The hidden value in out-of-print geological monographs

When we study history we obtain a more profound insight into human nature by instituting a comparison between the present and former states of society.

– Charles Lyell, Principles of Geology (1832).

Introduction

This post is a letter I wrote in 2017 to the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) after I discovered that not all of AusIMM's old monographs are available as PDFs on their members' website. For example, a document one reviewer once referred to as a magnum opus (masterpiece)—the inaugural edition of the Geology of Australian Ore Deposits (1953)—is unavailable online as a PDF on OneMine. My letter was edited and published as a Viewpoint article as part of AusIMM’s 125-year anniversary (AusIMM Bulletin, April 2018). I reproduce the article here with the addition of illustrations from textbooks and monographs listed at the end of this post.

I know what many of you may be thinking—why bother, as these books are all well and truly outdated. But are you sure about that? I assumed that too, but I’ve changed my mind after reading through some of these classic monographs. They are a treasure trove of useful information that we can still use today. Many are detailed geological descriptions of mines that have long closed down.

Take a good look at the figures in this post. There are structural observations that are few in number but are critical to the understanding of the mineral deposit. These geologists didn't need millions of automated multidimensional data points gathered from down-hole probes or autonomous drones to come up with a good understanding of a mineral deposit. The isometric drawings in these monographs from more than 70 years ago are as good, if not better than, any 3D geological models created using the most up-to-date computer software that I’ve seen recently in NI43-101 technical reports. That's because geologists who worked in the mining industry in the first half of the 1900s were very familiar with practical structural geological techniques—a skill that is unfortunately not very common in 2018. These figures show that a suitably trained geologist can visualise the 3D configuration of a mineral deposit and its structural controls without the aid of fancy software or hardware.

There is much to be learned from these so-called ‘outdated’ publications. I would like to hear from anyone who has valuable monographs and is interested in pooling our resources together so as to disseminate these valuable documents to of geologists of all generations in the mining industry.

This is my letter to the AusIMM:

---

I have recently been thinking about the wealth of value contained in old, out-of-print industry monographs, and want to explain the importance of why I think these volumes should be readily available to all geologists and other resources professionals. 

It is perfectly understandable that people assume that new and more recent work on any field of expertise is better than 100 years ago. There is a naturally assumed progression of improvement in any industry. We are living better more efficient lives now, we must be doing things better, so we must be doing things right in mining as well. This is likely the reason why the AusIMM had not scanned older ‘outdated’ volumes where there are younger versions of the same book available.

But a natural progression of improvement is still an assumption.

Quite often an ‘improvement’ is no different to how dish detergents are sold to the mass market. Detergents are regularly revamped as a 'new and improved', but the new product is nothing more than a watered-down version of the previous liquid sold in a smaller bottle with a marked up price.

When it comes to the geological analysis of ore deposits, I have come to the surprising conclusion that this assumption of progressive improvement may not actually apply. There has been a slow, 180-degree shift over the last 70 years in the way geologists analyse ore deposits. Prior to the 1950s, geologists in the industry were very careful about the structural geological analysis of deposits. This importance of structural analysis is reflected in the title of a CIM volume first published in 1948, Structural Geology of Canadian Ore Deposits, Volume 1.  A search of literature between 1900 and 1950s certainly supports this trend.

But by 1957 focus on structural geological issues was already slipping, judging by the quality of the 1957 second volume of the above CIM publication (Structural Geology of Canadian Ore Deposits, Volume 2) compared to the original 1948 volume. There are historical reasons for this progressive shift from about 1960 that could be an article in itself, but there has been a clear progressive decline in the knowledge of ore geology and the quality of the descriptions of deposits. This is particularly true when it comes to the structural nature of the deposits, which is absolutely critical for exploration and exploitation of mineral deposits.

A review of AB Edward’s Geology of Australian Ore Deposits monograph (published by the AusIMM in 1953), which appeared after the first CIM volume, also strongly emphasised structural controls of mineral deposits. Special emphasis is made on the structural control of each deposit, but sadly this is not standard practice in the mining industry today.

The conclusion I have drawn is that roughly 100-70 years ago geologists who were working in the mining industry were competent in structural geology. In 2017 the importance of structural geology, which is the primary control of all ore deposits, is all but forgotten, and instead, theoretical ore deposit models have taken over the basic observations that should be made at each deposit by geologists. Many modern geologists do not know what to measure in an ore deposit and how to analyse the data once obtained. Many geostatisticians today do not have to have any knowledge or training in very basic geological principles; therefore, I am not surprised at all why we are seeing massive resource downgrades, such as Rubicon Minerals Corp downgrading its gold reserves by 88 percent at the Phoenix gold project in Canada in 2016. With progressive improvements in analytical methods, the industry should be better off, but the fact is we’re not, and that is the paradox the mining industry is facing in the new century.

The answer to this very serious problem, I believe, actually lies in the old, out-of-print publications and the descriptions of careful observations and methods utilised in the past. This is literature that is completely ignored by most geologists who are practicing in the mining industry today. The industry as a whole has effectively forgotten about how things were done, because no one is living from this era; yet the key observations and important methodologies are recorded carefully in these volumes.

Sadly, the fact the modern world has converted primarily to electronic copies of articles means that only a handful of geologists would actually source the out-of-print journals and books to seek out information. And the lack of electronic access to these old publications means that we are getting more ignorant as time goes by. As an industry, we have a completely biased understanding of what is ‘best practice’. There had been many important publications in the early 1900s published in mining and metallurgical societies around the world, and these are very difficult to obtain now, but I firmly believe they should be scanned and made available for free to all professionals. To me, they are more valuable than modern publications because they outlined techniques that we no longer do as a matter of routine. There is a treasure trove of information that was published in old, out-of-print monographs, and it is time we as a community make an effort to make these books freely available so that anyone can benefit from reading the articles. They are a fascinating read, and I believe these books should be circulated as widely as possible. I would like to write and compare/contrast old techniques and approaches with the modern, and start a conversation about these old methods, but without free access to these old monographs, we cannot have a fruitful dialogue. The first step would be to resurrect these monographs as PDF copies for online distribution.

I am sure there are others like me who are keen to provide self-scanned versions of old books that we have in our personal collections, but I also think it is vital that they are distributed as widely as possible without any barrier to access.

---

Jun Cowan, PhD, is a director and principal structural geologist of consulting firm Orefind, and the conceptual founder of Leapfrog geological modelling software. He holds an Adjunct Senior Research Fellow position at the School of Geosciences, Monash University.

Based in Fremantle, Western Australia, Orefind is a geological consulting company founded by structural geologists Brett Davis and Jun Cowan. Visit www.orefind.com for more information. This post, and many more like this, can be found on the Orefind website.

Please share and/or 'like' this article if you found it interesting. Constructive feedback is always appreciated.

References

Bateman, A. M., 1942, Economic Mineral Deposits. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York. 898 pp.

Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1948, Structural geology of Canadian Ore Deposits, A symposium arranged by a Committee of the Geology Division, Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. 948pp.

Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1957, Structural geology of Canadian Ore Deposits, A symposium arranged by a Committee of the Geology Division, Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. 524pp.

Cowan, E.J., 2018, The hidden value in out-of-print monographs. AusIMM Bulletin, April 2018, p52-53.

Newhouse, W.H., (Ed), 1942, Ore Deposits as Related to Structural Features. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 280pp.