Gold Beyond The Workings?

[Guest]

Gday

Its not uncommon to find big nuggets well away from any workings, I guess thats exactly why they are missed and often found by inexperienced operators randomly detecting open areas, as most experienced people would be more likely hitting what they perceive as the hot spots, the best gold finds I have had have been in spots that looked quite unremarkable and you would easily have walked through the place to get to some more inviting looking ground, the gold does not care where it is so anywhere in the vicinity of a gold bearing feature is worth a look.

An old prospector once told me this and it makes a lot of sense, what we are seeing now on the ground is the "concentrates" left over from hills and features after millions of years of weathering and erosion, many of these places would have been many hundreds of meters higher than the ground level we see today, so if you take that into perspective then its easy to see why gold and the associated host rocks can be so wide spread, and nuggets can be so far away from recognizable source that we can see today that we can only simply wonder how they got there, there are also stories of big nuggets that have been found in areas that are not known as gold bearing areas, it can be due to it simply traveling a great distance due to weathering or even glacial movement, as large stones are carried many hundreds of kilometers, and another theory is that people believe that aboriginals could have picked them up elsewhere and then later dumped them on the ground as they simply got sick of carrying them about. :awful:

cheers

stayyerAU

 

[Aussiedigs]

This! Personally I would rather detect and dig nothing (or gold!) than to sift thru buckets of trash....

Extract from Kingswoods post.

 

[user 4386]

Gday

Its not uncommon to find big nuggets well away from any workings, I guess thats exactly why they are missed and often found by inexperienced operators randomly detecting open areas, as most experienced people would be more likely hitting what they perceive as the hot spots, the best gold finds I have had have been in spots that looked quite unremarkable and you would easily have walked through the place to get to some more inviting looking ground, the gold does not care where it is so anywhere in the vicinity of a gold bearing feature is worth a look.

An old prospector once told me this and it makes a lot of sense, what we are seeing now on the ground is the "concentrates" left over from hills and features after millions of years of weathering and erosion, many of these places would have been many hundreds of meters higher than the ground level we see today, so if you take that into perspective then its easy to see why gold and the associated host rocks can be so wide spread, and nuggets can be so far away from recognizable source that we can see today that we can only simply wonder how they got there, there are also stories of big nuggets that have been found in areas that are not known as gold bearing areas, it can be due to it simply traveling a great distance due to weathering or even glacial movement, as large stones are carried many hundreds of kilometers, and another theory is that people believe that aboriginals could have picked them up elsewhere and then later dumped them on the ground as they simply got sick of carrying them about. :awful:

cheers

stayyerAU

I suspect that a lot of the bigger nuggets are found because the old timers put their wash through sieves before separating the gold - big boondies in the wash prevented easy separation. Also because the nuggets often were not in the wash itself, but were in adjacent hillside soil. The gold does care a bit where it is - it is rarely uphill from its source and it usually takes the steepest path downhill. Erosion of overlying material in central Victoria has been about 2,000 m vertically on the south side of the range (a bit less on the north side). Most Victorian gold sources are vertical (quartz reefs), and large nuggets rarely move more than a couple of hundred metres horizontally. Glaciers can move nuggets a long way, but are probably not relevant to any Victorian nuggets found, except PERHAPS some one ounce ones still close to their source around Bacchus Marsh (glacial movement was VERY relevant in New Zealand). Large gold nuggets do not travel hundreds of kilometres anywhere in the world, and Victorian nuggets have all been found close to their source. Except for a couple that have obviously been transported by aborigines a few tens of km from where they have been found by the aborigines (e.g. left in aboriginal campfire sites as at Watchem - another probable example on a sand dune at Boort).

Just to put it in perspective. I keep posting this diagram that shows all nuggets over 15 kg from the Ballarat field - you can see how close they were to their source quartz reefs (denoted buy the mine shafts_ - even small nuggets only travelled a maximum of 500 m at Ballarat, mostly half that.

 

[kingswood]

I suspect that a lot of the bigger nuggets are found because the old timers put their wash through sieves before separating the gold - big boondies in the wash prevented easy separation. Also because the nuggets often were not in the wash itself, but were in adjacent hillside soil. The gold does care a bit where it is - it is rarely uphill from its source and it usually takes the steepest path downhill. Erosion of overlying material in central Victoria has been about 2,000 m vertically on the south side of the range (a bit less on the north side). Most Victorian gold sources are vertical (quartz reefs), and large nuggets rarely move more than a couple of hundred metres horizontally. Glaciers can move nuggets a long way, but are probably not relevant to any Victorian nuggets found, except PERHAPS some one ounce ones still close to their source around Bacchus Marsh (glacial movement was VERY relevant in New Zealand). Large gold nuggets do not travel hundreds of kilometres anywhere in the world, and Victorian nuggets have all been found close to their source. Except for a couple that have obviously been transported by aborigines a few tens of km from where they have been found by the aborigines (e.g. left in aboriginal campfire sites as at Watchem - another probable example on a sand dune at Boort).

Just to put it in perspective. I keep posting this diagram that shows all nuggets over 15 kg from the Ballarat field - you can see how close they were to their source quartz reefs (denoted buy the mine shafts_ - even small nuggets only travelled a maximum of 500 m at Ballarat, mostly half that.https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/4386/1559864349_ballarat_nuggets.jpg

Thanks, that very interesting
Does the same apply to WA goldfields, in the sense of gold movement?....Would a patch of nuggets that are rugged and prickly indicate a reasonable close source??....I guess specimens would be the same.
My patch was laterite forming over what should be nice greenstone bedrock....I wondered how it got there and after much reading, figured that there would have to a source below the laterite in the bedrock....Might have to peg a mining lease

 

[shakergt]

I keep finding gold in areas that no mines are even near. Not far from where I found some virgin ground it had been scrapped and that's about it. I tend to stay away from worked ground as the worked ground in WA has been hit hard, but that does not mean you won't find anything. I have managed to find gold around the goongarie workings.

 

[user 4386]

I suspect that a lot of the bigger nuggets are found because the old timers put their wash through sieves before separating the gold - big boondies in the wash prevented easy separation. Also because the nuggets often were not in the wash itself, but were in adjacent hillside soil. The gold does care a bit where it is - it is rarely uphill from its source and it usually takes the steepest path downhill. Erosion of overlying material in central Victoria has been about 2,000 m vertically on the south side of the range (a bit less on the north side). Most Victorian gold sources are vertical (quartz reefs), and large nuggets rarely move more than a couple of hundred metres horizontally. Glaciers can move nuggets a long way, but are probably not relevant to any Victorian nuggets found, except PERHAPS some one ounce ones still close to their source around Bacchus Marsh (glacial movement was VERY relevant in New Zealand). Large gold nuggets do not travel hundreds of kilometres anywhere in the world, and Victorian nuggets have all been found close to their source. Except for a couple that have obviously been transported by aborigines a few tens of km from where they have been found by the aborigines (e.g. left in aboriginal campfire sites as at Watchem - another probable example on a sand dune at Boort).

Just to put it in perspective. I keep posting this diagram that shows all nuggets over 15 kg from the Ballarat field - you can see how close they were to their source quartz reefs (denoted buy the mine shafts_ - even small nuggets only travelled a maximum of 500 m at Ballarat, mostly half that.https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/4386/1559864349_ballarat_nuggets.jpg

Thanks, that very interesting
Does the same apply to WA goldfields, in the sense of gold movement?....Would a patch of nuggets that are rugged and prickly indicate a reasonable close source??....I guess specimens would be the same.
My patch was laterite forming over what should be nice greenstone bedrock....I wondered how it got there and after much reading, figured that there would have to a source below the laterite in the bedrock....Might have to peg a mining lease

Yes, the same applies in WA, and the stuff in "laterite" probably almost overlies the source. However there is commonly a zone of depletion below the ironstone in the white "pallid zone" and it can be ten metres before one gets to little-weathered bedrock where the source is. ie highest in the ironstone and bedrock, nothing between.

 

[shakergt]

I suspect that a lot of the bigger nuggets are found because the old timers put their wash through sieves before separating the gold - big boondies in the wash prevented easy separation. Also because the nuggets often were not in the wash itself, but were in adjacent hillside soil. The gold does care a bit where it is - it is rarely uphill from its source and it usually takes the steepest path downhill. Erosion of overlying material in central Victoria has been about 2,000 m vertically on the south side of the range (a bit less on the north side). Most Victorian gold sources are vertical (quartz reefs), and large nuggets rarely move more than a couple of hundred metres horizontally. Glaciers can move nuggets a long way, but are probably not relevant to any Victorian nuggets found, except PERHAPS some one ounce ones still close to their source around Bacchus Marsh (glacial movement was VERY relevant in New Zealand). Large gold nuggets do not travel hundreds of kilometres anywhere in the world, and Victorian nuggets have all been found close to their source. Except for a couple that have obviously been transported by aborigines a few tens of km from where they have been found by the aborigines (e.g. left in aboriginal campfire sites as at Watchem - another probable example on a sand dune at Boort).

Just to put it in perspective. I keep posting this diagram that shows all nuggets over 15 kg from the Ballarat field - you can see how close they were to their source quartz reefs (denoted buy the mine shafts_ - even small nuggets only travelled a maximum of 500 m at Ballarat, mostly half that.https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/4386/1559864349_ballarat_nuggets.jpg

Thanks, that very interesting
Does the same apply to WA goldfields, in the sense of gold movement?....Would a patch of nuggets that are rugged and prickly indicate a reasonable close source??....I guess specimens would be the same.
My patch was laterite forming over what should be nice greenstone bedrock....I wondered how it got there and after much reading, figured that there would have to a source below the laterite in the bedrock....Might have to peg a mining lease

Yes, the same applies in WA, and the stuff in "laterite" probably almost overlies the source. However there is commonly a zone of depletion below the ironstone in the white "pallid zone" and it can be ten metres before one gets to little-weathered bedrock where the source is. ie highest in the ironstone and bedrock, nothing between.

Kingswood I can help you peg that lease if you want, just send me the gps coordinates and I will get right to it.

 

[Guest]

I keep finding gold in areas that no mines are even near. Not far from where I found some virgin ground it had been scrapped and that's about it. I tend to stay away from worked ground as the worked ground in WA has been hit hard, but that does not mean you won't find anything. I have managed to find gold around the goongarie workings.

Gday

I agree as every easily accessible area you go to has been worked hard, but as you say you will still get the odd piece here and there as there are always small pockets that have been missed, but its all the rubbish that does my head in, some years ago I was having a crack at some scrapings below some old mines that were very easily accessible from the road so I didn't think I would get much, within a few minutes of detecting the first signal I got was a specie that was on the surface, the second was another larger specie that was buried close to the refuse from the mine, these two species gave up around three ounces between them.

The scrapings gave up quite a few nuggets but also a lot of deep rubbish, I only persevered with it as I was getting the odd piece in between, I saw off to the side of the scrape there was a small cleared scrape about 10x6 metres where it looked as though a machine had been parked, on this scrape I found a small patch that gave up a couple of ounces, and several more pieces at other times when I re visited the spot with later model detectors.

It does happen but for the most part you will only get the dregs, I much prefer to walk virgin ground and get on to something new, that does more for me that digging rubbish all day :argh:, half the fun is in the hunt and the other half is in getting the gold.

cheers

stayyerAU

 

[kingswood]

I suspect that a lot of the bigger nuggets are found because the old timers put their wash through sieves before separating the gold - big boondies in the wash prevented easy separation. Also because the nuggets often were not in the wash itself, but were in adjacent hillside soil. The gold does care a bit where it is - it is rarely uphill from its source and it usually takes the steepest path downhill. Erosion of overlying material in central Victoria has been about 2,000 m vertically on the south side of the range (a bit less on the north side). Most Victorian gold sources are vertical (quartz reefs), and large nuggets rarely move more than a couple of hundred metres horizontally. Glaciers can move nuggets a long way, but are probably not relevant to any Victorian nuggets found, except PERHAPS some one ounce ones still close to their source around Bacchus Marsh (glacial movement was VERY relevant in New Zealand). Large gold nuggets do not travel hundreds of kilometres anywhere in the world, and Victorian nuggets have all been found close to their source. Except for a couple that have obviously been transported by aborigines a few tens of km from where they have been found by the aborigines (e.g. left in aboriginal campfire sites as at Watchem - another probable example on a sand dune at Boort).

Just to put it in perspective. I keep posting this diagram that shows all nuggets over 15 kg from the Ballarat field - you can see how close they were to their source quartz reefs (denoted buy the mine shafts_ - even small nuggets only travelled a maximum of 500 m at Ballarat, mostly half that.https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/4386/1559864349_ballarat_nuggets.jpg

Thanks, that very interesting
Does the same apply to WA goldfields, in the sense of gold movement?....Would a patch of nuggets that are rugged and prickly indicate a reasonable close source??....I guess specimens would be the same.
My patch was laterite forming over what should be nice greenstone bedrock....I wondered how it got there and after much reading, figured that there would have to a source below the laterite in the bedrock....Might have to peg a mining lease

Yes, the same applies in WA, and the stuff in "laterite" probably almost overlies the source. However there is commonly a zone of depletion below the ironstone in the white "pallid zone" and it can be ten metres before one gets to little-weathered bedrock where the source is. ie highest in the ironstone and bedrock, nothing between.

Thank you so much for this answer
Yes, the "depleted zone" in lateritic gold dispersion models, I recall reading about that in the work by Butt. Interesting stuff. I like the halo of dispersion too
I have had discussions with my detected mate and he maintains "Gold is where you find it"....I always add "yes...but gold is where gold is due to a reason"...Thats the big thing I have learnt: that gold is where gold is because of the geology playing the big part in how the gold got there in the first place!!! This is why all laterite isnt gold bearing as it relies on a hypogene source.
My approach to gold hunting now is to search the less detected areas that the geo maps indicate have similar potential gold bearing rocks/faults/fractures/contact zones, in the hope that they may well be gold producing...like most things, some you win, some you lose
I have often wondered, would it be fair to say that most WA gold nuggets tend to be eluvial rather than alluvial?....

 

[user 4386]

Probably most large nuggets everywhere tend to be eluvial, not just in WA. Smaller ones travel hundreds of metres in streams (remembering that WA had high rainfall when they were being moved around, in more deeply incised valleys that have since been filled in to a large degree. But some nuggets are neither, they have actually grown in ferricrete (ironstone) when gold was redistributed by saline groundwater. So things like a lack of roundness can simply reflect that the nugget grew where you see it now. Some economic gold orebodies are actually the laterite/ferricrete itself because of this re-concentration of gold - some gold nuggets actually enclose original "soil" (e,g, iron pisolites). One mine at least mined bauxite and gold together (bauxite is really an aluminium rich soil (Boddington - later primary gold was found at depth). Butt is a good reference.

As you say, gold is not "where you find it" - it occurs in specific places for good geological reasons. Some of it requires a lot of knowledge of geology, but there are simple rules that will increase your chances of success tenfold. One of them is understanding the difference between primary gold in unweathered rock, gold in the weathering zone (lateritic profile in WA), eluvial gold and alluvial gold - and the fact that the desert country you see now is not what it was like when the gold was being moved around. Since it turned to desert there has been little movement of gold beyond what breaking up of rock into fragments ("desert lithosol" - a surface veneer of broken rock fragments) and wind movement has caused. And that involves very little movement.

 

[kingswood]

Probably most large nuggets everywhere tend to be eluvial, not just in WA. Smaller ones travel hundreds of metres in streams (remembering that WA had high rainfall when they were being moved around, in more deeply incised valleys that have since been filled in to a large degree. But some nuggets are neither, they have actually grown in ferricrete (ironstone) when gold was redistributed by saline groundwater. So things like a lack of roundness can simply reflect that the nugget grew where you see it now. Some economic gold orebodies are actually the laterite/ferricrete itself because of this re-concentration of gold - some gold nuggets actually enclose original "soil" (e,g, iron pisolites). One mine at least mined bauxite and gold together (bauxite is really an aluminium rich soil (Boddington - later primary gold was found at depth). Butt is a good reference.

As you say, gold is not "where you find it" - it occurs in specific places for good geological reasons. Some of it requires a lot of knowledge of geology, but there are simple rules that will increase your chances of success tenfold. One of them is understanding the difference between primary gold in unweathered rock, gold in the weathering zone (lateritic profile in WA), eluvial gold and alluvial gold - and the fact that the desert country you see now is not what it was like when the gold was being moved around. Since it turned to desert there has been little movement of gold beyond what breaking up of rock into fragments ("desert lithosol" - a surface veneer of broken rock fragments) and wind movement has caused. And that involves very little movement.

Fantastic reply thanks. Have copied and pasted into my ever growing list of gold notes

 

[Aussiedigs]

Gold is where you find it. Im beginning to think this saying was more relevant to times past to an extent. Ok, it still stands true but not to the extent it once did.

One thing ive learnt through research is there are differences of opinion which both/all can be correct. Work the worked ground, work between the worked ground etc.

I took the dogs for a 2 hour walk yesty up a gully beyond some workings. Now heres another thing i read last night - dont bother detecting above reefs! Anyway i kept hitting fencing wire. Didnt matter how far up I travelled, more fencing wire. I got to virtually the top of the low gradient part of this gully and got a single travelling along under the surface. Barbed bluddy wire stretched across under the surface! The finest (smallest) barbed wire ive ever seen. Was a miner camped up in here containing some sheep hence the fine wire? One thing i have learnt is the likes of the metal detector can give a view to an extent of what took place in certain areas we would otherwise not see.

Another interesting observation, is this only because im green to all this is in this Google Earth view, the gold workings are in the hilly areas basically. So over time the earth has been pushed up to form the hills we have today. Through this process it has caused cracks in the earth for the likes of gold deposits to be made? Is this process what we call metamorphism?

 

[Aussiedigs]

The rows are interesting!

 

[kingswood]

So over time the earth has been pushed up to form the hills we have today

Goldierocks can probably answer that way better than me....but I always thought the hills were basically the old bottom....what is now on the top of the landscape was once the bottom and what was once the top is now the bottom...or something ...
Yes interesting observation about things in a line...I have noted that too over here in WA....one of my searching strategies is to see if the line of rocks/contacts/faults/fractures extends further than the known workings....if they do, thats target spot number 1

 

[madtuna]

Gold is where you find it. Im beginning to think this saying was more relevant to times past to an extent. Ok, it still stands true but not to the extent it once did.

One thing ive learnt through research is there are differences of opinion which both/all can be correct. Work the worked ground, work between the worked ground etc.

I took the dogs for a 2 hour walk yesty up a gully beyond some workings. Now heres another thing i read last night - dont bother detecting above reefs! Anyway i kept hitting fencing wire. Didnt matter how far up I travelled, more fencing wire. I got to virtually the top of the low gradient part of this gully and got a single travelling along under the surface. Barbed bluddy wire stretched across under the surface! The finest (smallest) barbed wire ive ever seen. Was a miner camped up in here containing some sheep hence the fine wire? One thing i have learnt is the likes of the metal detector can give a view to an extent of what took place in certain areas we would otherwise not see.

Another interesting observation, is this only because im green to all this is in this Google Earth view, the gold workings are in the hilly areas basically. So over time the earth has been pushed up to form the hills we have today. Through this process it has caused cracks in the earth for the likes of gold deposits to be made? Is this process what we call metamorphism?

https://www.prospectingaustralia.co...3174_e5a727ea-7ae8-4896-84d7-6093d2535991.jpg

Gold can fall off either side of the reef and I've found good gold on the uphill side many many times.

 

[DrDuck]

Great line of posts. Very interesting even though I don't detect for gold.

 

[kingswood]

Great line of posts. Very interesting even though I don't detect for gold.

Its very odd....the geo of where gold is and where gold could be excites me as much as finding it !!

 

[Aussiedigs]

So over time the earth has been pushed up to form the hills we have today

Goldierocks can probably answer that way better than me....but I always thought the hills were basically the old bottom....what is now on the top of the landscape was once the bottom and what was once the top is now the bottom...or something ...
Yes interesting observation about things in a line...I have noted that too over here in WA....one of my searching strategies is to see if the line of rocks/contacts/faults/fractures extends further than the known workings....if they do, thats target spot number 1

Oooh they do!

 

[Aussiedigs]

Gold is where you find it. Im beginning to think this saying was more relevant to times past to an extent. Ok, it still stands true but not to the extent it once did.

One thing ive learnt through research is there are differences of opinion which both/all can be correct. Work the worked ground, work between the worked ground etc.

I took the dogs for a 2 hour walk yesty up a gully beyond some workings. Now heres another thing i read last night - dont bother detecting above reefs! Anyway i kept hitting fencing wire. Didnt matter how far up I travelled, more fencing wire. I got to virtually the top of the low gradient part of this gully and got a single travelling along under the surface. Barbed bluddy wire stretched across under the surface! The finest (smallest) barbed wire ive ever seen. Was a miner camped up in here containing some sheep hence the fine wire? One thing i have learnt is the likes of the metal detector can give a view to an extent of what took place in certain areas we would otherwise not see.

Another interesting observation, is this only because im green to all this is in this Google Earth view, the gold workings are in the hilly areas basically. So over time the earth has been pushed up to form the hills we have today. Through this process it has caused cracks in the earth for the likes of gold deposits to be made? Is this process what we call metamorphism?

https://www.prospectingaustralia.co...3174_e5a727ea-7ae8-4896-84d7-6093d2535991.jpg

Gold can fall off either side of the reef and I've found good gold on the uphill side many many times.

Maybe what im reading is mostly gold wont fall uphill but what if the reef continues up there? To me this is working between the workings. As Kingswood pointed out if the rocks etc extend beyond...well!

 

[madtuna]

But what is now uphill was once downhill. Both sides of the original reef were once downhill. The only difference being one side eroded, weathered away quicker than the other.