Video 4 - The Peralta Stone Maps with Frank Augustine

sgtfda said:
I doubt that is true. Sandstone would be the last thing that would be used to line a smelter. Look at was used for the Indian ovens.
Click to expand...


So True Frank, so true!

I have a question. What was the car make and model Travis was driving during all of these discoveries he made out there? Does anyone have any pictures of it from both sides?

I know that's two questions but they're related.
 

sgtfda said:
If nothing else it's a spot to check out if your looking for a little gold. They would not have put that much effort into the spot unless it was paying. Your correct Bob.
Click to expand...

Not to start an argument over how deep someone will dig, but in the 19th century and early 20th, more than a few prospectors made it a rule to always dig to bedrock, before deciding whether a place would be worth the effort. Hence the so-called "Lucky Swedes" that hit it good in Nome where others found little gold (they simply dug to bedrock) and in California I know of two prospect shafts that are quite deep, both dug without a speck of gold found and one is 30 feet deep the other over 120 feet. (A 120 foot rope would not touch bottom, not sure how deep it is) Professor Jenney's test digs in the Black Hills here are another example, he tried to dig to bedrock at every site he tested, though if it proved more than 30 or 40 feet he would move on due to having limited time. I know that a LOT of guys today are not willing to put that kind of effort on the mere chance there could be gold down deep, but 100 years ago and more, it was fairly common practice to always try to dig to bedrock before making a judgment about whether a site is worth claiming or mining. I know of a couple of "dry wells" in Arizona that are not really dry wells they were prospect shafts dug to bedrock that proved too poor to work, but when people see them today they assume it must have been something else. It is hard to say what someone was really digging for when you find an old hole in the ground, could have been for gold, or water, or ??

Please do continue;

:coffee2: :coffee2:
 

Oroblanco said:
Not to start an argument over how deep someone will dig, but in the 19th century and early 20th, more than a few prospectors made it a rule to always dig to bedrock, before deciding whether a place would be worth the effort. Hence the so-called "Lucky Swedes" that hit it good in Nome where others found little gold (they simply dug to bedrock) and in California I know of two prospect shafts that are quite deep, both dug without a speck of gold found and one is 30 feet deep the other over 120 feet. (A 120 foot rope would not touch bottom, not sure how deep it is) Professor Jenney's test digs in the Black Hills here are another example, he tried to dig to bedrock at every site he tested, though if it proved more than 30 or 40 feet he would move on due to having limited time. I know that a LOT of guys today are not willing to put that kind of effort on the mere chance there could be gold down deep, but 100 years ago and more, it was fairly common practice to always try to dig to bedrock before making a judgment about whether a site is worth claiming or mining. I know of a couple of "dry wells" in Arizona that are not really dry wells they were prospect shafts dug to bedrock that proved too poor to work, but when people see them today they assume it must have been something else. It is hard to say what someone was really digging for when you find an old hole in the ground, could have been for gold, or water, or ??

Please do continue;

:coffee2: :coffee2:
Click to expand...


That would be about two inches too three feet in both these area's respectively.
 

Here is a look at what I found yesterday. In mint condition this thing maybe worth upwards of $400. I'd say the one I found is about a ten dollar crumple.
That ring is the same thing I've found at other old wagon trails or cattle ranches.


View attachment 1169442 View attachment 1169438
 

Bill Riley said:
Here is a look at what I found yesterday. In mint condition this thing maybe worth upwards of $400. I'd say the one I found is about a ten dollar crumple.
That ring is the same thing I've found at other old wagon trails or cattle ranches.


View attachment 1169442 View attachment 1169438
Click to expand...

I think that sign is "way cool" (hope that doesn't give away age here by using that slang) and goes to show, you never know what you will find! Kudos on the neat find!

:coffee2: :coffee2:
 

Bill Riley said:
Frank, I haven't seen it in years and wanted to film the other road and older bridge too. Good thing I went and found that old sign it'll look good in my garage!
I did the same thing years ago and went to the wrong bridge.
I spent more time looking at the old bridge location after I saw the first location. Just wanted to remember why I did that. Now I know.
I don't think they came from either location they would be busted up in that crappy hard ground.

Click to expand...

Nice effort Bill!
Who could ignore you? You are irresistibly interesting.
 

Bill Riley said:
Here is a look at what I found yesterday. In mint condition this thing maybe worth upwards of $400. I'd say the one I found is about a ten dollar crumple.
That ring is the same thing I've found at other old wagon trails or cattle ranches.


View attachment 1169442 View attachment 1169438
Click to expand...

You may actually be the first person to find any profit following those stones.
$10.00 is $10.00.
Nice!
 

Last edited:
sgtfda said:
View attachment 1169288
Speaking of arrastres
Click to expand...

Dime a dozen.
009.JPG

004.JPG

Arrastra1.JPG
 

Last edited:
sdcfia, those wouldn't be from the Pinos Altos, NM area would they?
 

Last edited:
Definitely worked more than usual, at least the perimeter stones. More so than the bed stone visible in the photo.
But the evidence of tie plates having been used to keep some of the stones aligned. Not likely someone would spend so much time working the stones to this extent for a simple arrastre. Could they have been taken and recycled from an older structure ? Similar methods of jointing were used in some stonework in Peru and Egypt, using copper or bronze ties of different shapes to keep the joints aligned and tight. Tie bars or anchor rods are still used for stone construction, but are usually not exposed like these must have been. Bolted plates are used for repairs, attachments and sometimes for decorative purposes, but that is not likely the case here.

Regards:SH.
 

somehiker said:
Definitely worked more than usual, at least the perimeter stones. More so than the bed stone visible in the photo.
But the evidence of tie plates having been used to keep some of the stones aligned. Not likely someone would spend so much time working the stones to this extent for a simple arrastre. Could they have been taken and recycled from an older structure ? Similar methods of jointing were used in some stonework in Peru and Egypt, using copper or bronze ties of different shapes to keep the joints aligned and tight. Tie bars or anchor rods are still used for stone construction, but are usually not exposed like these must have been. Bolted plates are used for repairs, attachments and sometimes for decorative purposes, but that is not likely the case here.

Regards:SH.
Click to expand...

Howdy Wayne,

To me they look more like shallow drill holes made to break the rocks to size.:dontknow:

Homar
 

The drill holes probably line up simply because they are both sides of the stone that was split.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Woodbury Cabin

⬅️ Previous Thread

Sierra de Espuma

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Latest Discussions

Back
Top