How exactly was an alluvial ground worked?

[AtomRat]

A question was brought up by littlenugget when we were at Panton Hill and I've been asked it a few times or discussed it several times with other prospectors, and that is when you see an alluvial ground that's been worked hard, meaning to the point where it looks like a moonscape, usually close to the creeks edge with shallow holes, mounds, shafts, tunnels, 3 meter long trenches or the cut out trenches into small gullies or simply darting off a creek wall for a few meters..

Of course I mean in an ancient river bed, erroded wash or any form of dug out alluvial

Its hard to answer the question, when you still look at each of these similar fields wondering yourself what on earth happened in that area.

I've tried digging between two shallow holes thinking it was untouched ground but no luck..

Is what's left remains of shallow shafts and tunnel networks now collapsed? If there was gold there that much, why is the ground still there and not hydrolically sprayed away yet the creek is.. ( not everywhere of course ).. is it all completely turned over and tailings yet still contains gold

What's your story on an alluvial moonscaped field? How do you picture what happened or do you know how and have any images / photos.

 

[nucopia]

Interesting question Atom.
When I visit Stuart Town thats exactly what the commons looks like in some places a moonscape.
Near the creek on my friend property its the same, you can walk around and see the places the old times dug out, put in shafts and even in some places followed quartz or shale reefs.
Would be great if the old times left records explaining their resonings for doing things.
My limited understanding is were ever they found quartz they dug for gold.

 

[AtomRat]

Whoops its 'Lilnugget'..now I gotta edit everything :lol:

..hey..I see you watching in the background mate

 

[AtomRat]

I'm finding lots of places are turned over and over and then shafts dug and then blasted and then shafts dug after blasting even.. I mean.. its a mess when it comes to trying to figure out parts of these grounds

 

[grubstake]

I think it's important to remember that the old workings moonscape that we see today, is the cumulative result of up to 160 years of mining and exploration work. Generations of prospectors and miners have come and gone, employing a variety of different technologies and approaches, from the simplest of hand tools, to more specialised mining gear and later, powered equipment.

The first gold rushes from the mid-nineteenth century made a big, initial impact on the landscape, then interest dwindled until many areas were probably abandoned altogether during the First World War, as diggers took their excavation skills to the trenches of foreign battlefields. From the early 1930's Depression years and up to World War Two, a new wave of unemployed men hit the goldfields, then this too dwindled away as they answered their own generation's call to battle. Later, in the post-war years, a static gold price slowly stifled interest in mining and the rapid industrial development arising from a growing population, offered better employment opportunities in industry, so interest in the old goldfields slumped again.

Over time, new workings have buried old workings and one man's tailings have become another man's feedstock. Memories of what was found where faded and fresh diggings were started in places once deemed useless. Excavations got backfilled by fresh diggings, while erosion by rain and floods jumbled everything up. Trees flourished in the loosened soil, only to be later felled or burnt, having changed the shape of the ground they grew in. The end result is the moonscape we now see and the often unsolvable riddle of working out what it all means. Good luck with that puzzle!

 

[AtomRat]

I guess I'm more talking where its obvious that alluvial ground is still there like conglomerates of various softness and hardness and Iit sure looks likethe whole lot hhasn't been turned over though.

I think the answer is leading towards the old timers and modern diggers looking for gutters in those alluvial grounds..

 

[Teemore]

This link may give some idea of what some such places looked like when they were first worked ... there are more examples of the "models" if you search the museum site.
Going through books with pics of the old diggings/diggers also helps when you're out there trying to understand what they were doing. Scratch a pile of dirt and it will sometimes tell you that it was rubble from the hole next to it untreated, meaning they may have "processed" what they dug out (the richer old streambed soils) somewhere else or it could tell you that it's "treated" wash tailings that they may have run through a sluice - sometimes some distance from where it was dug.
Each 'landscape' will be different from the next/previous one .... it's one of the things to take in when out in the bush.
Someday it may even make sense to me, till then it's a big learning curve that never ends.
Most of all enjoy and appreciate your surroundings.
Cheers T.
http://museumvictoria.com.au/learning-federation/video-temp/melbourne-story-videos/mining-model/

Will try to take a few photos over the next few outing and give my version of what may have been going on (hopefully others with greater knowledge will either agree or hopefully give the correct interpretation).
Actually may be a good new topic that everyone can contribute to ... will kick it off with an easy one (as I have a photo) under the topic heading "What were they doing here?"

 

[AtomRat]

I've seen that model around before, explains a little bit

I think the forum has a thread showing devices like puddlers and that "What to look for.." I think its titled

The areas I'm talking about just don't seem like its all been run though..

Where I live it seems they cut many channels through to the bedrock but left islands and pinnacles.. they look like they have been left for no reason.. did the old timers do this on purpose to iy is very obvious in the future..?

 

[Heatho]

Interesting question Atom.
When I visit Stuart Town thats exactly what the commons looks like in some places a moonscape.
Near the creek on my friend property its the same, you can walk around and see the places the old times dug out, put in shafts and even in some places followed quartz or shale reefs.
Would be great if the old times left records explaining their resonings for doing things.
My limited understanding is were ever they found quartz they dug for gold.

A lot of the time on gold fields they dug straight down to the wash layer and tunneled through it, a lot of the time these tunnels just plain collapsed, it was very dangerous work. This was how they worked the alluvial stuff that had shed from the reefs in the Stuart Town common. All those little pits probably went down about 4-5 metres, you bcan see a tunnel entrance in the creek which has collapsed. I think though the first miners on the ST common were finding nuggets up to a kilo just sitting on the surface. I think that's how a few discoveries were made, it was just sitting there, then they dig for the deeper stuff and follow the gold/gravel layers until the gold runs out, then they go loaming for the source (shedding reefs).

 

[AtomRat]

Great explination heatho. Well all the posts put together is the explination I guess. I was certainly starting to feel that a lot was very shalliw tunnels. Still doesn't make me feel any safer walking around them now..! :/

 

[AtomRat]

Its actually taken me a while to accept it as a fact. If you saw where and what houses are built on here and where they are still putting up residential houses and now flats... there's going to be an accident here somewhere very soon.

The local tar roads even collapse due to mines here and there. At least Ballarat is deep and it would take a rippa of an earthquake to collapse stopes and cause sink holes.. but here, its too soft, the land constantly moves and sludes.. yet they build on it. Who on earth is in charge of that.. why are the inspections not concerned about the diggings?? Why..oh why...

 

[Teemore]

why are the inspections not concerned about the diggings?? Why..oh why...

Not sure but believe one of the big differences in GeoVic 3 is that it has an overlay of "mine subsidence" somewhere within its layers .. never actually used it but??? Think it may be mainly around Bendigo ??
Cheers T.