Rosedale
Deposit type & geology
Volcanic-epithermal gold-silver veins.
Not independently detailed this session — San Mateo Mountains volcanic terrane.
Age: Not independently confirmed this session.
Structural geology & terrain
Vein/structure orientation: Rosedale vein N20°W–N10°W/70–90°W, 1–15 m wide, 7,500 ft long; Bell vein parallel
Named controlling structure: Rosedale Fault and Bell Fault (both named)
Elevation range: 7,250 ft
San Mateo Mountains foothills, Cibola National Forest, semi-arid; ephemeral drainage hampered historic placer mining.
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.
Historical production
~28,000 oz Au estimated / 13,276–27,750 oz reported (figures vary by source), 1882–1981 (NMBGMR Resource Map 24; Circular 5 separately estimates ~$500,000 in gold, with no placer production). Discovered 1882, active mainly in the 1890s–1916.
Sources: NMBGMR Circular 5; NMBGMR Resource Map 24; NMGS Guidebook 72 (McLemore, cited, not independently read) researched — see sources
Current status
Historic lode producer; current status not independently verified this session — flagged for follow-up.
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.
Not independently confirmed this session. San Mateo Mountains, Socorro County (approximate location).
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
One of four confirmed significant gaps from this session's completeness audit — cross-verified across three independent sources (Circular 5, NMGS Guidebook 72, NMBGMR Resource Map 24) but not yet researched to the same depth as the original 19 districts.