other Volcanics, American Geophysical Union, p.50-58.
Rock, N.M.S. 1977. The nature and origin of lamprophyres: some defin-
itions, distinctions, and derivations; Earth Science Reviews, v.13,
p.123-169.
——— 1990. Lamprophyres; Blackie and Son Ltd., London, United
Kingdom, 283p.
Sage, R.P. 1992. Alkalic rock, carbonatite and kimberlite complexes of
Ontario, Superior Province; in Geology of Ontario, Ontario
Geological Survey, Special Volume 4, Part 1, p.683-709.
——— 1994. Geology of the Michipicoten greenstone belt; Ontario
Geological Survey, Open File Report 5888, 592p.
——— 1996. Kimberlites of the Lake Timiskaming structural zone;
Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5937, 435p.
Scott–Smith, B.H. 1992. Contrasting kimberlites and lamproites;
Exploration Mining Geology, v.1, no.4, p.371-381.
Shilts, W.W. 1976. Glacial till and mineral exploration; in Glacial Till,
Royal Society of Canada, Special Publication 12, p.205-224.
62
Smith, C.B. 1984. What is a kimberlite? in Kimberlite Occurrence and
Origin: A Basis for Conceptual Models in Exploration, University
of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, publication no.8,
p.1-18.
Stea, R.R., Turner, R.G., Finck, P.W. and Graves, R.M. 1989. Glacial dis-
persal in Nova Scotia: a zonal concept; in Drift Prospecting,
Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 89-20, p.155-169.
Stone, D. 1994. Heavy minerals and kimberlite indicators in sand and till,
western Berens River area, Ontario; in Summary of Field Work and
Other Activities 1994, Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous
Paper 163, p.11-26.
Sugden, D.E. and John, B.S. 1976. Glaciers and landscape; Butler and
Tanner Limited, United Kingdom, 376p.
Sutherland, D.G. 1982. The transport and sorting of diamonds by fluvial
and marine processes; Economic Geology, v.77, no.7, p.1613-1620.
——— 1993a. Drainage basin evolution in southeast Guinea and the devel-
opment of diamondiferous placer deposits; Economic Geology,
v.88, p.44-54.
——— 1993b. The diamond deposits of the Mandala basin, southeast
Guinea, West Africa; Transactions of the Royal Society of
Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, v.84, p.137-149.
Thomson, I. and Lourim, J. 1981. Mid-density (SG 2.81 to 3.32) miner-
alogy of glacial overburden as an indicator of gold mineralization
in Martin, McElroy, Skead, Gauthier and Hearst townships; Ontario
Geological Survey, Open File Report 5355, 29p.
Thorliefson, L.H. 1993. Diamond indicator mineral tracing in Canada;
Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum,
Professional Development Program, Calgary, Alberta, 1993, 15p.
Thorliefson, L.H. and Garrett, R.G. 1993. Prairie kimberlite study—till
matrix geochemistry and preliminary indicator mineral data;
Geological Survey of Canada, Open File Report 2745, 12p.
Thorliefson, L.H. and Kristjansson, F.J. 1990. Geochemical, mineralogi-
cal, and lithological analysis of glacial sediments for gold, base
metal and kimberlite exploration, Beardmore–Geraldton area,
northern Ontario; Geological Survey of Canada, Open File Report
2266, 108p.
Towie, N.J. and Ho Seet, L. 1995. Diamond laboratory techniques;
Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v.53, p.205-212.
Urquart, W.E.S and Hopkins, R. 1993. Exploration geophysics and the
search for diamondiferous diatremes; in Diamonds: Exploration,
Sampling and Evaluation, proceedings of a short course presented
by the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada, Toronto,
Ontario, 1993, p.249-287.
Wannenburgh, A.J. and Johnson, P. 1990. Diamond people; Norfolk
House Publishers, London, United Kingdom, 280p.
Ward, B.C., Kjarsgaard, I.M., Dredge, L.A., Kerr, D.E. and Stirling,
J.A.R. 1995. Distribution and chemistry of kimberlite indicator
minerals, Lac de Gras map area, Northwest Territories (76D);
Geological Survey of Canada, Open File Report 3079, 46p.
Wolfe, W.J., Lee, H.A. and Hicks, W.D. 1975. Heavy mineral indicators
in alluvial and esker gravels of the Moose River Basin, James Bay
Lowland; Ministry of Natural Resources, Geoscience Report 126,
59p.
Wyman, D.A. and Kerrich, R. 1989. Archean lamprophyre of the
Superior Province, Canada: distribution, petrology and geochemi-
cal characteristics; Journal of Geophysical Research, v.94, no.B4,
p.4667-4696.
Metric Conversion Table
CONVERSION FACTORS FOR MEASUREMENTS IN ONTARIO
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PUBLICATIONS

Conversion from SI to Imperial Conversion from Imperial to SI

SI Unit Multiplied by Gives Imperial Unit Multiplied by Gives

LENGTH
1 mm 0.039 37 inches 1 inch 25.4 mm
1 cm 0.393 70 inches 1 inch 2.54 cm
1m 3.280 84 feet 1 foot 0.304 8 m
1m 0.049 709 7 chains 1 chain 20.116 8 m
1 km 0.621 371 miles (statute) 1 mile (statute) 1.609 344 km

AREA
1 cm2 0.155 square inches 1 square inch 6.451 6 cm2
1 m2 10.763 9 square feet 1 square foot 0.092 903 04 m2
1 km2 0.386 10 square miles 1 square mile 2.589 988 km2
1 ha 2.471 054 acres 1 acre 0.404 658 6 ha

VOLUME
1 cm3 0.061 02 cubic inches 1 cubic inch 16.387 064 cm3
1 m3 35.134 7 cubic feet 1 cubic foot 0.028 316 85 m3
1 m3 1.308 0 cubic yards 1 cubic yard 0.764 555 m3

CAPACITY
1L 1.759 755 pints 1 pint 0.568 261 L
1L 0.879 877 quarts 1 quart 1.136 552 L
1L 0.219 969 gallons 1 gallon 4.546 090 L

MASS
1g 0.035 273 96 ounces (avdp) 1 ounce (advp) 28.349 523 g
1g 0.032 150 75 ounces (troy) 1 ounce (troy) 31.103 476 8 g
1 kg 2.204 62 pounds (avdp) 1 pound (avdp) 0.453 592 37 kg
1 kg 0.001 102 3 tons (short) 1 ton (short) 907.184 74 kg
1t 1.102 311 tons (short) 1 ton (short) 0.907 184 74 t
1 kg 0.000 984 21 tons (long) 1 ton (long) 1016.046 908 8 kg
1t 0.984 206 5 tons (long) 1 ton (long) 1.016 046 908 8 t

CONCENTRATION
1 g/t 0.029 166 6 ounce(troy)/ 1 ounce(troy)/ 34.285 714 2 g/t
ton(short) ton(short)
1 g/t 0.583 333 33 pennyweights/ 1 pennyweight/ 1.714 285 7 g/t
ton(short) ton(short)

OTHER USEFUL CONVERSION FACTORS

Multiplied by
1 ounce(troy) per ton (short) 20.0 pennyweights per ton (short)
1 pennyweight per ton (short) 0.05 ounces (troy) per ton (short)
Note: Conversion factors which are in bold type are exact. The converion factors have been taken from or have been derived from factors given in the
Metric Practice Guide for the Canadian Mining and Metallurgical Industries, published by the Mining Association of Canada in co-operation with the
Coal Association of Canada.

63
ISSN 0704-2752
ISBN 0-7778-5854-1