alluvial gold

Prospecting Australia

Help Support Prospecting Australia:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
absolutely old rivers leave bench deposits in gullies and if a second source has also deposited gold on that bench from orogeny you have both right there. once eluvial has been moved by water its alluvial.
 
shivan said:
G'day Ben from my understanding, If gold was getting eroded from it source and traveling (eluvial) down the mountain/hills into a creek (alluvial), then at that point you would find both alluvial and eluvial gold.
A place a lot of us would love to come across :D

spot on mate, we have a spot like that here, if you're even in the GT checkout Hepburn / daylesford, the reefs are many so on one creek the only one it intersects maybe 25 reefs that were all payable and mined. so many paths and benches around the area you can get both easily. even if small its just a great place to prospect, goat country for sure :)
 
AussieGamer_Ben said:
G0lddigg@ said:
Easy way to remember the difference between alluvial and eluvial. Is a =aqua and e = erosion

so u can get alluvial and eluvial in the one place
Hi Ben there are several areas local to you (or reasonably local) where you can find examples of both alluvial & eluvial gold. Hill End probably being the main one. There is still gold that has shed from reefs or the broken quartz/host rock from reefs (which is eluvial in it's own right) or still found as specimen gold in quartz/ironstone/country rock on hills/slopes leading down to watercourses. Mostly (or entirely maybe) the sources have been discovered & exploited long ago though but some eluvial gold still remains to be found. There is also alluvial gold to be found in the creeks & other minor waterways sometimes in very close proximity together. Some areas of Hargraves are another local spot where you can see/find this off the top of my head. There would be plenty of other examples too. In some spots I've detected you can find some really reefy/prickly looking stuff or even speccis then work into a nearby gully or creek & the gold changes to flatter, smooth gold or vice versa.
I think every prospectors dream would be to find the alluvial type gold in a virgin area then start finding the more eluvial type leading up to a possible source. It would get the heart pumping but that type of prospecting can be very intensive & time consuming involving research, sampling, loaming etc. & even trenching or costeaning in an effort to intersect the source. Not something that the average hobbyist can do on public land on their weekends off.
We are lucky to live close to a fairly rich & diverse gold bearing area even if the old buggers pinched most of it :lol: There's some interesting areas here & some good spots to get your head around how all these things fit together.
 
mbasko said:
AussieGamer_Ben said:
G0lddigg@ said:
Easy way to remember the difference between alluvial and eluvial. Is a =aqua and e = erosion

so u can get alluvial and eluvial in the one place
Hi Ben there are several areas local to you (or reasonably local) where you can find examples of both alluvial & eluvial gold. Hill End probably being the main one. There is still gold that has shed from reefs or the broken quartz/host rock from reefs (which is eluvial in it's own right) or still found as specimen gold in quartz/ironstone/country rock on hills/slopes leading down to watercourses. Mostly (or entirely maybe) the sources have been discovered & exploited long ago though but some eluvial gold still remains to be found. There is also alluvial gold to be found in the creeks & other minor waterways sometimes in very close proximity together. Some areas of Hargraves are another local spot where you can see/find this off the top of my head. There would be plenty of other examples too. In some spots I've detected you can find some really reefy/prickly looking stuff or even speccis then work into a nearby gully or creek & the gold changes to flatter, smooth gold or vice versa.
I think every prospectors dream would be to find the alluvial type gold in a virgin area then start finding the more eluvial type leading up to a possible source. It would get the heart pumping but that type of prospecting can be very intensive & time consuming involving research, sampling, loaming etc. & even trenching or costeaning in an effort to intersect the source. Not something that the average hobbyist can do on public land on their weekends off.
We are lucky to live close to a fairly rich & diverse gold bearing area even if the old buggers pinched most of it :lol: There's some interesting areas here & some good spots to get your head around how all these things fit together.

I have heard a lot about hargraves.
where is it exactly.
 
mbasko said:
I think I've given enough help to people on here to not have someone that has offered assistance only sparingly over nearly 3 years rip into me because they think they have some higher knowledge & pompous attitude to go with it.

Matt ' thanks for the laugh & the personal mail that topped it off :lol:
 
No worries glad you got a giggle Jack. I've been getting the odd laugh out of you for years too thanks mate. Glad I could give some back :lol:
So how about that informative post I PM'd you about? I was serious & despite your trying to make it sound like I sent you some whacky PM there was nothing untoward! The benefits of the 14" Garrett prospector pan vs. the 15" Garrett super sluice. An in depth post would be a great benefit to many on here or is your trivial post on it just going to have to suffice as I said in my PM? Did I miss anything from the PM Jack - I've got nothing to hide it was quite above board! Until I read your comment on the 14" pan most people I had seen comment recommended the 15" Garrett super sluice mostly? Let the cat out of the bag man! Give us the low down on it OJ.
Outback said:
The 14" Garrett prospectors pan is better , you will discover why after using both
After being so up in arms about people putting up links to information surely you can do better than that? :|
 
mbasko said:
After being so up in arms about people putting up links to information surely you can do better than that? :|

Rubbish , You had the problem with Creekbeds reply ! I didn't have a problem , I defended him , trying to twist it again hey , readers check back .

Now as for the pans ' I suggest you try both to find out , your PM called my post trivial , another baiting tactic that fell flat .

Some advice , leave this exchange before you get out of your depth more , or you will get us both banned , let it go now ;)
 
Hey Fella's
Happy Australia Day!!!!
The problem with the written word is that it can be taken out of context quite easily, I took issue with Creekbeds, comment early in this thread, I thought it to be premature & arrogant however I chose to say nothing in that regard as I knew which way it would take this thread.

So lets all take a chill pill as I am sure that most of you guys who are having a disagreement & myself would get on fine over a cold one, we all have our opinions & that is important but it is also equally important to realise that this type of crap is unproductive.

So lets get back to providing great information for all to enjoy,
cheers
Lee
 
Yeah, and not to mention that laying a cRap in someone's hand is,... just so Un-Australian.
(Especially on this forum ) :D
 
Outback said:
mbasko said:
Now as for the pans ' I suggest you try both to find out , your PM called my post trivial , another baiting tactic that fell flat .
Some advice , leave this exchange before you get out of your depth more , or you will get us both banned , let it go now ;)

Gold pans one been better than the other? I would like to express an opinion in regards to this subject. Just like any bit of equipment what suits one may not suit another. It does come back to personal choice, but by far the best pan for the less experienced is the super sluice which is also second to none when doing the back wash. Small bottom pans are no good for doing the back wash you need a pan that has a large base such as the super sluice.
 
Ok, ill buy the beers and we will settle this like Aussies........Two-up :p ;)

Seriously though, I hope you all have a good Australia day and forget about this thread and any silly things that were said.
 
Gold pans one been better than the other? I would like to express an opinion in regards to this subject. Just like any bit of equipment what suits one may not suit another. It does come back to personal choice, but by far the best pan for the less experienced is the super sluice which is also second to none when doing the back wash. Small bottom pans are no good for doing the back wash you need a pan that has a large base such as the super sluice.
I agree Jemba & have seen blokes that prefer metal pans over plastic too.
I find that the larger bottom pans like the super sluice better but never spent much time wet prospecting at all preferring the detecting more. I did have a couple of 10" sample pans that I've since sold but one was a Jobe brand & had a larger bottom than the same sized Garret which was fairly narrow. I found the Jobe much easier to use & that + others recommendations led me to buying the super sluice. It's now on it's way to a new home too due to lack of use nothing else. I would like to get my hands on another small Jobe pan just for sampling though (& not taking up too much space). Everyone should have at least one pan they find good to use IMO.
 
Well said dam it, touchy subject. I am a newbie but recent studies have alway stated the requirement of reference and or data. As dr wiets (geologist_chemist) from bendigo liked to point out. But all in all it shows a great passion we have on the subject. I am not one to give advise,but advice l have taken is the requirement of data reference or many years of research and a degree to state.
Great Australia day all
Cheers.
I personally hope l havnt undone your good work dam it.
 

Latest posts

Top