Covering Ground Vs Going For Depth

[jasong]

I think the key is knowing when to go fast and when to slow down. Actual prospecting (exploration) for me is always a fast procedure. Then the first pass over a patch is a fast but somewhat more methodical procedure. Each subsequent time I visit when the gold gets slimmer, I slow down.

There are exceptions, patches that are crazy hard to get to I'll just camp and work it out entirely in a week, maybe even go back with a drywasher.

[Giddiup]

Might depend on your changing mood during the day too! With the zed i usually start in HY General....if i am struggling with hot rock/ground noise v target signals i sometimes switch to HY Difficult....this happens on those stinking hot days where the water you carry wont last too much extra time and false signal digging! ( and i need more practise), I likely leave a few deep targets but like the guys have mentioned i will find the small stuff and make sure i return to the area at a later date for good slow complete coverage.

[Hard Prospector]

3 hours ago, jasong said:

That is one part of a philosophy I'm covering in a video series on my channel, what I feel is the way forward for new guys looking to get serious about successful prospecting in the US. The second part is that it doesn't just produce more gold but it also produces more "knowledge". With each nugget dug, that is one less indicator left in the ground for the next guy to find. 

Consider for a moment a virgin field and in that field are a number of patches. Each of those patches has exactly 1 nugget that is the "lead", or the first indicator for the original discoverer of that patch. That person takes some percentage of the nuggets, and he takes the knowledge of the location, along with the relevant geologic indicators that went along with the gold in that field. A prudent prospector then uses that knowledge to concentrate his efforts in more specific areas within that field or the next to find more patches rather than wasting time wandering around randomly.

Then the next guy comes along, finds his first nugget in the now not-virgin patch, and then takes more percentage of the nuggets out. And again, takes the knowledge. And uses that find more patches. And this continues until the patch is dead and both the gold and the knowledge that gold was there is gone.

The unlucky people that follow afterwards may never realize it was a patch, (no leads are left to even indicate he should spend more time there), may never make the connections between the local geology and the nugget size gold, may never realize where the gold is located due to the specific weathering/erosion in that location - unless someone else tells him. But a new guy can't expect help from anyone, he has to operate under the assumption that he will build this knowledge for himself, and I think the way to do it is to cover a lot of ground, dig a lot of gold, and figure out himself the before those chances are gone forever.

All that said, I don't completely ignore the small stuff, often they are the first indicators for a new area. But I don't sweat it either because IMO, that stuff is better left in the ground as "trimmings" for the lean days so that I don't lose confidence or lower my morale. When exploration leads to the skunk then I try to find an old patch to hit up for a few hours on the way home to grab a couple dinks and pay for gas.

Eventually of course, this approach won't be possible anymore and we are getting close to that day. But right now it is. So that's why I recommend to anyone just starting - take advantage of it while you can. I'm speaking as a guy who started with no prospecting friends or family, and in my detecting life only had 1 other person share a patch with me (he posted here). Almost every succesful US nuggethunter I've met (a few notable exceptions) have had friends, family, or company involvement which gave them advantages that the majority of greenhorns do not have nor will they ever have. So the approach for people like me when I start from nothing has to be more extreme to make up for that lack of knowledge.

Most the detactable gold (excluding Alaska) is within 4 hours of a city of a million people. The chance to do this won't last forever. I think it's a good idea to be ready to give something back when we are done because those that follow after us will have even less than we did when we started.

Wow....very well put

[Tortuga]

When I find one or two tiny dinks after a long day of detecting part of me says it's better than nothing. But the other half of me wishes I was back on some coarser gold. There's really no thrill to me like digging anything over 4-5 grams (and much bigger) and everytime I'm out detecting I'm praying that I'll find another big one.

I found a nice nugget once that wasn't very deep and I probably would've found it going fast and I dug another nice specimen once that was VERY deep and quiet that I would've only found going slow. As long as you're out there swinging and not sitting at home I think anything is possible.

I like to imagine that as the search pattern of a mono coil reduces down to a cone at depth, say a foot and a half deep, all you can cover is an area the size of a quarter at the end of the cone. If you think of a goldfield the size of a place like Greaterville and all anyone has searched at depth there is the size of a quarter, it's impossible that everywhere will get detected.

[Giddiup]

I do I do JW!

[phoenix]

17 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

 

Let's say there is a nugget that a detector can hit at 20". That means as long as any of those nuggets or larger exist in the top 20" you get them.

Now you go back and hunt with a machine that can hit those same nuggets to 24". The problem is for all intents and purposes you are now detecting only 4" of additional depth, and the odds of one of those targets being in 4" of ground is far less than the odds of one being in 20" of ground.

Unfortunately Steve with that analogy you have probably described perfectly why I do so badly in my neck of the woods. I live in the middle of goldfields that are only 2-3 hrs from Melbourne and would be amongst the most detected goldfields in the world, and I`ve never considered your point quite that way.  I`ve got this wizz bang detector that goes a bit deeper, but regardless of the size of the nugget  I get, I`m only detecting a extra few inches of dirt.     Not a pleasing thought. 
cheers Dave

[Steve Herschbach]

Especially when you consider, as LipCA and Tortuga have pointed out, that at depth the search area you are scanning is much smaller. You might be swinging a 20" coil but are poking around in that extra 4" of depth with just the tip of a narrowed and weak detection area. To get full coverage at max depth requires extreme overlapping.

The next time anybody gets a really deep nugget, regardless of size, observe exactly where your coil needs to be to get a detectable signal. In most cases you are only getting a good signal in the middle of the coil, that fades towards the edge of the coil. If you are swinging a 14" coil but can only hear the target under the middle 5" of the coil, think very hard about what you are observing.

When swinging the 14" coil are you being sure to advance only 5" with each step?

This restricted coverage at depth is why people still pull old coins out of small parks hunted by countless people over the last 40 years. You either get dead center over that deep target or miss it.

[flakmagnet]

Great thread.

Patch hunting is a whole different mind set than cleaning out an area.
I seem to have a predilection for being thorough and detecting slowly with tight overlaps. I have friends who detect in exactly the opposite manner, they range out covering huge areas, moving quickly. I have tried it but have never felt comfortable. I will try it again soon.

[Steve Herschbach]

I certainly do also go on long wandering exploration swings in a regular basis. I read all this again and it sounds like all I do these days is hunt patches methodically. That's not true. One really does need to mix it up and always be exploring new territory, and nothing beats a long wander over hill and valley for pure enjoyment.

[Jonathan Porter]

7 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Especially when you consider, as LipCA and Tortuga have pointed out, that at depth the search area you are scanning is much smaller. You might be swinging a 20" coil but are poking around in that extra 4" of depth with just the tip of a narrowed and weak detection area. To get full coverage at max depth requires extreme overlapping.

The next time anybody gets a really deep nugget, regardless of size, observe exactly where your coil needs to be to get a detectable signal. In most cases you are only getting a good signal in the middle of the coil, that fades towards the edge of the coil. If you are swinging a 14" coil but can only hear the target under the middle 5" of the coil, think very hard about what you are observing.

When swinging the 14" coil are you being sure to advance only 5" with each step?

This restricted coverage at depth is why people still pull old coins out of small parks hunted by countless people over the last 40 years. You either get dead center over that deep target or miss it.

Steve I have to disagree in some part with these comments. In my opinion the deeper larger gold with the GPZ is a broader response with an epicenter that requires accurate coil sweep centering to manifest properly. The centering is not down to the targets field only being pinpoint small but more the requirement of the swing position of the two Rx's of the coil needing to be equalized over the plume of the faint field thrown out by the target. The two Rx's of the DOD coil need to be dead center to manifest a deep target response fully and equally, but the coil needs to pass though the complete broad plume of the target to fully manifest a response.

The target basically becomes a Tx, so logic would say the further the coil is from the target the more spread out the targets Tx field will be, just like the Tx of the coil plumes outwards from its transmission point. The Twin Rx windings of the SuperD coil need to pass through the Tx field of the target to generate a response, if the target is deep then both Rx's of the coil need to be even relative to the target to manifest a clear signal hence requiring accurate coil sweep speed and control. The ability to tap into the full noise floor information of the GPZ is very beneficial in zoning in on deep nugget responses, I'm constantly amazed how far a target can be pulled away from the coil and still generate a recognizable response over ground noise response with the GPZ, which is why I always advocate using conservative settings when chasing deep gold.

I don't mean to be controversial just my 2 cents.

JP