Twapster
Peter
Awesome info!
Peter
Peter
Reefs and diggings - where to look
- Thread starter loamer
- Start date
Help Support Prospecting Australia:
Thanks loamer for sharing your hard won info it is greatly appreciated. Learning more and more each day.
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2013
- Messages
- 10
- Reaction score
- 3
I am new to prospecting and found this thread the most informative information I have read so far. Thanks
Ben78
Ben
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2013
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 278
Loamer, got a bit of a question...
I was out today and came across a different type of diggings for my area. The diggings are similar to what I saw at Hargreaves.
I have roughed out a map of the area
I am going to conclude that the 'diggings' downstream from the hydraulic area was done by gold prospectors but I am not sure what they were trying to achieve. Dotted around the area is numerous shallow holes about a metre deep, maybe a metre by 2 metres, some smaller. There is always a mound of dirt on the downhill side.
Just trying to find out what they were trying to do? Surely if there was gold there the whole area would be dug up not just dotted holes around?
I was out today and came across a different type of diggings for my area. The diggings are similar to what I saw at Hargreaves.
I have roughed out a map of the area
I am going to conclude that the 'diggings' downstream from the hydraulic area was done by gold prospectors but I am not sure what they were trying to achieve. Dotted around the area is numerous shallow holes about a metre deep, maybe a metre by 2 metres, some smaller. There is always a mound of dirt on the downhill side.
Just trying to find out what they were trying to do? Surely if there was gold there the whole area would be dug up not just dotted holes around?
this stuff is wikkid!
i must admit every second day for the last 3 weeks me and the girl have been going out swinging and going all over the place with our detector....needless to say...nothing yet for a solid 25 hours.
we must get some rhyme and rhythm going to our searching techniques and loamer's post at the beginning is totally awesome, thanks so much for sharing
now to practice this on saturday...anyone heading to dunolly?
cheers
Laurie
i must admit every second day for the last 3 weeks me and the girl have been going out swinging and going all over the place with our detector....needless to say...nothing yet for a solid 25 hours.
we must get some rhyme and rhythm going to our searching techniques and loamer's post at the beginning is totally awesome, thanks so much for sharing
now to practice this on saturday...anyone heading to dunolly?
cheers
Laurie
Hi Ben - Firstly - why dirt downslope from shallow diggings. Picture you are digging on a slope - you hit the wash where you suspect the gold is - you would place it on the downhill slope because that's the way you are going to take it out to be washed. Also, it is more unlikely to fall back-in the hole if downhill.
I notice the 1080 contour line and below leads down towards the lower ground and then it becomes clear. The sluicing is on the lower ground, heading down the gully away from the diggings - as can be seen by the creek-line. Also notice they concentrated around where two creeks met, always a good sign. It would appear that the sequence was in that specific sluiced area there was gold, most likely smallish. I have no doubt that the area they sluiced was the most productive. The smaller holes are one of two things or even both - they have loamed, that is tested back up the hill in order to find the primary source.
This is a very good map, and I'm glad you showed the contour lines - it makes it that much easier to decipher. So, sluicing in the lower ground with attempts made to follow up the source on the higher ground. If the area is renowned for fine gold then that's what they were after. I can give you an almost identical area around Dunolly Victoria where the bottom of the gully is sluiced in a very specific area, about 10 metres by 100 metres and then no more. The higher you walk up the gully, there are test holes where the old timers were searching for the source. What eventually happened is they realised that the run was not linear, that is a definite start point at the head but rather the source was at almost 90 degrees either side of the sluiced area. It was coming down the slopes at the sides.
The higher ground to the sides may be worth a methodical search but across the slope, not straight up and down. That way you can cut across any runs. I would be looking for any noticeable runs of wash down the slopes. I'm not sure of your ground but quartz, ironstone, red clay type soil. I would tend to look for the gentler slopes and look for natural traps, flat spots etc. If you can get a geo map of the area, look for dykes, faults, intrusions (down here granite intrusions are an excellent sign). Faults are usually marked with what looks like an arrow with a cross and some numbers. I would also look for any signs at all of slate, we look for blueish greenish slate generally.
hope this helps but excellent map and observations. this is what I do a lot and then ask myself 'so what?', 'what were they looking for'. I always think - OK - it was perhaps uneconomical for the old boys but not for us. they had to get an ounce a week to survive.
I notice the 1080 contour line and below leads down towards the lower ground and then it becomes clear. The sluicing is on the lower ground, heading down the gully away from the diggings - as can be seen by the creek-line. Also notice they concentrated around where two creeks met, always a good sign. It would appear that the sequence was in that specific sluiced area there was gold, most likely smallish. I have no doubt that the area they sluiced was the most productive. The smaller holes are one of two things or even both - they have loamed, that is tested back up the hill in order to find the primary source.
This is a very good map, and I'm glad you showed the contour lines - it makes it that much easier to decipher. So, sluicing in the lower ground with attempts made to follow up the source on the higher ground. If the area is renowned for fine gold then that's what they were after. I can give you an almost identical area around Dunolly Victoria where the bottom of the gully is sluiced in a very specific area, about 10 metres by 100 metres and then no more. The higher you walk up the gully, there are test holes where the old timers were searching for the source. What eventually happened is they realised that the run was not linear, that is a definite start point at the head but rather the source was at almost 90 degrees either side of the sluiced area. It was coming down the slopes at the sides.
The higher ground to the sides may be worth a methodical search but across the slope, not straight up and down. That way you can cut across any runs. I would be looking for any noticeable runs of wash down the slopes. I'm not sure of your ground but quartz, ironstone, red clay type soil. I would tend to look for the gentler slopes and look for natural traps, flat spots etc. If you can get a geo map of the area, look for dykes, faults, intrusions (down here granite intrusions are an excellent sign). Faults are usually marked with what looks like an arrow with a cross and some numbers. I would also look for any signs at all of slate, we look for blueish greenish slate generally.
hope this helps but excellent map and observations. this is what I do a lot and then ask myself 'so what?', 'what were they looking for'. I always think - OK - it was perhaps uneconomical for the old boys but not for us. they had to get an ounce a week to survive.
Ben78
Ben
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2013
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 278
Ok, so just because there is holes doesn't mean they got gold there? In the gully itself there is the stone cobble piles I associate with sluicing operations.
The 'bedrock' in this area is two things - mud and siltstones that mark the bedrock from the tertiary period alluvial deposits which were then capped with basalt. The bedrock I have been working is the siltstone slates. The topsoil is mostly a powdery clay like material with occasional broken siltstone and rounded alluvial cobble. I have not been able to find any 'runs' of cobble - but I assume all those were found and worked long ago.
I am getting much rubbish that I associate with diggers - ie boot tacks, bullets and shot and old square type nails. Also got a button couple of weeks ago which was a surprise.
I think I'll concentrate on the area between the loaming in the gully and the basalt cap of the deep lead mines. That and further down into the gully. Not much further down from the topo the gully drops off the edge, extremely difficult to detect but there is the odd 'bench' - I assume in the steeper areas any bench is a good place to start?
Ben
The 'bedrock' in this area is two things - mud and siltstones that mark the bedrock from the tertiary period alluvial deposits which were then capped with basalt. The bedrock I have been working is the siltstone slates. The topsoil is mostly a powdery clay like material with occasional broken siltstone and rounded alluvial cobble. I have not been able to find any 'runs' of cobble - but I assume all those were found and worked long ago.
I am getting much rubbish that I associate with diggers - ie boot tacks, bullets and shot and old square type nails. Also got a button couple of weeks ago which was a surprise.
I think I'll concentrate on the area between the loaming in the gully and the basalt cap of the deep lead mines. That and further down into the gully. Not much further down from the topo the gully drops off the edge, extremely difficult to detect but there is the odd 'bench' - I assume in the steeper areas any bench is a good place to start?
Ben
Yes mate - the bench/flat spots should at least hold any gold up. The cobbles suggest deep leads as you say. It sounds like a ripper area - like the sound of the slates and the basalt intrusion. A bit of a rule of thumb - steep means faster erosion. I sounds like the old timers did a lot of work in the area. You say deep leads - am I to assume its fine alluvial and smallish water worn nugs?
Ben78
Ben
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2013
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 278
two that I have found
I have been told that this is typical of the gold found in the area. Although the occasional oz+ piece shows up. Largest piece I have found reference to on Trove is an 8lb nugget, I for one wouldn't complain if I found a piece a tenth that size!
The old timers did a lot of work in the area, kilometres of channels were cut to move water around the fields for the hydraulic set ups and sluicing of the wash. One of the adits ran 600m under the cap to get to the lead!
I have been told that this is typical of the gold found in the area. Although the occasional oz+ piece shows up. Largest piece I have found reference to on Trove is an 8lb nugget, I for one wouldn't complain if I found a piece a tenth that size!
The old timers did a lot of work in the area, kilometres of channels were cut to move water around the fields for the hydraulic set ups and sluicing of the wash. One of the adits ran 600m under the cap to get to the lead!
WalnLiz
Wal nLiz
Nice clean looking nugs there Ben. I'm sure that if an 8lb nug was found in the old days some great little chunks are still waiting for a dedicated coil to hover above them. Lets hope it's your coil mate,
Cheers Wal.
Cheers Wal.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 177
- Reaction score
- 66
Thanks for the solid info Loamer! reading the bush right will help heaps.
Similar threads
