CLUES TO THE LOST DUTCMAN MINE

[deducer]

"matches no known samples in Arizona"
actually that statement is quite ludicrous ...they did not test against the few million possibilities of arizona ore...more than likely they compared it to a few

"Bob Corbin and Tom Kollenborn both swore affidavits stating that they had seen the assay report done by the Goldman's store on the Holmes ore. Neither of them, as far as I'm aware, ever mentioned any trace of silver. "

you have probably never had an assay done but you can request gold only..it cost more to do gold and silver...highly doubtful they would spend extra dough on silver assay
"Considering the proximity of the location of the Pit Mine to claims on file during Waltz's time, isn't it a bit inconceivable that no miners ever came across it?"
maybe the mine was covered back then and couldn't be seen readily

No I have never had an assay done, nor have I and nor will I ever do any mining, or related activity, even as simple as sinking a pick into the ground. The subject of actual mining and geology holds absolutely no interest for me, and my knowledge of either subject is absolutely nil, so anytime I open my mouth about it, I am certain to get in trouble.

Anyway, that being said- I don't think the UA ore collection is anything to sneer at. From the other website:

In the 1920's, 30's, 40's, 50's and 60's, the geology department at the University of Arizona in Tucson was known simply as the, University of Arizona Department of Geology. The Geology department included as one of it's sub departments, the mines and minerology and mineral resources branch. There were some 7 or 8 seperate branches of geological study under the U of A Geology department.

Sometime in the 1970's the U of A at Tucson reorganized their geology department and renamed it the, University of Arizona Geosciences department. There are still some 7 or 8 sub departments of geology at the U of A, the minerology and mineral resources department is just one of them.

Because of the extreme amount of mining done in Arizona, the old Geology department, as well as the newly renamed Geosciences department, focus their studies on structural geology and deposit types and accumulate an enormous collection of ore samples from mines and deposits all over Arizona, focusing on Cu-Mo-Au, epithermal Au-Ag, and iron oxide Cu-Au deposits within Arizona. These deposits make up almost all copper and gold bearing deposits known within Arizona dating back to the 1850's. They have an extensive collection of ore from every known deposit in Arizona that is available.

There is also a three page analysis that was done on the same ore that came from Holmes, the first page of which was posted on the other website. The image is no longer there, but perhaps someone on here has a copy that they could repost?

It states that the Holmes ore (or the ore that it was compared to) comes from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera

The following report is from an analysis done over 40 years ago on some of the exact same ore Dr. Glover EDS tested at the University of Nevada in 1997. Certain parts have had to be blacked out to protect the owner of the gold ore and who contracted to have the analysis done. The resulting analysis of the testing done over 40 years ago concludes the ore tested can be matched to no other known ore deposit anywhere in Arizona.

The Tortilla caldera is the youngest of 4 calderas within the Superstition mountain range. The Superstition caldera being the oldest, collapsed and the Tortilla caldera rose and fell taking over a third of the NE part of the older Superstition caldera with it, altering the geology of the older portion of the Superstition caldera and mixing it with the geology of the newer Tortilla caldera. The other two known calderas in the region, the Doggie Springs and the Black Mesa calderas do not appear to have significantly affected the geology of the Tortilla caldera.

The Superstition Cauldron Complex

Tortilla Caldera in pink:

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[azdave35]

you will never convince me they have ore samples from every mine in arizona...do you realize how many mines are in arizona?..where did that come from?...there are almost 13,000 mines just in the arizona MRDS files...and they only have a small percent of the actual mines listed...less than 10% ..dont believe everything you read

 

[Real of Tayopa]

An assay report is only for specified materials, the assayer generally does not concern himself with speculation, hence the report may be quite accurate, but make no mention of Siler.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

azdave35, .... It does not say samples from every mine in Arizona, it says a sample from every mine that is available. A BIG difference and deducer is correct. I have seen the collection and associated paperwork.

Matthew

 

[Real of Tayopa]

Az, you are quite correct, however, they now have enough to specify various mineral zones in Az.

 

[deducer]

you will never convince me they have ore samples from every mine in arizona...do you realize how many mines are in arizona?..where did that come from?...there are almost 13,000 mines just in the arizona MRDS files...and they only have a small percent of the actual mines listed...less than 10% ..dont believe everything you read

Perhaps not every single mine in Arizona, but the database still shouldn't be dismissed as a potential asset, research-wise.

At any rate, there seems to be ample evidence, circumstantial and otherwise, that just shows the LDM as being an unique event, and the Pit Mine being unrelated.

 

[PotBelly Jim]

Very interesting discussion. I wonder how the analysis of the Holmes ore led to a conclusion that the ore originated from "the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera"? This would indicate to me that:

1. A specimen was collected from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera, it was analyzed, and it matched with the Holmes ore. This would seem to indicate that either the mine has been found, in order to collect the specimen; or the sample was by incredibly good luck taken from just the right spot in that rather large fracture zone, in order for it to match the Holmes ore.
2. Or, the owner of the ore stated that it came from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera, and the organization conducting the analysis simply included it in the analysis as to the origin of the specimen.

Does anyone know? Thanks, Jim

 

[azdave35]

azdave35, .... It does not say samples from every mine in Arizona, it says a sample from every mine that is available. A BIG difference and deducer is correct. I have seen the collection and associated paperwork.

Matthew

matthew...try as you may you will never convince me that a government ran study done by a bunch of college kids is the last word....this is done by the same government that has tried to convince us that there is no gold or platinum in volcanics...also the same government that swears there is no platinum in the U.S.....i'm sticking with what i have learned over the years

 

[azdave35]

Very interesting discussion. I wonder how the analysis of the Holmes ore led to a conclusion that the ore originated from "the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera"? This would indicate to me that:

1. A specimen was collected from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera, it was analyzed, and it matched with the Holmes ore. This would seem to indicate that either the mine has been found, in order to collect the specimen; or the sample was by incredibly good luck taken from just the right spot in that rather large fracture zone, in order for it to match the Holmes ore.
2. Or, the owner of the ore stated that it came from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera, and the organization conducting the analysis simply included it in the analysis as to the origin of the specimen.

Does anyone know? Thanks, Jim

jim..sounds like a bunch of b.s. to me

 

[deducer]

Very interesting discussion. I wonder how the analysis of the Holmes ore led to a conclusion that the ore originated from "the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera"? This would indicate to me that:

1. A specimen was collected from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera, it was analyzed, and it matched with the Holmes ore. This would seem to indicate that either the mine has been found, in order to collect the specimen; or the sample was by incredibly good luck taken from just the right spot in that rather large fracture zone, in order for it to match the Holmes ore.
2. Or, the owner of the ore stated that it came from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera, and the organization conducting the analysis simply included it in the analysis as to the origin of the specimen.

Does anyone know? Thanks, Jim

Who knows? Only the first page of the 3 page report was posted on the other website, and even then the image of that first page is no longer there. Perhaps a poster here has a copy in their files? Would love to see it again, however redacted it is.

It is not clear to me what exactly this report represents, whether it is just a comparison of ore samples or something else. Hopefully someone has more information.

 

[Real of Tayopa]

az, volcanics , no eruptions, are precisely involved in the ores at Tayopa.












tayopa, they origionatedthrough fractures i the earth.

 

[PotBelly Jim]

jim..sounds like a bunch of b.s. to me

Dave,

I will defer to your expertise...seeing as I know next to nothing about this and you've spent your life in the mining field ...

Does anyone know if the analysis of the Holmes ore was done by the UofA geology dept, or was it done by some other outside agency that wouldn't have access to UofA's collection? Thanks, Jim

 

[PotBelly Jim]

Who knows? Only the first page of the 3 page report was posted on the other website, and even then the image of that first page is no longer there. Perhaps a poster here has a copy in their files? Would love to see it again, however redacted it is.

It is not clear to me what exactly this report represents, whether it is just a comparison of ore samples or something else. Hopefully someone has more information.

Thanks, Deducer...I'll take a look at the other channel. I would like to second your request for anyone that has a copy of the report, to pls post if able. Take care, Jim

 

[deducer]

jim..sounds like a bunch of b.s. to me

There was an actual report done, by Crismon and Nichols Assayers and Chemists, in Salt Lake City, Utah. Two, in fact- the first was an assay, the second report established the mineral content of the host rock.

 

[deducer]

Thanks, Deducer...I'll take a look at the other channel. I would like to second your request for anyone that has a copy of the report, to pls post if able. Take care, Jim

Found some more information:

Page 1 of the analysis dealt with identifying and certifying the precise genetic makeup of the ore sample.
Pages 2 and 3 deal with that ore sample analysis being identified for it's exact type of deposit, and compared to another known ore sample, and the findings of those two ores being compared to each other.

Even though this ore analysis was done over 40 years ago, and while two of the principals in that analysis have passed on, two are still alive today and one of them is actively involved in the process of searching and verifying known sites and their relationship to this ore analysis. Because of that fact, pages 2 and 3 cannot be posted. The ore analysis was a private arrangement and was never used, or ever intended to be used, to claim or patent any mine, it was done purely for the information of the individual persons who were involved.

While page 1 of the analysis is quite precise and specific, there are only 2 or 3 things on that page that are of real value to know. While many dutch enthusiasts believe the most important point of the LDM geology is decoding it's 'fingerprint", or genetic makeup, the most imortant point is the exact identification of the type of deposit the gold was formed as. Knowing the "fingerprint" is excellent information but without the knowledge of the exact type of deposit that formed that "fingerprint", you will be endlessly engaged in a spitting contest over minor elements that vary from one sample to the next, even samples taken from the exact same mine. Dr. Glover learned this to late in his ore analysis.

 

[PotBelly Jim]

Found some more information:

Hmmm...sounds like the owner/s of the report did not want it to become public.

Edit: Disappointing, but understandable.

Thanks, Jim

 

[azdave35]

There was an actual report done, by Crismon and Nichols Assayers and Chemists, in Salt Lake City, Utah. Two, in fact- the first was an assay, the second report established the mineral content of the host rock.

do you have a copy available?

 

[deducer]

do you have a copy available?

Read my post on the question of there being a copy, here.

 

[somehiker]

all i'm saying is most mines past and present are operated to draw in investors..a few are legit but most weren't and aren't.. geological reports and assays are faked to sucker in high dollar money men...if you are going to hunt lost mines you should educate yourself on mining...save time and disappointment in the field...as far as ted cox goes...i never met the man so i can't vouch for him..but i tend to believe what he wrote.i wont go into it here why i do..if you choose not to that's your prerogative

Too easy to go off on a tangent, should we start in on how the promotion of mining ventures is often fraudulent to some degree. So probably best to stay away from that. I didn't know T. Cox either, but he certainly may have believed every word he wrote and said was absolutely true. Those like him that do, all too often can be very convincing to the gullible, or at least, even if completely wrong in fact, can be taken as support for any confirmation bias their audience already has.
I probably know as much as I need to, to recognize what the legend speaks of as the LDM if I happen to come across it. Other than grabbing a couple of samples, I have little interest in taking it any further than that.

 

[somehiker]

Read my post on the question of there being a copy, here.

Anyone try Greg ?