Fremont District
Deposit type & geology
Contact-metasomatic (skarn) deposits associated with small felsite bodies differentiated from larger porphyry intrusions, plus polymetallic veins.
Not independently detailed this session — Little Hatchet Mountains.
Age: Not independently confirmed this session.
Structural geology & terrain
Vein/structure orientation: Not independently detailed this session
Named controlling structure: Not independently confirmed this session
Elevation range: Not independently confirmed this session
Little Hatchet Mountains, bootheel desert terrain.
High-resolution terrain
~6 m/pixel lidar-derived hillshade (USGS 3DEP) — fine enough to reveal old mine workings, waste-rock piles, trenches, and roads the statewide terrain layer can’t show. Toggling to a different district turns this off.
Historical production
Not itemized for gold in any source found; district-wide commodities include gold and stratabound sedimentary copper. District established 1860; MRDS records include the Eagle, International, Barnett, and Daisy mines/prospects, mostly lead-silver with byproduct copper and gold.
Sources: NMBGMR RM-24 (McLemore, DIS078, citing North and McLemore 1986); USGS MRDS (Eagle, International, Barnett, Daisy mine records); Mindat (Fremont Mining District) researched — see sources
Current status
Historic producer; current status not independently verified this session — flagged for follow-up, same as several of this map's lower-depth entries.
Recency not verified
Current claim/permit status was not independently researched this session.
Land ownership & directions
Land ownership for this district was not independently confirmed in this session's research — verify directly before relying on it.
Little Hatchet Mountains, Hidalgo County bootheel — not independently confirmed this session. Southwest Hidalgo County, adjacent to the Eureka district.
See specimen photos (mindat.org) → — this app doesn’t host specimen photos itself; this searches mindat.org’s own mineral-specimen database, which isn’t necessarily specific to this exact district.
This pin is a generalized district/historic-site reference point, not a surveyed claim boundary — routes may cross private or patented inholdings where public access isn’t guaranteed even if a road reaches the site. Backcountry mine areas commonly have unmarked shafts, unstable ground, and no cell service; confirm current access and safety conditions (land manager, county, or landowner) before heading out.
Tailings reprocessing potential
Historic processing method and mill scale not established in the sources reviewed this session.
This is a documentary heuristic, not assay data.The tier above is inferred from historic production era, processing method, and ore character already cited elsewhere on this page — nobody has sampled or assayed this district’s tailings as part of this research. Actual recoverable gold content can only be established by physical sampling.
Reprocessing tailings is regulated mining. Disturbing or reprocessing historic mill waste requires the same NM Mining Act permitting as new mining (see the regulatory companion guide), regardless of who currently holds the claim or surface rights — and ownership of the tailings material itself is a separate legal question from mineral rights on the underlying land.
Legacy tailings can be hazardous. Pre-modern processing commonly used mercury (amalgamation) or cyanide (heap leach), and can carry elevated arsenic and other heavy metals — not a casual sampling target, and disturbing contaminated material can carry real environmental liability.
Geologist’s read
Added this session after an MRDS spatial sweep independently flagged it, immediately adjacent to the Eureka district in the bootheel — the two are geologically related (both skarn/contact-metasomatic systems in the Little Hatchet Mountains) but formally distinct MRDS districts. Like Eureka, this entry has much less research depth than the original 31 districts.