The "Peralta" Stone Maps --- On Their Own

[azdave35]

I read up on it after you posted. Superior is mined like crazy anyway. If the Indians wanted it protected they should have fought harder. (LOL). Anyway I don't see the problem with letting them mine it. I personally don't see the big deal. Perfectly okay to flood and destroy hundreds of thousands of acres of sacred land in the New Deal but we can't mine a bit and generate wealth for fear of hurting someone's feelings.

Secondly, the Native Americans were living on borrowed land themselves and were just as barbaric as European stock This wasn't Apache or Gila or Cherokee or Muskogee or Creek or whomevers land. They all moved around, fought wars, abandoned areas, took up new ones etc.

Hell all the Natives are Siberian immigrants. So...

Let em mine already.

the resolution copper mine is not that big of a deal....like old says...they want to dump the waste in hewitt canyon...hewitt canyon is a big recreation area that thousands of people use ..thats the problem..resolution has blanket claimed the entire area..the reason the locals are so pissed is because resolution is a foreign company and they wont hire any locals..they want to bring in there own work force..so they will be the only ones getting rich...the locals wont benefit a bit from it

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[OldManOfTheRiver]

the resolution copper mine is not that big of a deal....like old says...they want to dump the waste in hewitt canyon...hewitt canyon is a big recreation area that thousands of people use ..thats the problem..resolution has blanket claimed the entire area..the reason the locals are so pissed is because resolution is a foreign company and they wont hire any locals..they want to bring in there own work force..so they will be the only ones getting rich...the locals wont benefit a bit from it

I get you guys on that. Sounds like some nasty State and local politics. I don't mind any company mining really but these multi-nationals are kind of sick. That's a big mine if it can produce 25% of the U.S demand for the next 30 years though!

 

[OldManOfTheRiver]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burra_Burra_Mine_(Tennessee)


Here's a big 'un from right beside my house. Interestingly there are the very similar stories of a Silver Ledge and a cave of gold close to here even with a doctor, just like Doc Thorne in your guys neck of the woods!!

I guess these stories never get old and so similar it makes ya wonder at just what is true and what isn't, and I lean towards almost all of it being untrue! But, yeah Copperhill was a rich mine but boy it still has the Ocoee River messed up here with acidic runoff. It has gotten better though. It used to be able to be seen from space!

 

[azdave35]

I get you guys on that. Sounds like some nasty State and local politics. I don't mind any company mining really but these multi-nationals are kind of sick. That's a big mine if it can produce 25% of the U.S demand for the next 30 years though!

arizona has plenty of big open pit copper mines that produce all the copper we need (they dont call us the copper state for nothing)..besides ..nobody throws copper away..it is all recycled...the only reason that mine is going in is so a bunch of foreign fat cats can get fatter...it will do nothing for the united states

 

[OldManOfTheRiver]

arizona has plenty of big open pit copper mines that produce all the copper we need (they dont call us the copper state for nothing)..besides ..nobody throws copper away..it is all recycled...the only reason that mine is going in is so a bunch of foreign fat cats can get fatter...it will do nothing for the united states

Well being a few thousand miles away from AZ at the moment I was hoping it would help keep folks employed there in Superior. That's sad and yes, copper is mostly recycled and PEX for piping is a much better alternative. Oh well. I tried playing Devil's Advocate here. lol.

Love the discussion guys and gals!!

 

[Old]

Yeap Dave,

John McCain is going to have to answer for that one.....to a much larger power. Kinda unforgiveable.

lyn

 

[azdave35]

Yeap Dave,

John McCain is going to have to answer for that one.....to a much larger power. Kinda unforgiveable.

lyn

yes lyn he will...very soon too....matter of fact he is already paying a penance for it ...long slow death

 

[somehiker]

Mining in Superior isn't the issue.............well maybe for Superior it is. The issue is the waste product dump, which at completion will be 6000 feet of overburden raising the existing desert floor over a mile high.

Don't know about 6,000 Ft. That would be higher than Weaver's Needle and Tortilla Mtn.
But if I owned a home anywhere in the Gold Canyon area, I'd be worrying about future property values.

A lot of this will be Corporate propaganda re: oversight of the dump's environmental hazards....etc.
But it does give some visual perspective to what they have planned and applied for approvals to do out there.

On a related note........just a random thought. With all the strong feelings associated with "all things Stone Maps", what I find really odd is the lack of interest and no discussion of what is just around the corner that's going to dramatically affect any search for the truth or evidence of what really happened around the Stones and their history. I understand and can totally relate to the time and effort MANY have expended on this subject and why it can be a touchy subject. It can be addictive and all consuming. Granted......got that!

But, what I don't understand is no discussion of what's going to happen in a matter of months when Resolution Copper comes in and changes the face of these mountains FOREVER! That's your real ticking time bomb. Any signs, evidence, trail markers and a good part of anything left behind is going to be buried under a mile of toxic waste. Do your homework now.....before its too late.

I know it's late, but welcome to the party anyway.....

 

[Old]

Wayne, Weaver's Needle just might get some competition.

I have already allowed as how math isn't my strong suit.

Just from RC's own estimates...........Total tonnage of tailing = 1.5 billion tons. B.......billion, 1,500,000,000. Distributed over 1933 acres.........using round numbers I get 750 thousand additional tons per acre. That assumes all acres are equal in ability to receive (which they aren't)

It will be delivered in a slurry mix which RC believes will reduce the volume over time as the water dissipates........ maybe.

Even using their optimist forecast the crest will rise 2804 feet over the entire area. That's above the existing structure, ridge and valley. At the top of the existing ridges I believe you are already looking down on Weaver's Needle. Correct me where I'm wrong.....I sure could be.

I believe Weaver's Needle itself is roughly a 900 foot structure, the top of which sets at roughly 4400' ASL.

Portions of Hewitt Canyon (ridges) are already at the 6000' and above level. The plan is to fill the low canyons and raise the entire landscape (as I read the plan). Your mileage may vary. Its open for interpretation.

Weaver's Needle isn't going to be the most prominent structure in the area (I don't think).

lyn

 

[sdcfia]

750,000 tons/acre / 43,560 sq ft/acre = 17.2 tons/sq ft

17.2 tons/sq ft / 1.5 tons/cu yd = 11.5 cu yd/sq ft

11.5 cu yd / sq ft x 27 cu ft/cu yd = 310 cu ft / sq ft = 310 ft high

 

[Cubfan64]

Here's another way to look at it which comes out close to sdcfia's result...

According to a few different websites I checked, 1 ton of rock (ranging in size from roughly 1.5 inches down to sand) will cover 20 square feet to a depth of 1 foot...

There are 43,560 square feet per acre (66 ft x 660 ft)...

So to cover 43,560 square ft of area 1 foot deep in rock would require 43,650/20 = 2,178 tons

RC claims (by the math in Lynda's post above) they will be depositing 776,000 tons of mine tailings per acre. As was mentioned, it's likely they won't cover each acre with the same volume of tailings, but to keep the math simple let's assume they do...

Just take 776,000 tons / 2,178 tons = 356 feet (meaning 776,000 tons per acre would cover 1933 acres 356 feet deep assuming uniform distribution of tailings).

Based on that number you can estimate whatever you want - assume they'll fill in the low areas first and that 25% of the 1933 acres are low areas it would mean the low areas would be raised by ~ 1424 ft., etc...

Whatever the final result, rest assured that area will NEVER look the same again. The tallest building in Phoenix is the Chase Tower at 483 feet (40 stories) for perspective. There is history there that will be forever buried.

I doubt Bob Garman ever imagined something like that would happen to those canyons not to mention the countless other prospectors who explored those canyons over the years.

 

[somehiker]

I agree with the 300' + average fill estimate. Good work guys
Bad enough, considering the similarly stacked tailings visible from US 60 and Hwy 188 at Miami are only about 100' above the original land elevation.
That is certainly a view without any appeal for anyone other that the stockholders and the pols they contribute to.
Makes all those rules barring serious prospecting or "treasure hunting" in "Wilderness Areas" a joke, doesn't it ?

 

[azdave35]

I agree with the 300' + average fill estimate. Good work guys
Bad enough, considering the similarly stacked tailings visible from US 60 and Hwy 188 at Miami are only about 100' above the original land elevation.
That is certainly a view without any appeal for anyone other that the stockholders and the pols they contribute to.
Makes all those rules barring serious prospecting or "treasure hunting" in "Wilderness Areas" a joke, doesn't it ?

lol...you can do anything you want if you have enough money

 

[somehiker]

I've had my own experience Dave, with the mountains that can be moved when politicians and money men shake hands.
That longstanding historical, cultural and environmental concerns are not the real "green" which naive voters are brainwashed into supporting at the ballot box.
Every hooker has a price.

It would be interesting to hear J. Scott Woods' thoughts on this.
Wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't a part of his decision to "move on" from the TNFS.

 

[Holyground]

No, that's just what they want you to believe. It's like the so called dates on the Peralta Stone Maps. They really are not dates, they are Google Earth Locations. The Maps were made before 1847...or were they?

 

[somehiker]

No, that's just what they want you to believe. It's like the so called dates on the Peralta Stone Maps. They really are not dates, they are Google Earth Locations. The Maps were made before 1847...or were they?

Them rocks were made by mother earth herself, IMO......a long, long time ago.
And the evidence suggests somebody carved them sometime before google's earth showed up on our computer screens........
I got that part figgered out right.....I think

 

[sdcfia]

lol...you can do anything you want if you have enough money

Reality sucks, no?

 

[Old]

Thanks guys,

I'm getting the numbers from RC General Plan of Operation.....that's the big pdf file first mentioned as the long story in my prior post.

Cutting to the chase........the waste material site and specs are in the section from about page 129 - 150 with particular emphasis on data from about page 144 with exhibits attached. Within that discussion are road closings and loss of access as well as proposed changes to the landscape.

We can quibble over whether the increased footage means total height above sea level or additional height.......really doesn't matter for our discussion. Lets just assume the least just for discussion. That's still a mega change to the landscape. I think we can agree on that.

The original point was massive change is coming to a wide area of interest. Whatever is "out there" in the form of markers, land references and possible artifacts will be obliterated and/or beyond reach in a matter of months. That's what the original post was about.

 

[somehiker]

No need to quibble, since the AMSL data is is given on Pg.134

At the point of closure in Year40, the facility will consist of a four-sided perimeter embankment dam with an ultimate crest elevation of 2,805
ft (855m)above mean sea level (amsl). Maximum dam height will be on the southern embankment at approximately 574ft (175m) with a 5:1 exterior slope angle(Figures3.3-7 and 3.3-7a) to help blend into the natural terrain.

Aside from the obvious concern we should ALL have for any detrimental impacts on the land ,it's archaeological resources, wildlife, and of course our "other" interests in what is out there, how might this aspect of the project affect RG's own plans ?
In that.......
if the TSF lies within his own area of interest, it doesn't allow much more time for any interested production company to accomplish much in the way of film documentation.

 

[azdave35]

Thanks guys,

I'm getting the numbers from RC General Plan of Operation.....that's the big pdf file first mentioned as the long story in my prior post.

Cutting to the chase........the waste material site and specs are in the section from about page 129 - 150 with particular emphasis on data from about page 144 with exhibits attached. Within that discussion are road closings and loss of access as well as proposed changes to the landscape.

We can quibble over whether the increased footage means total height above sea level or additional height.......really doesn't matter for our discussion. Lets just assume the least just for discussion. That's still a mega change to the landscape. I think we can agree on that.

The original point was massive change is coming to a wide area of interest. Whatever is "out there" in the form of markers, land references and possible artifacts will be obliterated and/or beyond reach in a matter of months. That's what the original post was about.

in other words no matter how you look at it we are getting screwed lol