Hunting In Undiscovered Areas?

[Gold Catcher]

Guys, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the following: Old wisdom says that gold can be found where it has been found before by others. Following this "rule", I have mostly been hunting in areas that are well known for their gold deposits and that have been heavily mined by others. This has worked well for me and I have found decent gold over the years (although I always could use some more...;). However, lately I am more and more playing with the thought to explore areas where there are no known gold deposits recorded. Here in California there are many areas that are not explored by others that have the potential for gold. I am trying to locate these areas by for instance comparing the geological maps with those maps of known deposits. By inspecting these maps I sometimes see geological formations on public land that are virtually identical to those where gold mines are located, but they have never been mined or claimed before. This happens more often in desert areas where there is a lack of water and perhaps therefore the old timers where not all over it. I am sure this is not typical for California and the same potential for "undiscovered" bonanzas exist all over the world. So, what  do you guys think about such adventurous new places? I would hate to be skunked every day for weeks and months while exploring potential new areas, but I can't help the thought that it is nearly impossible for the old timers to have caught every single gold bearing area. 

[principedeleon]

Ill try where the river have gave good gold and try up in the hills.. if known gold have been present then the hills might have gold also i guess.. 

Most montain terrain have shallow bedrock or a false bedrock or clay pipe .. well in most gold bearing areas around here.. 

One good thing to beat the skunk if you dont find nothing in the hills .. expose bedrock in the rivers might be overlooked by the oldtimers .

 

[fredmason]

A sound theory...but, be prepared for many dry days. 
Chris Ralph covers this in his book and articles...

fred

[Steve Herschbach]

If I target known ground I almost never get skunked. Yet these days hitting known ground is getting lean results. There are indeed undiscovered patches out there, but anyone who tries it knows the normal result is many days with no gold. It’s a worthy goal for sure and can result in a big score, but tests the limits of how much time you want to spend finding little to nothing. Here was my last attempt, there is some good commentary about the subject on the thread. I do believe I will give it another go this summer. 

 

[GB_Amateur]

3 hours ago, Gold Catcher said:

I would hate to be skunked every day for weeks and months while exploring potential new areas,

This is probably the deciding factor.  You better have a good clothespin with you if you plan on going out into undiscovered territory.  (Translation of what Fred said 😁)  The fact that you are expressing potential pain in going many trips without finding gold is an indication the wide-eyed search of the wilds may not be for you.

Consider buying a lottery ticket.  You can buy one of the scratch-off tickets which gives you a higher likelihood of cashing a small prize, but (depending on the game), no chance of a big score.  You can buy one of the mega-lottery tickets which give you a miniscule chance of a life-changing payout, but almost guaranteed of misses ('skunks'), even if you bought many tickets a week for a lifetime.  As usual I've oversimplified.  In fact here in the US the big prize tickets tend to "throw you a bone" of $5, $50, etc. probably in an attempt to keep up your morale.  (Good analogy to Steve's post about mixing known areas with unknown areas to avoid getting too discouraged?)

Back when metal detectors started becoming decent for finding gold (mid-late 1970s) it made more sense to go to the spots where gold had been removed, since previous methods couldn't cover ground efficiently.   But as more detectorists (and better detectors) because available the low haning fruit was lost, the high hanging fruit was attacked, and eventually most of the fruit was gone, period.  That swung the balance more towards looking for gold in places where it's not known to have been found.  Does this occurrence now dis-favor looking in places known previously to have produced gold?  Hard to say, but most likely depends upon the goals and makeup of the person asking the question.

 

 

 

[Gold Catcher]

Pretty cool Steve. I guess I can deal with the frustration if I every now and then go back to my old spots to convince me that I can still find gold. It’s the old saying: either one step away from a million dollars, or a million steps away from a dollar. I would be willing though to go a million steps for a million dollars 🙂

[klunker]

Well GC. There you go thinking again. I will warn you that if you keep it up you will be cursed with the affliction of finding substantial quantities of gold.  I doubt that, at this point , I can save you from yourself so I'll share some ideas that have worked for me.

 As far as the "mother load" area of the Sierra Nevada range goes I would be very surprised if there was an acre that had not been prospected for gold by the mid 1860s. But they didn't have very good detectors back then and the only way they could recover the gold was to see it and reach down and pick it up, throw the gold bearing dirt in the wind and hope the gold dropped before it blew away or concentrate it with water - and there you have a good idea. Look higher than any available water. there was rainwater but rarely enough for profitable washing. If you go to the higher elevations the rain soon turned to snow so even if it was a rich placer the working season was unpredictable and short so these areas were often abandon before they were worked out and a lot of good detector ground is still available and perhaps some that was discovered but never worked

  Another idea is pocket hunting. I am absolutely certain that I will be here bragging about a stupendous pocket discovery before this coming season is over.  

 

[Gold Catcher]

Yup, all good points. However,  I am more optimistic in the desert areas down south. One thing you got right for sure: i am way past to save myself....

[Swegin]

The old timers didn't miss much.   You may try the outer fringes of known areas.

 

[Andyy]

7 hours ago, Gold Catcher said:

Guys, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the following: Old wisdom says that gold can be found where it has been found before by others.

Lot's of the books record the areas of high productivity and low productivity finds.  The low productivity finds were often forgotten or are not as widely explored anymore by the general public.  Also, just because there is a known gold area, it does not mean that everybody and their grandmother has covered every square inch.  Many many of my finds are in known gold areas, just not in the heart of the main work.  Many time there are no "signs of life" anywhere near where I am finding gold.  Maybe they are not noticeable or they just weren't worth the old timer's efforts.  But staying on the claims can be really tough.  I really don't know if you will get skunked more by going off the claims or not, but I can tell you that your chances of the big finds tend to increase 10 fold when you go off on your own and explore.  And when you find a couple gullies that nobody else found (because they were afraid to explore) you will more than pay off all of those skunks.

Well, hopefully :)