Digging a hole like the old timers

[Hare_Twigga]

I know a bit about it. You can dig a hole 5ft x 2.5ft x 5ft deep in 2-3hrs approx. cleaning out the gravel another hour or so and filling it back in takes about 40 mins approx. Each ft deeper than this add at least another hour. I've found enough gold by doing this to pay for my time and effort a couple of times. The old timers saying of "Three in one hundred" has been true for me. Most holes I dig I get nothing,a speck or two.

The plus for us is while the old timers would dig down to it , very few if any people have done it in modern times

So in theory we will have 130 years of gold buildup under those gravel bars

If i had a spot close to home i would do it but you really need to own the spot "through frequent attendance"

The other question is , will 130 years of floods give productive gold compared to thousands of years of build up that the old timers scored ?

130 years of floods only washes around the bit they left behind IMO. I only sink holes well away from creeks,rivers etc I think it's best to look for area's that has never been touched. I'm not sure what it is but when I find old washes that haven't been messed with it has this shiny, black,rainbow coating on it?

 

[jethro]

Some years ago I found an old bench of alluvial wash hidden in some blackberry covered old sluice workings. The old timer chinese had stripped the overburden in preparation to washing it and then left it. I mined that block of wash out & put it through my trommel then followed the crevice in the bedrock that was exposed in under the bank for about six feet. the depth of overburden was about nine or ten feet but the wash was only worth taking outfrom about a foot above the bed rock, above that the gold was too poor. The wash was very bouldery and hard going with just a ballarat pick and buckets. A lot of the boulders were to big to go into the trommel so had to be stacked just like the old timers did. The best 2 blokes did in a day was 20 barrow loads through the trommel. I think we got 8 grams for our trouble.

 

[crazyk]

Twigga I've seen lots of that stuff on creek walls. Looks kind of volcanic.

I've got a few pics of the same sorta stuff but can't post cause they are too big.

I'd love to know what it is.

 

[Hare_Twigga]

Twigga I've seen lots of that stuff on creek walls. Looks kind of volcanic.

I've got a few pics of the same sorta stuff but can't post cause they are too big.

I'd love to know what it is.

Crazy you can resize pictures with paint. I think your right about it being related to volcanic activity, the stuff in the pic was covered by basalt rubble and 400mm of limestone.

 

[Rambling rude]

Great topic here, I was swinging the 5000 through a diggings and came across what looked like two recently dug test holes. Both were about 600mm deep, I swung the coil over the dirt left behind and found a nice flat piece of gold about 0.4gm. 8)
I don't know how they missed it, but Im guessing that they took the rest away for processing. I still haven't had time to get back and give a go with the shovel and pick.
But it is definently on my hit list

Cheers RR

 

[G0lddigg@]

I know a bit about it. You can dig a hole 5ft x 2.5ft x 5ft deep in 2-3hrs approx. cleaning out the gravel another hour or so and filling it back in takes about 40 mins approx. Each ft deeper than this add at least another hour. I've found enough gold by doing this to pay for my time and effort a couple of times. The old timers saying of "Three in one hundred" has been true for me. Most holes I dig I get nothing,a speck or two.

The plus for us is while the old timers would dig down to it , very few if any people have done it in modern times

So in theory we will have 130 years of gold buildup under those gravel bars

If i had a spot close to home i would do it but you really need to own the spot "through frequent attendance"

The other question is , will 130 years of floods give productive gold compared to thousands of years of build up that the old timers scored ?

130 years of floods only washes around the bit they left behind IMO. I only sink holes well away from creeks,rivers etc I think it's best to look for area's that has never been touched. I'm not sure what it is but when I find old washes that haven't been messed with it has this shiny, black,rainbow coating on it?
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/1994/1390822018_img_0466.jpg

the colour in this picture concerns me a little... looks like copper maybe even Enargite which is a copper arsenic sulphide i'm no geologist but be it minerals fish or mushrooms bright coloured things in nature generally signal warning to me and result in further research. I'd like to be completely wrong but be careful all the same Hare_Twigga

 

[HeadsUp]

I know a bit about it. You can dig a hole 5ft x 2.5ft x 5ft deep in 2-3hrs approx. cleaning out the gravel another hour or so and filling it back in takes about 40 mins approx. Each ft deeper than this add at least another hour. I've found enough gold by doing this to pay for my time and effort a couple of times. The old timers saying of "Three in one hundred" has been true for me. Most holes I dig I get nothing,a speck or two.

The plus for us is while the old timers would dig down to it , very few if any people have done it in modern times

So in theory we will have 130 years of gold buildup under those gravel bars

If i had a spot close to home i would do it but you really need to own the spot "through frequent attendance"

The other question is , will 130 years of floods give productive gold compared to thousands of years of build up that the old timers scored ?

130 years of floods only washes around the bit they left behind IMO. I only sink holes well away from creeks,rivers etc I think it's best to look for area's that has never been touched. I'm not sure what it is but when I find old washes that haven't been messed with it has this shiny, black,rainbow coating on it?
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/1994/1390822018_img_0466.jpg

not sure what the coating is , maybe staining from ironstone or fine peacock ore ? ( chalcopyrite ) . need a more expert opinion . i am just guessing :/

 

[crazyk]

What I did notice is that the pools of water that dry up in the creek that I saw these rocks in, tend to always have an oily appearance on the top.

In regard to resizing the pic, yeah I can on the computer but not on my phone !

 

[SWright]

I know a bit about it. You can dig a hole 5ft x 2.5ft x 5ft deep in 2-3hrs approx. cleaning out the gravel another hour or so and filling it back in takes about 40 mins approx. Each ft deeper than this add at least another hour. I've found enough gold by doing this to pay for my time and effort a couple of times. The old timers saying of "Three in one hundred" has been true for me. Most holes I dig I get nothing,a speck or two.

The plus for us is while the old timers would dig down to it , very few if any people have done it in modern times

So in theory we will have 130 years of gold buildup under those gravel bars

If i had a spot close to home i would do it but you really need to own the spot "through frequent attendance"

The other question is , will 130 years of floods give productive gold compared to thousands of years of build up that the old timers scored ?

130 years of floods only washes around the bit they left behind IMO. I only sink holes well away from creeks,rivers etc I think it's best to look for area's that has never been touched. I'm not sure what it is but when I find old washes that haven't been messed with it has this shiny, black,rainbow coating on it?
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/1994/1390822018_img_0466.jpg

G'Day Hare_Twigga

Depending on where it is and what the local rocks are I would be surprised if the coating and colours are anything exotic. You can have many of the same affects with a compination of iron and manganese that are common elements washing through alluvial systems most of time, especially if they have not been disturbed for some time and recently opened to the air. Some sulphates of irob may also be present and form the light bluish looking material. these iron sulphates are common in wet overhangs in sandstone caves or around old mine sites. The rainbow sheen on the water and parts of the rock will most likely be organic material that has been trapped in the rock in combination with iron oxides. Worth a dig and pan though.

Araluen

 

[Hare_Twigga]

Ok, Thanks Guy's!

 

[crazyk]

I managed to work out how to shrink my photos on the phone... I just email them to myself.

Anyway below are photos I've taken.

1. Is a rocky outcrop that is prevalent along the banks of the creek I walked. The material is very very hard.
2. This is a chunk that I broke out if the outcrop. To me it looks quite volcanic
3. The creek bottom has lots of hard bedrock an in some sections lost of stones and gravels. You can also see the oily appearance I mentioned.

What I want to know is, is it worth exploring this stuff? I did a couple of pans but nothing.

 

[Hare_Twigga]

If the creek has gold in it I would be digging to the bottom of that stuff and testing it! Looks good to me!

 

[crazyk]

Ok looks like it needs a bit of hard yakka!

 

[Village]

Based on the photos what you I think have is a sedimentary rock comprising predominately or by composition the largest percentages of a iron rich calcite and dolamite structure which included in the intrusion, amongst a whole host of other minerals contains Alizarin Red and Potassium Ferricyanide, so please no body go licking these suckers on a continued basis, The alizarin red when weathered with the Fe3(Iron)content provides the red staining, with the Potassium Ferricyanide will provide the blue staining. Whilst manganese is the 11th or 12th most abundant mineral in the earths crust, it does little to assist or be a catalyst in metamorphic sedimentary deposits. Fe3 is obviously abundant whether as a a specific intrusive vein or a mineral dissemminated component.

Are there links to gold bearing deposits, urban legends, wives tales but little in documented research.

But alas saying that as prospector, your overlooking the most valuable photo, the highly formed conglomerate in photo 2, however this leads to the question of changing stream beds the and if the stream does or did produce, then I would be getting a post hole borer or a pair of spoons, and digging test holes at 45 deg to the azimuth of bearing of the upstream course.

I hope it assists, enjoy and I hope you get wealthy.

John

 

[Village]

oh the sheen ion the water would most likely be some form of oil, man or nature made.

 

[crazyk]

Wow thanks Village that's some info.

The area i was in is ballan near daylesford. It's a friends property so I don't really want to upset them too much!

I did a little more research and do you think the oily appearance could be highly mineralised water? The are up to daylesford is renowned for their mineral springs.

Also that stuff is rock hard, no pun intended there, so I think it would be quite difficult to bore by hand with an auger.

What I also noticed. Was that these rocky outcrops on the banks were generally on the outside bends so this would lend me to think the river/stream has changed course over hundreds of years so maybe I need to start digging inland?

Sorry if this has hijacked your thread

 

[G0lddigg@]

the sheen on the water looks like blue green algae

 

[rc62burke]

Maybe the oily sheen on the water may have something to do with the decomposing gum leaves, sometimes we try to over complicate things to explain things that are different, think simple as often there are simple answers, just saying!
cheers
Lee

 

[rc62burke]

Based on the photos what you I think have is a sedimentary rock comprising predominately or by composition the largest percentages of a iron rich calcite and dolamite structure which included in the intrusion, amongst a whole host of other minerals contains Alizarin Red and Potassium Ferricyanide, so please no body go licking these suckers on a continued basis, The alizarin red when weathered with the Fe3(Iron)content provides the red staining, with the Potassium Ferricyanide will provide the blue staining. Whilst manganese is the 11th or 12th most abundant mineral in the earths crust, it does little to assist or be a catalyst in metamorphic sedimentary deposits. Fe3 is obviously abundant whether as a a specific intrusive vein or a mineral dissemminated component.

Are there links to gold bearing deposits, urban legends, wives tales but little in documented research.

But alas saying that as prospector, your overlooking the most valuable photo, the highly formed conglomerate in photo 2, however this leads to the question of changing stream beds the and if the stream does or did produce, then I would be getting a post hole borer or a pair of spoons, and digging test holes at 45 deg to the azimuth of bearing of the upstream course.

I hope it assists, enjoy and I hope you get wealthy.

John

Hey Village
Mate do you mind putting in lay mans terms what the bold word above means??
I know you have a huge amount of knowledge & we here appreciate your input, but I think some of what you are trying to explain gets lost due to many folk here including me not understanding some of the words used.
cheers
Lee

 

[nuggetino]

I haven't dug any big holes myself in the pursuit of deeper gold but I intend to do just that when i get out for some detecting. I hope doing research on which were the most productive stream beds in the triangle and then going out and taking a close look at an area may pay off. Lot's of detector hole digs around certain low-junk mullock heaps and a rich gold history would probably have me digging a big hole right there to see what I can throw out. I think it could be rewarding considering some of us spend 50+ hours running around with a detector for little to show. Might be more lucrative. I guess the old timers would have dug hole after hole before they hit a good bit of pay dirt. We have the equipment/freedom/information of going straight to the most productive holes and digging right up along side. Might be much better odds than 3 in 100 these days?