Just as minerals may be grouped by provinces, they may be grouped by geologic ages. Such groupings are especially useful in the case of minerals which are closely related to certain stratigraphic horizons, such as coal, oil, and iron. The greater number of the productive coal deposits of the United States are of Carboniferous age, and the distribution of sediments of this age is pretty well understood from general geologic mapping. The Clinton iron ores all follow one general horizon in the lower-middle Paleozoic. The Lake Superior iron ores are pre-Cambrian, and over three-fourths of them occur at one horizon in the pre-Cambrian. Gold deposits of the United States were formed mainly in the pre-Cambrian, the early Cretaceous, and the Tertiary. Copper deposits of the United States were formed chiefly in pre-Cambrian, Cretaceous, and Tertiary time. While there are many exceptions and modifications to general classifications of this sort, they seem to express essential geologic facts which can be made very useful in localizing exploration. CLASSIFICATION OF MINERAL LANDS In recent years there has been considerable development of the practice of classifying mineral lands in given areas for purposes of exploration and valuation, or for purposes of formulation and administration of government laws. This has been done both by private interests and by the government. These classifications take into account all of the geologic and economic factors ascertainable. The classes of mineral land designated vary with the mineral, the district, and the purpose for which the classification is made. Common procedure for commercial exploration purposes is to divide the lands of a given territory into three groups--(1) lands which are definitely promising for mineral exploration, (2) lands of doubtful possibilities, and (3) lands in which the mineral possibilities are so slight that they may be excluded from practical consideration. Each of these classes may be subdivided for special purposes. Another commonly used classification is, (1) proved mineral lands, (2) probable mineral lands, usually adjacent to producing mines, (3) possible mineral lands, and (4) commercially unpromising mineral lands. The classification of the public mineral lands by government agencies is fully discussed by George Otis Smith and others in a bulletin of the United States Geological Survey.[37] The purposes, methods, and results of this classification should be familiar to every explorer. Nowhere else is there available such a vast body of information of practical value. Quoting from this report: