Hello All….
I’ve just returned from searching the silverfields in Ontario and would like to add my views to this thread. I recently met and became reasonably well acquainted with Cryptic. We spent considerable time detecting mine tailings together over the course of the autumn. He is a forthright, honest individual… highly skilled as a silver hunter… and knows how to use his F75 metal detector to good effect in that application.
Now to the 153 lb high-grade silver specimen. I had ample opportunity to evaluate it as far as possible based on surface features. Regardless of actual silver content, this specimen has a very good showing of native silver that is associated with some quantity of either cobaltite and / or safflorite. Without lab / assay analysis it is not possible to say more about exact chemical constituents or proportions of these associated substances especially since intergrades are quite common.
Ores tend to blast apart along the weakest or brittle planes. A result is that the surfaces of ores tend to show more of such material relative to the amount of silver showing than is normally found within the core. These “brittles” include calcite / dolomite vein material, plain country rock, and associated sulfides or arsenides common to the area such as cobaltite, niccolite, skutterudites, and safflorite. So clearly a visual determination of silver content is more subjective than otherwise. There is usually more silver content than is indicated by surface features.
An assay is destructive to the sample in question. To do a proper assay would ruin the sample’s specimen value to serious buyers. I know that Cryptic has done some limited “drilling” for assay purposes, but these results will prove meaningless because this technique is largely “hit and miss” and will not properly extract native silver. Relevant assay results require crushing the sample and submitting a homogeneous sample for analysis. I strongly recommend against such a procedure for obvious reasons. The destruction of a lifetime achievement for the sake of a forum discussion is absolute nonsense.
As with many finds nominated for the banner award, we must extend the benefit of the doubt in this instance because supplying the “proof” means the destruction of a museum quality specimen. Did I say a “museum quality” specimen?? Why yes I did. Prior to returning home I visited the local mineral museum and can assure readers this specimen would be prominently displayed there.
Congratulations Cryptic… your technical “know how” with your F75 in concert with your dedication and perseverance has resulted in a winner. Yes it will be difficult to improve on this piece, but I believe you are equal to the task… it’s just a matter of time IMO.
Jim.
