Heads, Tails, and Decisions In-Between:
The Archaeology of Mining Wastes
Paul J. White
Ore dumps, milling wastes, and other processing residues
are ubiquitous features of mining landscapes and often
dominate the surface remnants of former operations.
While archaeologists have yet to investigate these features
systematically, state and federal hazard mitigation pro-
grams increasingly target mining and milling wastes for
environmental testing and cleanup. This article investi-
gates the extent to which these deposits retain historical
information, including differences in ore bodies and tech-
nological processes, by reviewing historical and contempo-
rary literature and analyzing rock and sediment samples
associated with a small-scale gold mine in Alaska for
which an excellent documentary record exists. Results of
physical and chemical analyses are tempered by the vari-
ability caused by sampling methods, testing techniques,
and post-depositional processes, but promising avenues for
future studies are also identified.
Introduction
With public opinion polls ranking mining as North
America’s least-favored industry, below even that of
tobacco manufacturers, mining enterprises have seem-
ingly gained a reputation more for their undesirable
consequences than for their desirable products.1 Process-
ing wastes are the likely source for much of this discon-
tent. According to the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), mining operations in the United States
generate some two billion tons of waste material annu-
ally, accounting for up to 40 percent of the nation’s solid
waste. Approximately three-quarters of mining refuse
comes from materials overlying mineral deposits, with
the remainder classified as tailings—the discard from
milling processes employed to concentrate ore values.
Generally speaking, the ratio of waste to product is
greatest in the working of precious metals because high
commodity prices enable companies to work compara-
tively poorer outcrops. By recent estimates, the produc-
tion of a single gold ring now leaves in its wake any-
where from 3 to 35 tons of mine waste.2
There is little need to account for where the bulk of this
material ends up. Vast, barren piles of processed rock
tend to dominate mining sites, and they also form some
of North America’s most dramatic industrial landscapes.
Beyond their often-arresting appearance, environmental
testing indicates that mining wastes contribute to an
unwelcome legacy of contamination, impacting mining
regions long after the demise of operations. Indeed,
wastes at historic and abandoned mines are thought
responsible for a large portion of the total pollution
stemming from mining wastes, a reflection of their cre-
ation during periods when environmental regulations
were poorly enforced, comparatively lenient, or entirely
nonexistent.3 To remedy this problem, government pro-
grams have increasingly slated wastes at abandoned
mines for hazard mitigation over the last three decades.
The exponential growth of cleanup activity has sparked a
proliferation of technical data on the sources, types, and
extent of mine waste pollution. That little of this informa-
tion has found its way into historical analyses is unfortu-
nate and the likely consequence of a frequent communica-
tion divide between environmental and cultural resource
practitioners. There are, however, good reasons to explore
this area further. Industrial archaeologists generally con-
sider process residues a promising source of information
because of their “quantity, usually undisturbed pattern of
distribution, and potential for physical analysis.”4 Archae-
ological investigations of iron-making wastes, among the
most studied of industrial residues, have productively
linked physical and chemical variances in slag composi-
tion to different reduction processes, stages within a
process, and, more tentatively, operative efficiency. 5
Admittedly, the extent to which an archaeological study of
mining wastes could harvest similar yields is difficult to
assess a priori. If other studies of wastes suggest prof-
itable directions, clear evidence of the permeability and
reactivity of overburden, ore dumps, tailings, and other
mining sediments indicate that mining wastes are more
problematic storehouses of historical information.
To assess the historical information potential of mining
wastes in greater detail, this article presents a review of
past findings together with the results from environmen-
tal characterization and limited archaeological testing in
47
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY
Alaska’s Bremner District. This small-scale gold mining
region (figure 1), with lode mines active from the mid-
1930s to early 1940s, features excellent physical and doc-
umentary preservation that provides specific informa-
tion about the changes taking place during operations.
The comparison of different data sources permits the
evaluation of several mining deposits (including ores
from different mines, ores delivered to the mill [heads],
sediments remaining within the mill, and mill tailings)
in terms of their information potential. These are exam-
ined here with an eye to identifying historical associa-
tions, interpretive problems and directions for future
research.
48
VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003
Mining Wastes as Archaeological Artifact?
Prospects and Pitfalls
Processing wastes, at first glance, may appear an
unlikely source of information about past mining opera-
tions: dumping locations, whether immediately outside
mine entrances or downhill of mill sites, suggest little
more than a governing economic rationale to dispose of
wastes as quickly as possible. Wastes are, however, fun-
damentally cultural deposits. As environmental histori-
ans have frequently stressed, dumping practices have
changed over time, and these practices are often in line
with prevailing cultural attitudes about the environ-
Figure 1. Alaska’s Copper Basin, show-
ing location of the Bremner District and
places mentioned in text.

ment.6 Waste deposition required both forethought and
continued expenditure, and mining engineers employed
different strategies to improve the efficiency of waste
disposal. Until the late-19th century, and continuing in
remote districts through the 20th century, mining engi-
neers preferred to locate milling facilities along water-
courses to expedite waste removal.7 The sedimentation
and contamination of streams resulting from these prac-
tices increased in severity with the growing capability of
milling techniques to process poorer deposits. By the
early-20th century, and in response to rising conflicts
between mining operations and downstream users, anti-
debris legislation in several western states required min-
ing operations to impound their wastes.
Local conditions influenced the choice of containment
methods. For operations located in rugged terrain, the con-
struction of a retaining wall across the floor of the valley
to trap mine wastes might have sufficed. Milling plants
located on level or gently sloping ground required other
alternatives. Here, the use of size-separating devices, such
as classifiers, dewaterers, or perforated launders, enabled
engineers to stack tailings and also to construct impound-
ment dams entirely from tailings material, the larger, sand-
size particles forming the embankment behind which finer
particles, or “slimes,” were directed.8 Other companies
found new uses for wastes, including as fertilizer, road and
railroad gravel, concrete aggregate, and fill for mine stopes.
Waste storage also opened possibilities for waste reprocess-
ing if improvements to milling technology or mineral
prices warranted. In preparation, some companies sepa-
rated mining and milling wastes according to grade.9
Mining literature also indicates that wastes contain
internal information of import to daily operations. Ore
bodies were rarely homogenous and often changed with
depth—and the profitability of mining ventures hinged
upon the ability to keep apace of these changes. Mine
operators accomplished this by regularly sampling ores
and host rock. Inside milling plants, too, the compari-
son of mill heads, concentrates, and tailings enabled
millwrights to calculate the efficiency of the plant and
of individual machines.10 Supporting the textbook dic-
tum that “a millman is not progressive who is content
with his flow sheet,” mining treatises and journal articles
abound with case studies identifying minor improve-
ments to extractive efficiency. Some common adjust-
ments included altering grinding size, varying the chem-
ical agents used in recovery equipment, rerouting the
flow of ore through the mill, or adding and removing
machines from the circuit.11
HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN
Hypothetically, the physical and chemical composition
of mining wastes should record some of these transfor-
mations (Table 1). Some indications of this potential are
indeed discernable from accounts of companies rework-
ing milling wastes as an ore body, the historical charac-
terization of tailings at the Sweeny mill near Kellogg,
Idaho, providing a good case in point. Waste characteri-
zation work, conducted shortly after the mill’s closure in
1918, involved trenching the tailings at several locations.
Chemical analysis of these sediments identified four
successive dumps, with later dumping episodes found to
be poorer in lead and silver concentrations—a circum-
stance that the project’s author attributed to improved
milling methods.12
Table 1. Historical Processes with Potential
Signatures in Mining and Milling Wastes
Mining Waste
• Changes in the ore body or host rock
• Separation of mined materials by grade
Milling Waste
• Changes in the ore body
• Processing of different ore bodies
• Separation of wastes by grade
• Residues of milling processes
• Changes in milling techniques and/or grinding size
• Overall recovery efficiency
Within Milling Facility
• Residues of milling processes
• Recovery efficiency of particular machines
While such studies are encouraging, greater difficulties
face those wishing to interpret long-abandoned wastes.
Chief among these is that tailings and mine waste piles
continue to be key sources of pollution in mining
regions. Acid rock drainage, by far the most prevalent
problem, is induced by the oxidation of sulfide minerals
commonly found with metal ores. The weathering of
sulfides generates sulfuric acid that corrodes other min-
erals as it percolates through the deposit. Two common
environmental ramifications of this process are the low-
ering of pH levels in nearby watercourses and the intro-
duction of a range of metals (such as arsenic, cadmium,
and iron) into solution at high concentrations. Acidic
drainage is not limited to waste deposits; research indi-
cates that unworked outcrops can also generate acid and
release metals in concentrations violating water quality
49
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY
standards.13 Even so, tailings and mine waste present
especially acute problems because their finer particle
size creates greater surface area for oxidation.
Acid rock drainage does not modify deposits uniformly.
Waste characterization studies indicate that local depo-
sitional environments influence significantly the rates
and extent of acid generation and metal leaching. Acid
attacks minerals differently; quartz and feldspars, for
instance, react weakly in acid and tend to decompose at
extremely slow rates, while the presence of carbonates
can neutralize acid and limit the mobility of heavy met-
als. Oxidation decreases with depth and is also influ-
enced by general climatic conditions. Weathering rates
are faster in warmer and more humid climates, and mul-
tiyear studies indicate that metal loading surges in
streams during and immediately after rainstorms. Com-
mon strains of bacteria are also known to increase oxi-
dation rates considerably.14
Despite these significant problems, there are still indica-
tions that long-abandoned mining wastes retain serviceable
information about past operations. Although sporadic,
archaeological investigations of mining wastes have identi-
fied some positive connections. Soil samples collected dur-
ing the excavation of an early-19th-century mill at the
Reed Gold Mine, North Carolina, for instance, found mer-
cury concentrations well above natural levels, indicating its
use in the milling process. The testing of soils during inves-
tigations at a 19th-century borax works in Death Valley,
California, indicated that the earliest steps of the recovery
process were most successful in extracting borax.
Researchers also identified high borax concentrations
within some wastes, possibly representing harvested
deposits that had escaped reprocessing.15 Other indications
come from environmental testing programs. Testing at an
EPA cleanup site in Arizona, for instance, discriminated
zones of different ore types across the tailings pond, con-
sistent with the mill’s operation as a custom facility.16
Further archaeological attention to mining wastes is
timely, given the rapid expansion of environmental
characterization programs over the last few decades.
The EPA’s “Superfund” program—the most recognized
of all government initiatives—targets the gravest cases
of contamination, with cleanup sites varying in scale
from individual mines to entire watersheds containing
well over 100 abandoned mines.17 Remediation work is
also conducted by agencies operating under the Depart-
ment of the Interior’s Abandoned Mine Lands pro-
gram, an initiative that aims to coordinate the cleanup
50
VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003
of federal lands impacted by acid rock drainage. As part
of these efforts, the Bureau of Land Management has
inventoried 10 percent of the approximately 70,000 min-
ing sites estimated in its holdings. Of those sites sur-
veyed, the agency reported 6,650 (96 percent) as posing
safety hazards and 890 (13 percent) as presenting signif-
icant environmental threats.18 The U.S. Forest Service
estimates that anywhere from 20,000 to 50,000 mines are
generating acid on lands within its jurisdiction, impact-
ing up to 10,000 miles of water drainages. Proposed leg-
islation, entitled the Abandoned Hardrock Mines Recla-
mation Act, was introduced to the House of
Representatives in January 2003. If passed, this act will
provide funds to states for completing an inventory of
abandoned mine lands, setting aside $45 million per
year for mine cleanup work.19
The rapid increase in mine cleanup activities has raised
significant historic preservation concerns. In part, waste
mitigation often occurs in tandem with remedying other
safety concerns, such as mine workings, and too often
this is conducted without consideration for historical
value.20 The historic preservation movement has also
developed strong interests in the interpretation and pro-
tection of historic cultural landscapes, and cleanup
strategies cannot avoid manipulating these to some
degree, whether by aggregating waste into one area,
recontouring profiles to lessen surface erosion, capping
tailings with soil and vegetation, or, in extreme cases,
removing wastes to offsite storage.21 In this light, pro-
posing that mine wastes might be a partial record of the
mine and tailings a partial record of the mill might gen-
erate another area of conflict. On the other hand, envi-
ronmental studies have examined mining wastes more
extensively than archaeological research to date, with
testing programs regularly involving the collection and
analysis of multiple samples from different areas around
the mine and from within individual deposits. Certainly,
data from environmental characterization comes with
important limitations for historical analysis. Environ-
mental studies are designed to furnish information
about current, not historical, conditions, bringing with
them different methodologies. But if characterization
data is unlikely to procure all the information that
archaeologists may want to learn from mining wastes, it
is still a pragmatic place to start.
Mining and Milling in the Bremner District, Alaska
For those visiting the Bremner District today, the avail-
able travel options differ little from those facing miners

in the 1930s: either travel across frozen rivers by snow-
mobile or sled, or fly by two- or three-seater plane dur-
ing the summer months. Similar to many northern gold
districts, this small-scale gold mining region, located in
Alaska’s rugged Chugach Range (figure 1), was neither
easily accessible nor particularly profitable. Climatic
conditions restricted mining activities to a four- to five-
month working season. Despite nearly a century of
intermittent operations, miners ultimately won less than
5,000 troy ounces of gold from the area’s streambeds
and rock outcrops, a quantity that, at best, granted a
working wage to some of those who sought profits.22 If
operations were short-lived, signs of past mining activ-
ity nevertheless remain conspicuous. Rock and snow
slides have obliterated some structures, but several camp
buildings are still standing. Electric power and road net-
works are traceable along the valley floor, as are the
routes of aerial tramways to the mines. Waste dumps
are identifiable at mining sites and at a milling facility
built to process the district’s ores. Equipment and sup-
plies are distributed throughout the valley, including a
dump truck once used to relay ore from the tram
bunkers to the mill and that now sits on blocks outside
the camp garage (figures 2 and 3). The survival of a
range of company records, including stockholder
reports, survey maps, company inventories, a manager’s
diary, and historic photographs, complements this rich
physical preservation. In combination, these evidentiary
Figure 2. Blacksmith shop, garage, and dump
truck at the Yellow Band Gold Mines camp. The
excellent condition of many structures in the dis-
trict is due to Paul Fretzs’s upkeep of mine build-
ings during the 1970s as well as to recent
National Park Service preservation efforts. Pho-
tograph by author.
HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN
sources enable detailed insights into the nature of oper-
ations, including changes in the ore bodies and modifi-
cations to milling techniques (summarized below)—
offering a prime opportunity for evaluating the
historical potential of environmental data collected
recently from the district’s mining sites. Lode mining
activity in the Bremner District began in earnest in
1927, when prospector S. Lee Ramer staked 12 mining
claims at the headwaters of Golconda Creek. Shortly
after Ramer’s discovery, another prospector, Charles
Nelson, located a promising vein at significantly higher
elevation and approximately one mile to the north.
According to geological reports, both quartz veins were
mineralized in places by iron sulfides—including chal-
copyrite, galena, pyrite, and sphalerite (respectively cop-
per-iron, lead, iron, and zinc sulfide)—and flecked with
gold. In 1931, Lee Ramer and his brother Peyton
formed the Bremner Gold Mining Company and set out
to transform both the Lucky Girl and Grand Prize
prospects into a working mine (figure 4).
Several economic conditions lessened the exorbitant
transportation costs that operators in the Bremner Dis-
trict had formerly faced. Regionally, mining enterprises
in the Copper Basin benefited from a 200-mile-long rail-
road completed in 1911 that connected the port of Cor-
dova to the Kennecott Copper Mines (30 miles north-
east of Bremner). The Ramer brothers benefited also
51
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003

Figure 3. Fortunate in name but not in destiny, the

Lucky Girl mill suffered a direct hit from a snow slide
sometime in the 1970s. The slide toppled the jaw
crusher into the ore bin (foreground), upturned the
classifier (just above the ball mill at photo center)
over the Wilfley table, and redeposited the mill’s super-
structure on the valley floor up to one-quarter mile
from the mill site. Surprisingly, most milling machin-
ery remains in its original position. View looking
southeast. Photograph by author.

from the growth of McCarthy and Chitina as supply

centers and the burgeoning availability of aerial trans-
portation services—the latter bringing substantive
reductions to the time and costs of transporting equip-
ment, supplies, and workers.23 Moreover, and in contrast
to the fate of most industries during the Great Depres-
sion, federal policies to amass gold bullion enabled gold
mining operations to take advantage of lowered supply
costs and high labor availability.24 The most explicit gov-
ernment endorsement came with the passage of the Gold
Reserve Act (1934), which fixed gold prices at a new high
of $35 per fine ounce and required the treasury to pur-
chase all nationally produced gold. That year, the Brem-
ner Gold Mining Company secured a loan to finance the
construction of major surface improvements. In addi-
tion to improving camp facilities, workers improved an
airstrip at the headwaters of Golconda Creek and
installed an aerial tramway at the Grand Prize Mine to
connect the mining activities with operations on the val-
ley floor. One-half mile south of the Lucky Girl claims,
the company constructed a hydroelectric plant to power
operations. Adjacent to the Lucky Girl Mine, the com-
pany cleared a site for the construction of a small-scale
mill capable of processing up to 50 tons of ore per day.25
Despite the sizable financial investment—the cost of
milling equipment alone reaching $50,000—this pilot
plant enabled the company to reduce gold ore directly to
bullion, promising significant savings on transportation
costs.26

The layout of the Lucky Girl mill followed a fairly sim-

Figure 4. Lode mines in the Bremner District, c. 1939, indicating aerial
ple design of ore reduction and gold recovery that
tramlines and haul roads connecting the mines to the company camp and required one operator to run (figure 5). In common with
Lucky Girl mill. contemporary milling practices, ore reduction occurred

52

as a two-stage process. Material entering the mill build-
ing passed first over a “grizzly” (a set of parallel bars
serving as a rough sorting device) and then into a “jaw
crusher.” The crusher worked ore between a moving
plate or “jaw” and a fixed plate, breaking it into 1-1/2-
inch diameter pieces and letting crushed material drop
into a bin set below the machine. Secondary crushing
took place in a ball mill. This large, revolving cylinder
used cast-iron balls to pulverize the ore until it was fine
enough to pass through an output screen. The mill
operated in tandem with a classifier (a mechanical sort-
ing device) that improved the consistency of the product
by directing heavier materials back to the ball mill for
further grinding. Upon reaching the desired milling
size—here, the consistency of medium sand—ore
entered into the recovery circuit, where machines sepa-
rated out valued material from wastes.
Figure 5. Lucky Girl mill, c. 1941. The stepped layout of the building—a popular design feature of 19th- and early-20th-century milling plants—enabled
gravity alone to move material through the milling circuit. Reconstruction based on 1998 field documentation by Patrick Martin and the author.
HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN
Gold recovery at the Lucky Girl mill used both amalga-
mation and gravity concentration techniques, a tried-
and-true combination popular among small-scale oper-
ators. 27 Amalgamation extracted gold chemically by
inducing the formation of a mercury-gold alloy. The
milling circuit included two such recovery devices. A
mechanical “amalgamator” positioned immediately
after the ball mill mixed the ore with water and mercury
in a small chamber, with amalgam collecting on mer-
cury-coated copper plates placed inside the device. The
company also installed amalgamation plates into the
bottom of launders positioned after the amalgamator
and classifier. In accordance with general practices, the
mill attendant periodically scraped the “pasty” amal-
gam collecting on the plates and took the consolidated
mass to the mine’s assaying furnace for further reduc-
tion into bullion.
53
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003

Ore passing through the amalgamation circuit contin- Instead of marking an end to lode mining in the Brem-
ued to the lowest level of the mill for final processing on ner District, the death throes of the Bremner Gold Min-
a Wilfley table. This gravity concentration device con- ing Company attracted the interest of mining engineer,
sisted of an inclined tabletop fitted with riffles (wooden surveyor, and lawyer Asa Baldwin. He was familiar with
slats) and over which the slurry of ore was introduced. both the operations and the locality, having once
In operation, the table separated mineral grains accord- optioned the Lucky Girl and Grand Prize claims from
ing to differences in specific gravity (approximated by the Ramer brothers during the late 1920s. Since 1935,
the maintenance of a uniform feed size). Lighter parti- Baldwin had investigated an ore outcropping found to
cles, such as quartz, flowed over the riffles and off the the south of the Ramer’s claims and on the opposite
long edge of the table, dropping into a waste launder side of the valley. By 1937, development work on his
and passing out of the mill building. Riffles caught the Yellow Band prospect had marked out three corners of
heavier particles, and the shaking motion of the table a high-grade block, cautiously estimated to be 80 feet
conveyed these sediments off the table’s short end and long, 4 to 6 feet wide, and 30 feet deep, with a potential
into a concentrate bin.28 value of $15,000.31 In 1938, Baldwin formed the Yellow
Band Gold Mines and negotiated successfully for the
By most indications, the Bremner Gold Mining Com- purchase of all possessions of the Bremner Gold Min-
pany should have enjoyed a production run of several
years, for, contrary to the history of many gold mines,
the company had invested years in property examina-
tion and scaled mining infrastructure to an early phase
of exploration. Indeed, initial outward measures of the
operation were generally positive. Over the next few
years the company employed a workforce varying from
one- to two-dozen workers—respectable numbers for a
small-scale mine. At times, the mill ran eight-hour shifts
back to back, and by the close of 1936, the mill had
processed some 2,000 to 3,000 tons of ore, with ore val-
ues averaging a low, but workable, gross return of $10 to
$12 per ton.29

Yet miners soon encountered difficulties. As with most

metal mines, surface outcrops contained the richest ores
and, as workings progressed, miners found only poorer
and more chemically complex deposits. Furthermore,
the quartz veins in the district tended to pinch and swell
and end abruptly, with gold distributed sparsely and in
erratic pockets and lenses.30 Outward signs of these trou-
bles occurred as early as 1935 when work ended at the
Grand Prize, the mine having procured a meager 500
tons of ore for the mill. By summer 1936, spotty and
decreasing ore values were also evident on the Lucky
Girl vein. In 1937, the Bremner Gold Mining Company
devoted efforts to tapping the vein at a lower elevation,
but results proved discouraging (a later analysis of the
tunnel concluded that the engineer had likely missed the Figure 6. The Lucky Girl mill and mine at the time of takeover by the
mark by several feet). Having processed all of the ore Yellow Band Gold Mines in 1938. The diagonal line of overburden piles
stockpiled in the previous season, the Lucky Girl mill (upper left to below photo center) traces the path of the Lucky Girl
remained idle during 1937. At the end of that year, the vein. The lowest of these was formed in 1936–37 as a last attempt to wrest
a profit from the vein. The low building to the left of the mill, formerly a
Bremner Gold Mining Company teetered on the brink
dry room, later served as an assaying facility for testing ores and reducing
of collapse, its future bleak, and its finances exhausted. amalgam to gold bullion. Photograph by Asa Baldwin, Asa C. Baldwin
Photograph Collection, PCA 71-430, Alaska State Library, Juneau.

54

ing Company holdings and the leasing of another gold
prospect, the Sheriff claims, located by Charles Nelson
in 1936 (figure 6).32
The Yellow Band Gold Mines spent the first two years
engaged mostly in preparatory work, employing a crew
of approximately one dozen workers variously about the
mine. If journal entries surviving for one year of the
mine’s operation offer any indication, the crew worked
every day except July 4, when they “Hoisted Old Glory
[and] took it easy.”33 By the close of the 1939 season, the
list of improvements included relocating the main camp
to a more central location, establishing a new airstrip,
erecting aerial tramways to the Sheriff and Yellow Band
mines, building a mine bunkhouse, and constructing a
haul road between the tram stations and the mill. The
Lucky Girl mill also received a minor overhaul. In 1938,
a millwright ran 20 tons of ore from the Yellow Band
Mine through the mill, adjusting the circuit to make
improvements to efficiency. One recorded modification
involved changing the output screens on the ball mill
from 60-mesh to 80-mesh (a change in aperture from
Figure 7. Delivering ore to the Sheriff Mine’s
tram terminal, c. 1939. The lower tram terminal,
where ore samples were collected in 1996 for
environmental characterization studies, is located
at the toe of a moraine some 5,000 feet distant
from the mine and 1,500 feet lower in elevation.
Photograph by Asa Baldwin, Asa C. Baldwin
Photograph Collection, PCA 71-493, Alaska
State Library, Juneau.
HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN
respectively 0.0098 inches to 0.007 inches). This
improvement permitted finer grinding and ostensibly
higher gold recovery, with the tradeoff of reducing the
mill’s running capacity to 30 tons per day.34 During this
development phase, Baldwin aimed for each year’s activ-
ities to procure at least 500 tons of ore for the mill. No
ores came from the Lucky Girl and Grand Prize mines
as test samples confirmed a former millwright’s opinion
that the ore was too low grade to be either mined or
milled profitably. The company performed some work at
the Yellow Band Mine during the 1938 and 1939 sea-
sons, but by 1940 all mining efforts had shifted to the
Sheriff Mine—a move governed partly by a need to
reduce annual lease payments (figure 7).35 Gold at the
Sheriff Mine tended to be found in association with
galena and arsenopyrite (arsenic-iron sulfide); assay
results indicated the latter often brought the richest con-
centrations of gold, with some seams valued at more
than $4,000 per ton (figure 8).36 The presence of sulfides,
however, did create some difficulties in mill recovery,
Baldwin noting that amalgamation did not recover gold
from the arsenopyrite ore as readily.37 Two modifications
55
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY
to the gravity-concentration circuit may have been
intended as possible fixes. By 1940, if not before, the
millwright reintroduced all table concentrates back into
the ball mill, with concentrates remaining at the end of
the season panned by hand. In mid-1941, Baldwin and
the millwright installed frames for “corduroy blankets”
(another gold-saving technique) next to the Wilfley
table, but there is no indication that they saw actual
use.38 Company reports indicate that mill recovery rates
steadily improved each season, but that gold lost in tail-
ings doubled in the 1941 season to $1.40 per ton or
approximately two parts per million (ppm).
Annual reports also indicate that the company reached
its 500-ton quota only once (Table 2). Unusually low
production volumes in 1941 were caused by problems in
air service that delayed the arrival of miners into the
district by a month and also forced work cutbacks on
account of depleted food supplies. Perhaps to offset the
financial ramifications of reduced development work, a
general pattern of decreasing ore tonnage but rising ore
values and recovery rates suggests that the company
sent only the richest ore to the mill. Irrespective of these
efforts, by the end of 1941, with the country now at war,
the Yellow Band Gold Mines found itself in a frustrat-
ingly similar predicament to what the Bremner Gold
Mining Company had faced four years earlier. Con-
fronted with insufficient funds to begin work in the
spring, Baldwin sought additional loans.39
56
VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003
Figure 8. Detail of an assay map of the Sheriff
Mine, c. 1939, showing variations in vein thick-
ness and ore values. Note the occurrence of
arsenopyrite, identified as “Arsen Ore” (map
center), where gold values ranged from $4,354 to
$10,150 per ton. One small square represents one
foot. Asa Baldwin, “Assay Map, Sheriff
Claims” (see n. 36).
Workings remained idle during the 1942 season, and
two events in the fall stymied attempts to secure capital
for the following year. In September, Baldwin, who had
been so instrumental in organizing operations in the dis-
trict, died of a heart attack. Less than three weeks later,
the War Production Board passed limitation order L-
208 declaring gold and silver mining a nonessential
wartime industry—and thereafter all gold mines had to
close within 60 days.40 When the order was rescinded in
1945, Claude Stewart, the new company president,
made several attempts to rekindle operations. However,
depressed economic conditions for gold mining (includ-
ing stagnant gold prices and rising wage costs) thwarted
his efforts. With finances too lean to even visit the
mines, Stewart decided that the only course of action
left was to interest another company in a buyout. From
the late-1950s, Paul Fretzs, one of the company stock-
holders, arranged to conduct assessment work on claims
in return for what he could take out until a new investor
was found.41 Some further cleanup of mine workings
and the mill took place, but Fretzs soon resorted to sal-
vaging copper wire from the electric lines to repay devel-
opment expenses. The company never found a buyer
and, in 1980, the property became incorporated into the
13.2 million-acre Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and
Preserve. Tellingly, in 1975 Fretzs conceded, “Yes, I have
really tried to make Yellow Band work, but it is impossi-
ble”—capturing in a few words the labored experience
of most entrepreneurs in the district.42
 HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN

Table 2. Milling Record of the Lucky Girl Mill, 1935–1941a

Av. Value Av. Value Gross

Year Tons Milled Ore Source b Mill Heads Tailings Recovery Production

Bremner Gold Mining Company

1935 1,500 L 67%; G 33% $10–$12 — — < $18,000.00

1936 1,000 L $10–$12 — — < $12,000.00
1937 — — — — — —

Yellow Band Gold Mines, Inc.

1938 20 Y $20.00 $1.98 91% $400.00

1939 505 S 96%; Y 4% $9.16 $0.70 93% $4,626.60
1940 461 S $20.13 $0.72 97% $9,279.37
1941 262 S $46.45 $1.40 97% $12,170.90

a
Derived from mine inspector’s report (see n. 25) and annual reports of the Yellow Band Gold Mines to stockholders for years
1938–1941 (see n. 32, 34, 39). Italicized figures are author’s estimates.
b
G: Grand Prize Mine; L: Lucky Girl Mine; S: Sheriff Mine; Y: Yellow Band Mine.

Environmental Characterization and
Archaeological Investigations at Bremner
A decade after the Bremner District’s inclusion into a
National Park, cultural resource managers initiated sev-
eral hazard mitigation measures to improve visitor
safety. Park staff systematically removed a range of haz-
ardous materials, including batteries, fuel, fuses, dyna-
mite, and blasting caps. Remediation teams also closed
mine openings and slackened aerial tram cables to
reduce hazards to aircraft. In 1996, geologists from the
National Park Service and the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) visited the Bremner District as part of a
broader sampling program to assess potential environ-
mental hazards at several metal-mining sites in the park.
At Bremner, researchers collected water and stream sed-
iment samples from several locations, including from a
stream exiting the Lucky Girl Mine, from a stream
below the mill, and from more distant streams. Rock
samples were collected from the surface of dumps at or
associated with the Grand Prize, Lucky Girl, Sheriff,
and Yellow Band mines and from mill tailings.43 In total,
researchers collected 36 samples from 14 locations in the
Bremner District.
As with other characterization studies, sampling strate-
gies in the field and in the laboratory were critical con-
siderations in project design, in no small part because
chemical analyses generally do not require large sam-
ples (some techniques used in this study needing less
than a gram). To improve sample representativeness,
USGS testing in the Bremner District collected rocks
and sediments as composite samples—a method involv-
ing the collection of 20–30 individual samples at each
test site. In the laboratory, sediment samples were air
dried and sieved to 80-mesh, with the sieved fraction
then pulverized to a fine flour consistency and an
approximately 185-gram portion saved for chemical
analysis. Rock samples were crushed to pea size, passed
through a sample splitter, with a 185-gram portion then
pulverized and saved for analysis. Researchers collected
water samples by sampling at intervals across stream
widths.44
Laboratory testing subjected samples to several analyti-
cal techniques in order to determine a broad range of
element concentrations. Two of the most used methods
were inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spec-
trometry (its welcome acronym, ICP-AES), valued for
its high sensitivity and capability of detecting up to 40
elements simultaneously, and atomic absorption spec-
trophotometry (AAS), used to determine concentrations
for select elements such as mercury and gold.45 As with
site sampling strategies, laboratory testing took analyti-
cal duplicates to check results.

57
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003

The principal concern of geochemical testing was to

investigate the impact of mining locations on nearby
watercourses. Water and stream sediment samples from
the Bremner District did not show signs of acid runoff
and metal leaching; pH levels were near neutral, and
metal concentrations did not exceed environmental
standards. However, a test for acid runoff (simulated by
mixing samples with acid and analyzing the leachate)
indicated a more complex situation among other sedi-
ments.46 Tailings leachates were acidic (pH 4.2), likely
from the decomposition of pyrites known to have been
distributed liberally in the district’s gold-bearing ores.
The acid also mobilized metals, and tailings leachates
contained high concentrations of arsenic, iron, man-
ganese, and relatively elevated levels of gold, lead, and
silver. Conversely, samples collected from waste dumps
outside the Lucky Girl and Yellow Band mines showed
close to neutral pH levels (8.3 and 8.7) and low metal
mobility, with leachates containing elevated levels of
aluminum and tungsten but no other excesses. From
these results, researchers concluded that water coming
off the tailings probably carried metals during spring
runoff, but that any metal loading would be highly
localized due to the small volume of mill tailings and
rapid dilution by adjacent streams.47

The analysis of rock and sediment samples generated

data useful for geological characterization, but it also
raises questions of potential value for historical analy-
sis: Can ores from specific mines be distinguished? To
what extent are historic milling processes visible? How
variable are milling sediments? To explore this potential
further and improve the scope of historical interpreta-
tions, in 2001 additional samples of waste deposits were
taken at the Lucky Girl mill. Archaeological investiga-
tions, conducted by the author, sought initially to Figure 9. Sample locations at the Lucky Girl mill during the 1996 and
expose a vertical profile of tailings for stratigraphic 2001 seasons. Tailings samples 4 and 5 are vertical samples, taken from,
respectively, 5–10 cm and 10–15 cm below the ground surface.
sampling. To achieve theoretically the greatest represen-
tation of all mill periods, a test unit was positioned
alongside the lowest mill level directly in front of the hillside (30 m south from the first unit). Here, tailings
waste launder. While this was presumably the point were sampled vertically from two lenses located at 5–10
where tailings were ejected, debris from a slide that had cm and 10–15 cm below the ground surface. In addition
hit the mill building in the 1970s obscured the area to the two tailings samples, samples were also taken of
immediately downhill from the mill site with a surface materials found in bins throughout the mill, including
scattering of rocks and building debris (figure 3). Frus- from the ore bin, ball mill feeder, classifier oversize, and
tratingly, excavations did not locate tailings deposits table concentrates (figure 9).
beneath the slide debris, even though the unit was exca-
vated to bedrock, 1.5 meters below the surface.48 Tail- To aid the comparison of results and reduce potential
ings were sampled, however, from a surface exposure sources of variability, where possible, collection tech-
interspersed with rock debris located further down the niques followed procedures of the 1996 USGS study. As

58
 HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN

one notable exception, tailings samples were not taken
as composites but intentionally sampled within a stra-
tum. As two variances in laboratory preparation, sedi-
ment and rock samples were oven dried (at 60° C) and
not sieved prior to pulverizing. ICP-AES and AAS tech-
niques were, however, used to determine elemental com-
position, as well as X-ray fluorescence (XRF) for pre-
liminary characterization purposes.49 Supplementing
these techniques, laboratory analysis also included wet-
sieving a portion of tailings and milling sediment sam-
ples to determine particle size ratios.
The following three sections present data collected from
rock and sediment samples during both field seasons.
Ore samples collected in 1996 are first examined to dis-
cern differences among mine locations and determine a
probable source for ores recovered from the mill bin. The
elemental profiles of sediments sampled from within the
milling circuit are next reviewed to observe the signatures
of historical technological processes. Lastly, tailings
from both field seasons are investigated to assess factors
of internal variability and the correspondence of ele-
mental profiles to historic milling processes.

Table 3. Elemental Composition of Mine Ore Samples (ppm)a

Lucky Grand Yellow

Elementb Girl Prize Sheriff Band Mill Bin

Aluminum 4,000 10,000 15,000 60,000 810

Arsenic 10 <10 380 11 810
Barium 35 81 95 1000 25
Bismuth 14 69 <10 16 <10
Calcium 130 3,400 19,000 6,300 1,600
Cerium <5 12 6 33 <5
Chromium 2 2 18 66 <2
Cobalt <2 8 3 4 <2
Copper 820 1500 21 140 37
Gold 7.5 2.2 4 6 9.8
Iron 10,000 20,000 14,000 34,000 1,000
Lanthanum <2 6 3 16 <2
Lead 290 860 65 590 270
Lithium 21 8 8 17 3
Magnesium 260 2,700 4,900 10,000 120
Manganese 19 160 580 440 43
Phosphorus <50 140 2500 500 <50
Potassium 1,800 3,000 1,300 23,000 300
Silver 11 18 2 6 2
Sodium 110 710 4,200 11,000 110
Strontium <2 83 140 180 17
Titanium 90 190 530 2,700 <50
Vanadium 5 16 32 93 <2
Zinc 280 200 35 610 39
a
Data from Eppinger et al., “Geochemical Data for Environmental Studies of Mineral
Deposits” (see n. 43), samples 6BR002R, 6BR003R1, 6BR010R, 6BR012R, 6BR014R1.
b
All elements analyzed by 40-element ICP-AES total digestion, except gold, analyzed by
graphite-furnace AAS. Elements not represented in table if no concentrations were
greater than 1 ppm or if more than two concentrations between mines were below
detection limits.

59
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY
Mine Ores and Mill Heads
Elemental analysis identified low gold concentrations
among all ores sampled, the highest concentrations (9.8
ppm or $8 per ton in Depression-era prices) coming
from ores found in the mill bin (Table 3). ICP-AES did
not test for sulfur, but high iron concentrations in all
ores imply the presence of pyrites that miners com-
monly found with the gold-bearing quartz. Beyond
identifying these general characteristics, elemental char-
acterization generally affirms historical assessments
made of ores at specific mines. High arsenic levels in the
Sheriff ores, for instance, suggest the presence of
arsenopyrite noted variously in annual reports, diary
entries, and assay maps of the mine. Similarly, the com-
paratively high concentrations of copper, lead, and zinc
in samples from the Lucky Girl and Grand Prize mines
allude to the presence of chalcopyrite, galena, and spha-
lerite observed historically by geologists and mine
inspectors at these locations.50 Elevated concentrations
of these same elements in ore samples from the Yellow
Band Mine may also indicate the presence of similar
metallic sulfides.
Ore processed in the mill came from the Lucky Girl,
Grand Prize, Sheriff, or Yellow Band mines; outside of a
few undeveloped prospects, no other lode mines existed
in the Bremner District. The visual inspection of mill ore
samples collected during the 1996 field season suggests a
good fit between ores from the mill bin and ores from
the Sheriff Mine, namely through the presence of
arsenopyrite in both samples (a mineral evidenced at no
other mine).51 Elemental analysis adds support to this
assessment in that low arsenic concentrations occur
across all other ores except those retrieved from the
Sheriff Mine and ore bin, and that both ores are also
notably poorer in copper and zinc. Even so, identifying
the source of milling ores from elemental analysis alone
is problematic. In part, mill ores are lower in most ele-
ment concentrations than those sampled from the mine,
with three elements—aluminum, iron, and potassium—
differing in concentration by an order of magnitude.
Possibly, these differences fall within the range of varia-
tion for a given ore deposit. Leaching may also be a con-
tributing factor, given that samples taken from the mill
bin had already passed through the primary crushing
stage, and the smaller the particle size, the greater the
surface area for oxidation.
Milling Processes
Sediments sampled from within the mill building show
markers of both ore reduction and gold recovery
60
VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003
processes. While outtake screens for the ball mill are
absent (probably removed during the mill’s final cleanup),
grinding left a signature in particle size. More than 90 per-
cent by weight of table concentrates passed through an
80-mesh sieve, and this suggests that the modifications to
grinding size made by the Yellow Band Gold Mines were
still in place when Fretzs took over operations in the
1950s. 52 Like the analysis of ore samples, ICP-AES
detected only limited quantities of gold in milling sedi-
ments. The highest levels came from the table concentrate
bin where gold carried a value of between 4 and 8 ppm (a
paltry $3.5 to $7 per ton in Depression-era prices).
Whereas samples taken from ore deposits and mine over-
burden piles contained no detectable mercury, elemental
analysis identified elevated levels in the ball mill feeder (39
ppm) and even higher mercury concentrations (279 ppm)
in the table concentrate bin. The physical inspection of
table concentrates, conducted in 1996, also identified the
presence of free gold, native mercury, and mercury-gold
amalgam.53 These findings clearly corroborate the exis-
tence of amalgamation in the mill’s recovery circuit. They
also suggest that Baldwin’s practice of redirecting concen-
trates back to the ball mill not only increased the odds of
capturing additional free gold but also made savings by
recycling unused mercury and affording the plates another
opportunity to catch already-formed amalgam. In this
sense, the ball mill technically upstaged the amalgamator
as the first site of gold recovery.54
Trends in element concentrations across the different
mill bins also document the workings of gravity concen-
tration (figure 10). XRF results indicate that elements
with an atomic mass of greater than 50 (arsenic, iron,
and lead) increased in concentration as they passed from
the feeder to the classifier and table concentrate bins,
while lighter elements (aluminum, calcium, potassium,
magnesium, and sodium) showed the opposite trend.
The notable exception, sulfur (atomic mass 32), possibly
follows the pattern of heavier elements because of its
association with metallic sulfides such as arsenopyrite,
chalcopyrite, pyrite, sphalerite, and galena, known to be
prevalent in the district’s ores. Similar reasoning proba-
bly explains more erratic patterns in concentration found
among elements representing less than 0.1 percent of the
sample weight—namely that an element’s separation into
either saved concentrate or tailings followed the charac-
ter of dominant elements in a compound.
Tailings
Elemental analysis encountered some difficulties in
determining gold concentrations in tailings samples. Ini-

Figure 10. XRF analysis of sediment samples collected from bins inside the Lucky Girl mill. Chart shows concentrations of elements representing 0.1
percent or greater sample weight, with the exception of the dominant mineral, silica (not depicted).
tial tests of 2001 samples by XRF indicated compara-
tively high gold levels (70 ppm), but subsequent analyses
calculated dramatically lower values. ICP-AES analysis
of these samples using nitric-acid digestion reported
gold below 8 ppm, the lower detection limit of this
method. Subsequent examination by ICP-AES total
digestion, a method involving less dilution of the sam-
ple and capable of detecting gold as low as 0.1 ppm,
recorded concentrations at 0.2 ppm (a loss of 14 cents
per ton). While XRF results likely represent a concen-
tration miscalculation caused by interference with other
elements, the continued closeness of gold concentra-
tions to instrument detection limits together with the
recognized mobility of gold in leaching tests also cau-
tion against interpreting ICP-AES concentrations as
inferring a higher milling efficiency than historically
reported.55
HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN
Elemental analysis had better success in recognizing
gold recovery techniques. Little could be made of grav-
ity concentration processes because most element con-
centrations (gold and copper, the exceptions) registered
higher in tailings samples than in mill heads. Amalga-
mation, however, left its characteristic imprint. Mercury
concentrations in the Lucky Girl mill tailings varied
from 1 to 170 ppm (figure 11), the highest levels signifi-
cantly greater than the 3 to 38 ppm reportedly lost on
average when working free-gold ores.56 Leaching seems
an unlikely explanation for higher values since 1996 and
2001 samples derived from the upper surface of the tail-
ings deposit and because the highest mercury concentra-
tions came from the sample site closest to the mill build-
ing. Instead, mercury levels are more likely to represent
values diminished from historic concentrations. Mercury
wastage may have been induced by the presence of
61
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY
arsenopyrites in the Sheriff ores. Significantly, mining
engineers considered arsenic a leading cause of mercury
loss in amalgamation and, at Bremner, tailings samples
with the highest mercury concentrations are also those
with the highest arsenic levels.57
While a firm connection between tailings samples and a
particular ore source cannot be established, tailings
samples most likely pertain to the milling campaigns of
the Yellow Band Gold Mines or from Fretzs’s cleanup
work. First, all samples came from the surface or near
the surface of the waste pile, and although these sam-
ples are from altered deposits, the slide probably did not
impact earlier mill runs buried deeper in the deposit.
That more than 90 percent of tailings samples passed
through an 80-mesh sieve also suggests, but does not
itself prove, a post-1938 date.58 The elemental profiles of
tailings and mill bin ores parallel each other in a general
way—where an element concentration is relatively high
in the ore sample, it also tends to be relatively high in
the tailings (figure 11). Notably, all ore samples follow
this general trend with the tailings.
Tailings samples share generally similar profiles, but
some differences in element concentrations are notable.
Arsenic, lead, and mercury have the greatest spread of
values, with concentrations varying by two orders of
magnitude (figure 11). Tailings samples also tend to be
“bunched” by collection period, and those collected in
the 2001 season generally have lower concentrations
than those sampled in 1996. Curiously, in comparing
62
VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003
Figure 11. The elemental composition of Lucky
Girl mill tailings taken from different sample
locations (see figure 9). Concentrations attained
by 40-element ICP-AES total digestion, with
mercury tested by Cold Vapor AAS. To aid com-
parison with data collected from milling sedi-
ments (figure 10), 10,000 ppm is equivalent to 1
percent sample weight.
the two samples taken in 2001, some elements with
known susceptibility to leaching (for example, arsenic,
iron, and mercury) show higher concentrations in the
upper layer. Without an extensive sampling program,
however, a single explanation for these differences can-
not be forwarded. Large variations in element concen-
trations may be a consequence of differential leaching
processes, historical differences within or between ores,
changes in milling techniques, or a combination of these
factors. Smaller elemental variations could indicate his-
torically significant differences as well, but, given over-
lapping margins of error, these could also be the cre-
ations of testing instruments and sample selection
methods.
Discussion and Conclusion
Chemical analysis indicates that mining and milling
deposits retain a range of historical information. Ore
samples taken from the mill resemble those from a par-
ticular mine; recovery processes such as amalgamation
(and gravity concentration to a lesser degree) leave traces
in the elemental composition of milling sediments; ore
reduction stages leave signatures in particle size. More
tentatively, milling wastes also furnish some qualitative
indicators of operative efficiency, particularly with
regard to mercury loss. All told, if results from Bremner
represent the most detailed information ascertainable
from abandoned mining wastes, then the outlook for
future archaeological studies holds promise, albeit with
qualifications. Realistically, researchers could glean

much of this information from written records and site
surveys, without the need for extensive laboratory analy-
sis. Indeed, the numerous caveats for interpreting histori-
cal conditions from present-day chemical signatures—
such as the need to account for post-depositional
processes, sample size and representativeness, laboratory
procedures, and instrument errors and detection limits—
can be anticipated to factor into all mine waste studies. It
is sobering, too, that the wastes sampled at Bremner
were relatively simple deposits, formed without the use
of size-separating devices certain to complicate site
stratigraphy and the ability to “reconstruct” wastes
ejected from the mill. These techniques were commonly
implemented at larger mines, the sites most subject to
environmental remediation.
Substantial limitations exist, then, in using environmen-
tal characterization studies to also serve the purposes of
historical inquiry. Arguably, however, some restrictions
could be overcome (or at least better controlled) if
incorporated early into the design of waste characteri-
zation programs. Data taken primarily from the upper
levels of waste deposits (as at Bremner) or strategies
that mix different sampling locations to form an overall
composite (another common technique) mask the inter-
nal variability of deposits. Sampling from vertical pro-
files would enable researchers to observe leaching and
oxidation processes in greater detail and potentially
enable the assessment of changes over time. An analyti-
cal strength of this approach is that it provides a firmer
basis for interpreting whether element concentrations
are the likely consequence of leaching and oxidation
processes or whether the variation is due to other fac-
tors. Historical interpretations would benefit also from
combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, ana-
lyzing mineral phases together with an assessment of
concentration ranges for a given element. Other analyti-
cal techniques may also be of service. For cases where
valued metals such as gold are identifiable in waste
materials in sizable amounts, optical microscopy might
usefully distinguish gold not recovered from gold not
recoverable by milling techniques.
As this suggests, archaeologists and historians need not
pursue these lines of inquiry independently of environ-
mental research. Indeed, environmental characterization
programs remain imperative to historical studies of
wastes because they determine the susceptibility of spe-
cific deposits to acid generation and leaching. More-
over, environmental testing programs show signs of
increasing compatibility with archaeological method-
HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN
ologies. Recent procedures for characterizing mine
wastes, for instance, stress three-dimensional sampling
to better account for the internal heterogeneity of
deposits, one environmental testing handbook noting,
“If a tailings pile has several levels, each level represents
a different time period and must be sampled
separately.”59 Lastly, and arguably most critically, envi-
ronmental researchers will continue to examine historic
and abandoned mining wastes in the foreseeable
future—and archaeologists and historians ought to be
involved in this process.
Acknowledgements
Anne Worthington, Patrick Martin, and Richard Gould
provided support and suggestions during various phases
of this project. Survey work and documentary research
of the Bremner Historic District was conducted in 1997
and 1998, with funding provided by a cooperative agree-
ment between Michigan Technological University and
Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve, Alaska
(WRST). During the course of this research, Sylvia
Baldwin graciously lent me company documents and
photographs of her father’s activities in the Bremner
District—materials that now reside in the Asa C. Bald-
win collection at the Alaska State Library, Juneau. The
Brown University Anthropology Department and
WRST funded archaeological investigations in 2001,
and I was aided in the field by WRST seasonal archae-
ologists Kory Cooper and Susan Sura. At Brown Uni-
versity, David Murray and David Drew generously per-
formed XRF and ICP-AES analysis using MacMillian
Hall Environmental Chemistry facilities. I am grateful
to Fred Quivik for bringing my attention to the Handy
article (n. 9) and extend thanks to David Murray, Mal-
colm White, Ed Hathaway (EPA), Bill Lovely (EPA),
Terry Reynolds, Andrew Huebner, and Siân Silyn
Roberts for comments on the final draft.
Notes
1. Roper Research on the public favorability of industries, 1992 and
1994, cited in Sharon Prager, “Changing North America’s Mind-
Set about Mining,” Engineering and Mining Journal 198, no. 2
(1997): 36–44.
2. Robert L. Hoye and S. Jackson Hubbard, “Mining Wastes” in
Standard Handbook of Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal,
ed. Harry M. Freeman (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1989), sec. 4,
48–49; gold ring estimates derive from the Mineral Policy Center, a
nonprofit organization dedicated to reducing the destructive
impacts of mines on communities and the environment.
3. Hoye and Hubbard, “Mining Wastes,” sec. 4, 49 (see n. 2).
4. George A. Teague, “The Archaeology of Industry in North Amer-
63
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY
ica” (PhD diss., Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, 1987), 205.
5. See, for instance, Hans-Gert Bachmann, The Identification of
Slags from Archaeological Sites, Institute of Archaeology, Occa-
sional Publication 6 (London: Institute of Archaeology, 1982);
Jerzy Piaskowski, “Distinguishing between Directly and Indirectly
Smelted Iron and Steel,” Archaeomaterials 6 (1992): 169–73; W.
Rostoker and James Dvorak, “Wrought Irons: Distinguishing
between Processes,” Archaeomaterials 4 (1990): 153–66; Robert B.
Gordon, “Material Evidence of Ironmaking Techniques,” IA:
Journal of the Society for Industrial Archeology 21, no. 2 (1995):
67–80, and “Process Deduced from Ironmaking Wastes and Arti-
facts,” Journal of Archaeological Science 24 (1997): 9–18; Robert B.
Gordon and David Killick, “The Metallurgy of the American
Bloomery Process,” Archaeomaterials 6 (1992): 141–67; David
Landon, Patrick Martin, Andrew Sewell, Paul White, Timothy
Tumberg, and Jason Menard, “‘… A Monument to Misguided
Enterprise’: The Carp River Bloomery Iron Forge,” IA: Journal of
the Society for Industrial Archeology 27, no. 2 (2001): 5–22.
6. For an excellent account of the mining industry’s changing dis-
posal practices and their environmental consequences, refer to
Duane A. Smith, Mining America: The Industry and the Environ-
ment, 1800–1980 (Lawrence: Univ. Press of Kansas, 1987).
7. F. E. Marcy, “The Enrichment and Segregation of Mill Tailings
for Future Treatment,” Transactions of the American Institute for
Mining Engineers 58 (1917): 178.
8. Arthur F. Taggart, Handbook of Ore Dressing (New York: John
Wiley and Sons, 1927), 1284.
9. Marcy, “Enrichment and Segregation,” 178–83 (see n. 7); Otto
Ruhl, “Mine Tailings, the Basis for a Growing Industry,” Mining
and Engineering World 35, no. 16 (1911): 733–35; R. S. Handy,
“Treatment of Tailing and Ore in the Sweeny Mill,” Mining and
Scientific Press 30 (August 1919): 289–94; “Tailings Disposal
Innovations,” Engineering and Mining Journal 131, no. 6 (1931):
275; John B. Huttl, “Re-Treating Complex Tailings at Ophir,
Utah,” Engineering and Mining Journal 141, no. 5 (1940): 52–53;
Taggart, Handbook, 1287–88 (see n. 8).
10. Robert S. Lewis, “Milling Calculations,” Chemical and Metallurgi-
cal Engineering 20, no. 5 (1919): 224–33; A. L. Engel, “Some
Aspects of Ore-Dressing: General Observations on the Conduct of
Daily Operations in the Plant, Made from the Viewpoint of an
Operating Engineer,” Mining and Metallurgy 12, no. 298 (1931):
447–49. The regular testing of mill sediments seems to have been a
late-19th-century development. Arthur Taggart notes, for instance,
that for the typical mill in the 1870s, “Head assays were substan-
tially unknown. Feed tonnage was ‘guesstimated’ … Moistures
were agreed upon, often in the Russian sense. Tailings were simi-
larly manhandled.” Taggart, “Seventy-Five Years of Progress in
Ore Dressing” in Seventy-Five Years of Progress in the Mineral
Industry, ed. A. B. Parsons (New York: American Institute of
Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, 1947), 118.
11. Robert H. Richards and Charles E. Locke, Textbook of Ore Dress-
ing, 3rd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1940), 355. There are copi-
ous examples of milling modifications, but for a sense of some dif-
ferent possibilities, refer to tables in Charles F. Jackson and J. H.
Hedges’s “Metal Mining Practice,” U.S. Bureau of Mines Bulletin
419 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1939), 404, 406–19, which detail the
circuits of 28 gold mills.
12. Handy, “Treatment of Tailing,” 289 (see n. 9).
13. See, for instance, Robert G. Eppinger, Paul H. Briggs, Danny
Rosenkrans, and Vannesa Ballestrazze, “Environmental Geochem-
ical Studies of Selected Mineral Deposits in Wrangell-St. Elias
64
VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003
National Park and Preserve, Alaska,” U.S. Geological Survey Pro-
fessional Paper 1619 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1999), 34.
14. Roger P. Ashley and Charles N. Alpers, “How Mineral Deposits
Interact with the Environment,” Abandoned Mine Lands Prelimi-
nary Assessment Handbook, State of California, Environmental
Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control
(State of California, 1998), Appendix B, 1–2; Robert B. Vaughn,
Mark R. Stanton, and Robert J. Horton, “A Year in the Life of a
Mine Dump: A Diachronic Case Study” in Tailings and Mine
Waste ’99 (Rotterdam: A. A. Balkema, 1999), 475–84.
15. Michael Trinkley, “Archaeological Investigations at the Reed Gold
Mine Engine Mill House (31CA18**1): Reed Gold Mine State
Historic Site, Cabarrus County, North Carolina,” Chicora Founda-
tion Research Series 6 (Columbia, S.C.: Chicora Foundation,
1986), 28, 40, and “Additional Investigations at the Reed Gold
Mine Engine Mill House, Reed Gold Mine State Historic Site,
Cabarrus County, North Carolina, 31CA18**1,” Chicora Founda-
tion Research Series 12 (Columbia, S.C.: Chicora Foundation,
1988); George A. Teague and Lynnette O. Shenk, “Excavations at
Harmony Borax Works: Historical Archaeology at Death Valley
National Monument,” Western Archaeological Center, Publications
in Anthropology 6 (Tucson: National Park Service, 1977), 172–77,
192.
16. Charles V. Baltzer, “Developing Mineral Waste Sampling Plans for
Reprocessing Studies,” Hazardous Materials Control Research
Institute, Monograph Series: Sampling and Monitoring 1 (Silver
Spring, Md.: Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute,
1991), 104. Custom mills processed ores from different companies,
with prices varying by tonnage, complexity of the operation, and
stipulations for the final product.
17. For an introduction to the legislative background of Superfund,
refer to Richard Stanford and Edward C. Yang, “Summary of
CERCLA Legislation and Regulations and the EPA Superfund
Program” in Standard Handbook of Hazardous Waste Treatment,
sec. 1, 29–45 (see n. 2). The EPA currently lists 88 mining sites on
its National Priority List, with the total cost of cleanup estimated
at $2.8 billion. EPA projects encompassing extensive mining
regions include the Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Com-
plex, and Stibnite/Yellow Pine Mining Area in Idaho, the
Oronogo-Duenweg Mining Belt, Missouri, and, in Montana, the
Basin Mining Area, Barker-Hughesville Mining District, Upper
Tenmile Creek Mining Area, and Carpenter Snow Creek Mining
District. USEPA, Abandoned Mine Lands Team, Reference Note-
book (Sept. 2004) <http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/aml/
tech/amlref.pdf> .
18. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Abandoned Mine Lands Task-
force, Abandoned Mine Land Inventory and Remediation: A Status
Report to the Director (1996); see also U.S. Geological Survey,
“The USGS Abandoned Mine Lands Initiative: Protecting and
Restoring the Environment near Abandoned Mine Lands,” U.S.
Geological Survey Fact Sheet 095-99 (Reston, Va.: U.S. Geological
Survey, 1999).
19. Bill to Provide for the Reclamation of Abandoned Hardrock Mines
and for Other Purposes, HR 504, 108th Cong., 1st sess., Congres-
sional Record, 149, (29 January 2003): H244. [HR 504 is currently
awaiting executive comment from the Department of the Interior.]
20. Donald L. Hardesty, “Issues in Preserving Toxic Wastes as Heritage
Sites,” The Public Historian 23, no. 2 (2001): 19–28; Fredric L.
Quivik, “Integrating the Preservation of Cultural Resources with
Remediation of Hazardous Materials: An Assessment of Super-
fund’s Record,” The Public Historian 23, no. 2 (2001): 47–61.

21. For examples of the landscape approach, see Richard V. Francav-
iglia, Hard Places: Reading the Landscape of America’s Historic
Mining Districts (Iowa City: Univ. of Iowa Press, 1991); Donald L.
Hardesty and Barbara J. Little, Assessing Site Significance: A
Guide for Archaeologists and Historians (Walnut Creek, Calif.:
Altamira Press, 2000); Bruce R. Noble and Robert Spude, “Identi-
fying, Evaluating, and Registering Historic Mining Sites,” National
Register Bulletin 42, revised ed., National Park Service, Intera-
gency Resources Division, National Register of Historic Places,
1997.
22. A troy ounce is 1/12 of a pound (compared to the usual 1/16) and
was used regularly in the assaying of precious metals.
23. See Ernest Patty, “The Airplane’s Aid to Alaskan Mining,” Mining
and Metallurgy 18, no. 362 (1937): 92–94. For a general history of
mining in the Copper Basin, refer to William Hunt, Mountain Wilder-
ness: Historical Resource Study for the Wrangell-St. Elias National
Park and Preserve (Anchorage: National Park Service, 1991).
24. Indicating the improved conditions for precious-metal mining, the
number of mines producing gold and silver in the United States
rose from approximately 1,200 placer and 2,000 lode operations in
1929 to, respectively, 7,400 and 4,650 in 1935, with gold produc-
tion rising from 689,403 fine ounces to 3,222,116 fine ounces. J. P.
Dunlop, “Gold and Silver” in Minerals Yearbook 1930 (Washing-
ton, DC: GPO, 1933), 817, 827, and “Gold and Silver” in Statisti-
cal Appendix to Minerals Yearbook 1935 (Washington, DC: GPO,
1936), 337; Chas. W. Henderson and J. P. Dunlop, “Gold and Sil-
ver” in Minerals Yearbook 1936 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1936),
92. See also Charles W. Miller, The Automobile Gold Rushes and
Depression Era Mining (Moscow: Univ. of Idaho Press, 1998).
25. J. C. Roehm, “Preliminary Report of the Bremner Mining Com-
pany, Hanagita-Bremner Mining District,” Alaska Territorial
Department of Mines Property Examination 87-3 (1936), Bureau of
Land Management, Alaska Resources Library, Anchorage, PE 87-
3.
26. Higher metal prices and the ability to reduce gold ore to bullion
cheaply were likely factors behind a noted trend that gold-mining
operations tended to construct milling plants earlier in mine devel-
opment than the mining of base metals. E. D. Gardner and C. H.
Johnson, “Mining and Milling Practices at Small Gold Mines,”
U.S. Bureau of Mines Information Circular 6800 (Washington, DC:
GPO, 1934), 4. The cost of milling equipment at the Lucky Girl
mill is provided in “Yellow Band Gold Mines, Inc. Balance Sheet,
31 December 1939,” MS 36-1-10-8, Asa C. Baldwin Papers, c.
1907–1942, Alaska State Library, Juneau (hereafter cited as Bald-
win Papers).
27. A number of gold-recovery methods more efficient than amalga-
mation and gravity concentration were in existence by the 1930s.
Flotation and cyanidation, for instance, were both capable of
working poorer, more refractory ores. Amalgamation and gravity
concentration methods nevertheless remained popular among
small-scale operators for several reasons. For one, small-scale
mines tended to work less-complex deposits, to which these tech-
niques were best suited. These methods were also comparatively
cheaper, required fewer man-hours to operate, and could be run by
less-skilled operators—of particular benefit to smaller operations
where labor resources were often limited. Refer to Gardner and
Johnson, “Mining and Milling,” 19–28 (see n. 26).
28. The arrangement of the milling circuit derives from field observa-
tions and a detailed description in Roehm, “Preliminary Report,” 4
(see n. 25).
29. J. C. Roehm, “Investigations: McCarthy, Nizina River, Bremner
HEADS, TAILS, AND DECISIONS IN-BETWEEN
and Chisana Mining Districts: Summary Report and Itinerary of
J. C. Roehm,” Alaska Territorial Department of Mines Itinerary
Report 195-14, p. 8 (1936) Bureau of Land Management, Alaska
Resources Library, Anchorage.
30. Fred Moffit, “The Lower Copper River Basin, Alaska: The Taral
and Bremner Districts, The Chitina District,” U.S. Geological Sur-
vey Bulletin 520-C (Washington, DC: GPO, 1912), 10, and “Geol-
ogy of the Hanagita-Bremner Region, Alaska,” U.S. Geological
Survey Bulletin 576 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1914).
31. Asa Baldwin, “Yellow Band Gold Prospect, Golconda Creek,
Bremner District, Alaska” (1935), and “To the Unitholders [sic] in
Yellow Band Gold Option,” MS 36-1-10, items 1 and 3, Baldwin
Papers, 10 March 1937, p. 2; Fred Moffit, “Recent Mineral Devel-
opments in the Copper River Region,” U.S. Geological Survey Bul-
letin 880-B (Washington, DC: GPO, 1937).
32. The Sheriff claims were formerly known as the “Nelson Prospect,”
but the name evidently changed upon its acquisition by Yellow
Band Gold Mines. Asa Baldwin, “Notice of Special Meeting of
Stockholders” (1938), and “Yellow Band Gold Mines, Inc. Presi-
dent’s First Annual Report to Stockholders” (1938), MS 36-1-10,
items 4 and 5, Baldwin Papers.
33. Asa Baldwin, “Journal of the Yellow Band Gold Mine, 1940-41,”
entry 4 July 1941, MS 36-1-2-4, Baldwin Papers.
34. Baldwin, “Yellow Band,” (see n. 32); Asa Baldwin, “Annual Report
1939” and “Annual Report 1940,” MS 36-1-10, items 7 and 9,
Baldwin Papers.
35. The contract for Yellow Band, rewritten just prior to the purchase
of the Bremner Gold Mining Company holdings, allowed the
Baldwin to pay royalties of 25 percent to the original claim-hold-
ers for any ore from the Yellow Band taken to the mill, with a min-
imum cash payment of $1,500. Baldwin, “Yellow Band,” 2, 6 (see
n. 32).
36. Asa Baldwin, “Assay Map, Sheriff Claims, Yellow Band Gold
Mines, Inc., Golconda Creek, Alaska,” MS 36-1-8-28, Baldwin
Papers.
37. Baldwin, “Annual Report 1939,” 4 (see n. 34); Baldwin, “Journal,”
entry 4 October 1941 (see n. 33).
38. Baldwin, “Journal,” entry 23 July 1941 (see n. 33). The Bremner
Gold Mining Company may also have suffered a similar problem
with the concentration circuit, mine inspector J. C. Roehm noting,
“Very little concentrate is collected on the [Wilfley] table since
most of the mineralization is oxidized and passes off in the tails.”
Roehm, “Preliminary Report” (see n. 25).
39. Asa Baldwin, “Annual Report 1941,” 3–4, MS 36-1-10-11, Baldwin
Papers; also “Journal,” entries 30 April to 1 June 1941 (n. 33).
40. C. E. Needham, “Gold and Silver,” Minerals Yearbook 1942
(Washington, DC: GPO, 1944), 80–81.
41. Claude Stewart to Mrs. Asa C. Baldwin, 10 November 1946, 15
March 1948; and Paul Fretzs to C. F. Taplin Jr., 9 January 1960,
MS 36-1-11, items 13, 16, 18, Baldwin Papers.
42. Paul Fretzs to Sylvia (Baldwin) Johnson, 26 March 1975, 17 April
1978, MS 36-1-11, items 22 and 24, Baldwin Papers.
43. For a complete description of sample methodology, sample size,
and analytical techniques, refer to Robert G. Eppinger, Paul H.
Briggs, Danny Rosenkrans, Vannesa Ballestrazze, José Aldir, Z. A.
Brown, J. G. Crock, W. M. d’Angelo, M. W. Doughten, D. L. Fey,
P. L. Hageman, R. T. Hopkins, R. J. Knight, M. J. Malcolm, J. B.
McHugh, A. L. Meier, J. M. Motooka, R. M. O’Leary, B. H.
Roushey, S. J. Sutley, P. M. Theodorakos, and S. A. Wilson, “Geo-
chemical Data for Environmental Studies of Mineral Deposits at
Nabesna, Kennecott, Orange Hill, Bond Creek, Bremner, and
65
INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY
Gold Hill, Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve,
Alaska,” U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-342 (Wash-
ington, DC: GPO, 1999); Eppinger et al., “Environmental Geo-
chemical” (see n. 13).
44. For testing methodology, refer to Eppinger et al., “Geochemical
Data,” 8–9 ( n. 43).
45. These techniques come with different methods. Laboratory analy-
sis employed ICP-AES using total digestion and 10-element partial
extraction, and trace- and major-element scan methods, cold-
vapor AAS for mercury, and graphite-furnace AAS for determin-
ing gold concentrations. For a fuller description of these tech-
niques and other analytical techniques employed, see Eppinger et
al., “Geochemical Data,” 10–13 (n. 43).
46. Geochemical studies at other sites indicate that leachate tests do
approximate the initial waters flowing from waste piles prior to
their dilution by adjacent streams. Eppinger et al., “Environmental
Geochemical,” 34 (see n. 13). For a detailed description of the
leaching methodology employed, refer to Eppinger et al., “Geo-
chemical Data,” 10 (n. 43).
47. Eppinger et al., “Environmental Geochemical,” 15 (see n. 13).
48. The preservation of milling equipment and mill floors indicates
that it is unlikely that these boulders derived solely from slide
debris but probably resulted from the blasting necessary during the
mill’s construction (c. 1934). In all probability, a second launder
dumped tailings southeast of the mill foundation—an area still
covered with slide debris.
49. SGS Minerals Services, Toronto (the same lab contracted to ana-
lyze USGS samples collected in 1996), performed 40-element ICP-
AES total digestion and cold-vapor AAS for tailings samples col-
lected in 2001. Tailings and other samples from the 2001 season
were also analyzed using MacMillian Hall Environmental Chem-
istry facilities at Brown University. Here, ICP-AES analysis was
performed on a JY2000 Ultrace ICP Atomic Emission Spectrome-
ter, and XRF on a Philips PW 1480 wavelength dispersive sequen-
tial diffractometer, controlled by Phillips X40 4i software, and with
data reduction by UniQuant 5 software.
50. Roehm, “Preliminary Report,” 7 (see n. 25); Moffit, “Lower Cop-
per River,” 10–11 (see n. 30).
51. Eppinger et al., “Geochemical Data,” CD Rom data files; Rock
Samples, sample field nos. 6BR002R, 6BR003R1, 6BR010R,
6BR012R, 6BR014R1 (see n. 43).
52. Percentage based on dry sample weight.
53. Eppinger et al., “Geochemical Data,” CD Rom data files; Heavy
Mineral Concentrate, sample field no. 6BR002C2 (see n. 43). Sig-
nificant gold (100 ppm) was found in the concentrates using an
alternative sampling methodology, in which a large sample
(approximately 16 pounds) was hand panned, sieved, and further
concentrated to leave only heavy nonmetallic concentrates. By
boosting gold values, this qualitative technique may facilitate the
identification of some metal phases under microscopic techniques.
66
VOLUME 29, NUMBER 2, 2003
54. Some operators chose to introduce mercury into the ball mill
under the rubric that it was best to extract gold as early in the cir-
cuit as possible. The downside of this practice was that, unlike
stamp batteries, cleaning out the ball mill was an involved process,
and it also increased the danger of mercury loss by “flouring”
(refer to Gardner and Johnson, “Mining and Milling,” 22 [n. 26]).
According to diary entries, Baldwin recovered 1/2-ounce worth of
amalgam “pellets” from under the ball mill liners in the 1941 sea-
son (“Journal,” entry 10 October 1941) and gold recovery from the
ball mill is suggested also in the previous year (“Journal,” entries
15–18 October 1940) (see n. 33). That both cleanups occurred at
the end of the milling season and recovered only a small amount
of amalgam suggests that mercury in the ball mill came only from
the reintroduction of table concentrates.
55. As an element approaches minimum detection limits, the signa-
tures of other elements in the sample can cause instruments to
read higher values.
56. Averages taken from Taggart, Handbook, 960 (see n. 8); Richards
and Locke, Textbook, 65 (see n. 11); M. W. Von Bernewitz, Hand-
book for Prospectors and Operators of Small Mines, 4th ed. (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1943), 395. Taggart directly states average
losses in troy ounces per ton. The other estimates, which are
higher, state only ounces per ton (for an explanation of troy
ounces, see n. 22). In converting these numbers to ppm, I conserv-
atively took all textbook estimates to be in troy ounces per ton.
57. Arsenic induces the formation of a black film over the mercury,
preventing it from alloying with gold. Charles F. Jackson and John
B. Knaebel, “Gold Mining and Milling in the United States and
Canada: Current Practices and Costs,” U.S. Geological Survey Bul-
letin 363 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1932), 106.
58. Particle size does not rule out the possibility that the Bremner
Gold Mining Company also experimented with grinding sizes.
59. State of California et al., Abandoned Mine Lands, Appendix D and
E (see n. 14).