Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Naxos Resources (NAXOF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jerry in Omaha who wrote (8551)	1/25/1998 12:13:00 PM
From: ShoppinTheNet	Respond to of 20681

Pj Mr. Christopher states "The Franklin Lake is unique in that its compositional materail, zeolite, has acted as a sponge trapping metals that have been leached by the river over millions of years. A big concentrating depo. Metals in the river water will exchange with other elements in the zeolite, clay etcs. This process is not simple and the metals are in some sort of chemosorbed state, thus difficult to extract. The S&G layer probably has some level of capacity to chemosorb these metals, albiet lower than clay, thereby producing a component of refractory ore." This sounds like to me both the""so called "alluvial" gold" and " the so called "chemosorbed""gold." Are Alluvial deposits. Alluvial is defined by Websters as "found in or made up of alluvium" Alluvium is defined by Websters as "sand clay etc.gradually deposited by moving water, as along a riverbed or the shore of a lake." So as discussed on this thread both types are thus alluvial deposits. They both happen to be in different forms. One could call them alluvial free gold and the other alluvial chemosorbed gold. To call one alluvial and not the other would be missleading. there is a third possibility you implyed. This would be your possible gold nuggets that were possibly deposited in the lake bed durring the creation of the bed itself. Thus it was there and never put there by an outside force, ie alluvial or mass wasting.

To: Jerry in Omaha who wrote (8551)	1/25/1998 12:27:00 PM
From: Terry Christopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

<<"...I understand that we are discussing two forms of gold deposits. My point is that they are both alluvial as I understand the property and its deposits.">> I would guess there are two types: free and refractory. A free gold component is not surprising since the area has been known for Au mining in the past. Free Au is simply little particles or nuggets that are physically broken away from bedrock at another location, transported via water to it new resting place - FL. The refractory component is different. It starts with the dissolution of Au from some souce up stream. It's dissolved in solution like salt in water - you can't see it. The dissolved Au is transported to the FL area, where it reacts with the zeolite. Thus, both are related to alluvial processes, but in different 'forms'. <<An interesting topic will be the proportion of so called "alluvial" gold to the so called "chemosorbed" gold.>> The fraction of chemosorbed, IMO, will be FAR greater than the alluvial fraction. Depending on the history of FL there could very well be ancient river beds with high grades of free gold. For me that is of little interest. I'm more interested in seeing the if there will be very rich chemosorbed clay layers. These types of settings (layers and layers of clay - zeolite) will not allow water to flow evenly through the deposit. Logically, the layers with the greatest ancient volume of river flow should have the highest grades. TC