This occurrence deals with placer mining on part of the Liard River, carried out in the 1870s and possibly at undocumented times later. The location is approximate, based on descriptions in early reports of the Ministry and the Geological Survey of Canada, and on the position of old placer mineral leases along a several-kilometre long stretch of the Liard River. This stretch is about halfway between the settlement of Coal River on the Alaska Highway and the mouth of the Smith River, the site of the former Hudson's Bay Company trading post at Fort Halkett (Minister of Mines Annual Report 1874, 1897; Geological Survey of Canada Paper 44-28, page 27; Bulletin 28, Figure 2, site 41).

Gold was discovered on bars of the Liard River at this location in 1871 or 1872 (Geological Survey of Canada Summary Report 1925, Part A). The main site became known as McCullough's (or McCulloch's) Bar, after the main discoverer. The location of this particular bar is not clear, but the map coordinates given are on a bar which is likely at or within a few kilometres of the principal discovery. In subsequent years, miners worked this and other bars along this stretch of the river. The gold was "as fine as flour", and was collected by means of mercury (Minister of Mines Annual Report 1874). There is also a reference to workings at another gold-bearing bar on the river 25 kilometres to the west, at the mouth of the Rabbit River (Minister of Mines Annual Report 1897).

The amount of gold recovered from McCullough's Bar is not known, as apparently the numbers were combined with production from the Dease Lake and Cassiar placer mining districts which were also being developed at this time. However, one account stated that the bar "pays per day to the rocker from one to three ounces", or 34 to 103 grams (Minister of Mines Annual Report 1874). Another record suggests that the Liard River produced a total of 48,720 grams, but it is not clear if all this came from McCullough's Bar (Bulletin 28, page 57 and Figure 2, site 41). Overall, the site proved to be of little value at the time, at least compared with the richer Dease Lake area (Geological Survey of Canada Summary Report 1925, Part A).