Old timers, to break even

[20x]

Is there anyone here who can help me with some OLD math..
If 2 old timers paid for a claim, spent weeks sinking an elavial shaft to 20ft, belled out and only got 2 ounces.
Without taking in to account of time down and spent on infrastructure to keep them alive, water rates from the race, puddle process costs.
Would they have bought another claim for another shaft beside it?

 

[Mackka]

In 1850 Victoria, gold was valued at £4 2 shillings and 6 pence. Not sure if that is a help or a hindrance. I know in 1960 a pie was a shilling, a single ice cream cone was 6 pence and my Dad paid 10 shillings rent per week on our two bed fibro house.Mackka

 

[Hawkear]

Gold seems to have been traditionally valued around a good weeks wages, except for the period when it was artificially pegged. Two diggers working hard may have been able to sink 20’ in a week so that would have been wages.
Their ethos at the height of the rush would have been to make as much money as possible before the rush ended. They wouldn’t have regarded it as an occupation but an opportunity to buy themselves a more comfortable life. They would probably wouldn’t have been content to just make wages and chased better claims.
After the rush however there were many who were content to do that because they couldn’t get a better life. They probably would have beavered away making wages until the gold ran out Before moving on.
Today maybe, lot of us rather than do it to make money do it as a hobby and very happy for an ounce a week. I would.

 

[XLOOX]

Damn right you would be happy with an ounce a week even now !
At AUD$2900/oz that is $150k pa.

For a long time in the 1800s & into the early 1900s an ounce a week was considered perfectly acceptable wages for a hand miner.

 

[Jeff]

During economic downturns and depressions like the 1890,s and 1930’s for example that was the ONLY work/income that was available for a lot of people. That’s my theory on why some worrkings in some goldfields are hard to make sense of…..they’re ares that have been worked, reworked and worked again. Sometimes the same area, sometimes just overlapping historic areas to get to the less productive ground that has been left behind from previous efforts.

 

[20x]

During economic downturns and depressions like the 1890,s and 1930’s for example that was the ONLY work/income that was available for a lot of people. That’s my theory on why some worrkings in some goldfields are hard to make sense of…..they’re ares that have been worked, reworked and worked again. Sometimes the same area, sometimes just overlapping historic areas to get to the less productive ground that has been left behind from previous efforts.

Workings that are hard to make sence of?
That's the point of this topic

 

[20x]

Just looked this up, if gold was worth 10 pound an Oz back then a digger only needed 6-7 grams to pay for his hole?

 

[Moneybox]

Our 40e permit lasts a simpilar period although we lose the first 21 days but it only costs the value of 1g of gold.

 

[20x]

Our 40e permit lasts a simpilar period although we lose the first 21 days but it only costs the value of 1g of gold.

Suggests that part of what caused the eureka stockade was the diggers that got to the bottom and missed the gutter..
But still had to pay for it..

 

[20x]

Endless variables to consider when looking at the surface of a worked lead.
A lead with connecting holes today won't tell you the richest side area of a lead, getting some bits of any mullock could simply mean it was a digger fresh off the boat and didn't know exactly what he was doing..

 

[Hawkear]

View attachment 10240
Just looked this up, if gold was worth 10 pound an Oz back then a digger only needed 6-7 grams to pay for his hole?

Diggers down on their luck still had to pay these horrendous (in those days) fees just to work and make wages. That was OK for those on rich ground but many were impoverished by these license fees and the harsh penalties imposed if they were caught in their damp and wet holes without this soggy bit of paper on their person.
I sometimes feel that governments and bureaucrats want to return us to those days.

 

[20x]

Diggers down on their luck still had to pay these horrendous (in those days) fees just to work and make wages. That was OK for those on rich ground but many were impoverished by these license fees and the harsh penalties imposed if they were caught in their damp and wet holes without this soggy bit of paper on their person.
I sometimes feel that governments and bureaucrats want to return us to those days.

Yes, just another cost to factor into the equasion, and if a digger carted his gravel to a puddler, there is another cost.
I'm trying to create a view of the poor ground, particularly where holes are widely spaced to get an idea of what is left..

 

[Hippyty79]

Maybe never reported theirs correct findings , was it around war times, maybe never came home?

 

[20x]

When your detecting around colors and mullocks, have you ever wondered why there is awesome 'looking' gravels thrown out and not processed?

 

[Hawkear]

Wondered the same thing. What I have often found, from surface detecting of heaps, is that good looking gravel are frequently barren but the bits of clay (decomposed bedrock often white or grey) contain much better gold.
Perhaps originally the gravels were very loose and the gold just worked its way fully through the gravel and deposited on or in the bedrock which later decomposed the clay. That would have left the gravels relatively poor.
I’m sure the old timers would, as a result of their own trial and errors and conversations with fellow diggers, have recognised the true gold bearing layers by appearance and concentrated their processing time on the most likely layers.
Still it’s hard not to try to prove them wrong.

 

[20x]

Wondered the same thing. What I have often found, from surface detecting of heaps, is that good looking gravel are frequently barren but the bits of clay (decomposed bedrock often white or grey) contain much better gold.
Perhaps originally the gravels were very loose and the gold just worked its way fully through the gravel and deposited on or in the bedrock which later decomposed the clay. That would have left the gravels relatively poor.
I’m sure the old timers would, as a result of their own trial and errors and conversations with fellow diggers, have recognised the true gold bearing layers by appearance and concentrated their processing time on the most likely layers.
Still it’s hard not to try to prove them wrong.

Definitely on the right path mate, but let's imagine the rush in a lead, a digger that's learnt what's worth it and what not, this knowledge was a matter of survival.
A digger fresh off the boat stakes a claim beside yours on a lead, would you help with your knowledge or just watch him fail distracted by the higher gravels, jump in his shaft when he gives up, throw all the overburden into empty shafts and pick the plumbs from the pudding below..

 

[20x]

Something else seriously considering..
The digger that's right in the guts of the the deepest section of a lead/gutter, has a localised view of the bedrock topography, he could see the gutter direction and possible tributaries of the gutter.
But from what I've seen it only takes a difference in hardness of the bedrock between a tributary gutter and the main gutter to be harder/slower decomposition rate to trap a higher bench..
A possible explanation for the outer/spaced random diggings as I'm sure they would have been aware of it.
Other variables are the 2 man claim verses the company's later in the rush employing diggers to dig for these anomalies..

 

[Hawkear]

I can only think all of the above.
Genuine friendships were were no doubt forged in those harsh times, and genuine wishes for the success of friends likewise.
There were also many ‘new chum gullys‘ recorded, no doubt from encumbent diggers wishing to misinform new comers to dig In relatively poor areas to avoid competition in areas they knew to be richer.
For those neighbouring diggers on the richer areas perhaps from the perspective of friendship or just in an endeavour to help identify even better prospects, sharing of information would have been beneficial.

 

[20x]

I can only think all of the above.
Genuine friendships were were no doubt forged in those harsh times, and genuine wishes for the success of friends likewise.
There were also many ‘new chum gullys‘ recorded, no doubt from encumbent diggers wishing to misinform new comers to dig In relatively poor areas to avoid competition in areas they knew to be richer.
For those neighbouring diggers on the richer areas perhaps from the perspective of friendship or just in an endeavour to help identify even better prospects, sharing of information would have

Interesting point Geoff,
Maybe in the early days/primative blokes were more loyal abd honest..
Makes me think of how the modern prospector is, just a troll on social media looking for a mistake to take advantage of?

 

[Mackka]

Long story short, about 40 years ago a mate and I went to Inglewood ( the potato diggings) and we noted that the ground between two not so deep shafts hadn’t been touched except for a deposit of gravel which had been tossed from the other shafts. So we dug down about 8’ x 4’ and found , yep, absolutely nothing. However, Scotty, with your experience, if it looks good you should process it. Cheers Mackka