Has Anyone Here Done any Gold Prospecting?

[Michigan Swampbuck]

Has anyone here panned for gold? If so, could you describe how you went about choosing where to pan and if you found any gold, be it fine dust, flakes, or nuggets? Also, what techniques did you use, like a sluice or a rocker, or how did you use the pan to concentrate the heavy material?

There is physical labor involved, but for me, it is a recreational activity and on my bucket list. I find it pleasant to sit there and pan away while I listen to the gurgling stream and other sounds of nature. There is the occasional wildlife encounter as I'm not making much noise or moving around. Right now, the ticks and mosquitoes are emerging, so it won't be so pleasant for very long.

[Michigan Swampbuck]

I noticed the zero response rate on this subject. Maybe I should have rephrased that question to, "Is anyone interested in hearing about gold prospecting?"

I could post about my adventures in gold prospecting, if there is any real interest in any of that. I feel pretty good about the whole thing, considering what I have recovered from my property, which I have the mineral rights to.

I can back it all up, of course, and explain why it is there and how much I think is there, and how it is possible to make some money with my discoveries. Prospecting can mean a couple of things, and the prospect of owning the mineral rights to 40 acres with a creek that produces any amount of gold, especially at current gold prices, sounds promising. Add to that mix the fact that I live in a booming recreational area, and I see an opportunity to make some cash from a number of activities here.

[Ksihkehe]

I find the topic interesting and followed your threads on it elsewhere, but I have no experience actually doing it beyond looking at some spots. I've watched a lot mining of different things using different techniques, like the Gold Rush umbrella of shows. There are some interesting shows and documentaries on smaller operations mining for other resources as well. I looked into doing it in some of the riverbeds here. Like you, I thought it would be an active hobby in the outdoors. It's just not practical here for me. I'm sure there's gold in some of the old riverbeds, but getting to it would probably cause problems. I know there's a popular place for geodes within a reasonable day trip distance, but I really wouldn't know where to look or what to do with one if I happened to find one.

I would certainly follow further posts on your mining efforts, but I have nothing of real value to add. I usually refrain from commenting if I don't have a decent handle on a specific topics like this, but those also tend to be threads I find quite valuable as a reader because I lack direct experience. I can watch videos about it and have, but they're all edited for consumption and geared toward entertainment. Your interest in the topic is more practical and your motivation is sharing information rather than getting clicks, so it's much more rare and valuable to me.

There are probably not many people that have done any mining, but I think a great deal more are interested in it. I would imagine a lot of people that are trying to homestead and subsist on what they can extract from their property have considered mining, but it may not scale to the level of a being practical for them. That's if they even have anything worth extracting.

A thread on your experiences with mining is a long term value, even if not many people have much to add. It will be as relevant in five years as it is the day you write it. A lot of forum topics are so specific they lose meaning a few months later. As you update on projects and results it will get back into the queue and more people will see it.

I would enjoy a dedicated thread for it. I wonder if we changed the "cooking and recipe" forum to "cooking and DIY" it would be a good fit for this? All sorts of hobby/side-hustle topics are interesting from people doing it themselves. We don't really have a dedicated spot for that kind of thread and they're really one of my favorite kinds of threads.

Cooking, canning, preservation, gardening, hunting, power generation, mining, and all kinds of interesting topics for people doing things at the small scale.

We'd need to get Myke to change the forum label. I don't think anyone would object though and hopefully it will prompt some others to share their own DIY stuff. I'll put a thread in suggestions and if anyone objects they can do it there. I think it's a good addition though.

[Michigan Swampbuck]

. . .

I would enjoy a dedicated thread for it. I wonder if we changed the "cooking and recipe" forum to "cooking and DIY" it would be a good fit for this? All sorts of hobby/side-hustle topics are interesting from people doing it themselves. We don't really have a dedicated spot for that kind of thread and they're really one of my favorite kinds of threads.

Cooking, canning, preservation, gardening, hunting, power generation, mining, and all kinds of interesting topics for people doing things at the small scale.

We'd need to get Myke to change the forum label. I don't think anyone would object though and hopefully it will prompt some others to share their own DIY stuff. I'll put a thread in suggestions and if anyone objects they can do it there. I think it's a good addition though.

Cool Idea. That would be open for a lot of topics.

[FCD]

Never done any of it personally, but I used to work with a guy who was into dredging for the stuff pretty heavily when I lived in WY.  (but I think I noted this to you elsewhere once).  He did it as a side gig.  The dredging part of it was pretty straight forward, but getting all the dredging equipment to and from the site was a whole other matter and quite the ordeal.  He and his dad had pack horses though, so that made it easier.  Any places which are remotely close to anything you can access via vehicle are long tapped out (at least per him).  To really get into anything worthwhile you have to get into some pretty rugged and remote locations.

I don't remember him saying they ever had a "EUREKA!" moment; they usually got some gold when they went out, but not like the mother lode or anything.  He was what I picture as your typical gold prospector where that one strike it rich find was just around the next bend in the river.  Don't know if he ever found it though.

[Michigan Swampbuck]

Never done any of it personally, but I used to work with a guy who was into dredging for the stuff pretty heavily when I lived in WY.  (but I think I noted this to you elsewhere once).  He did it as a side gig.  The dredging part of it was pretty straight forward, but getting all the dredging equipment to and from the site was a whole other matter and quite the ordeal.  He and his dad had pack horses though, so that made it easier.  Any places which are remotely close to anything you can access via vehicle are long tapped out (at least per him).  To really get into anything worthwhile you have to get into some pretty rugged and remote locations.

I don't remember him saying they ever had a "EUREKA!" moment; they usually got some gold when they went out, but not like the mother lode or anything.  He was what I picture as your typical gold prospector where that one strike it rich find was just around the next bend in the river.  Don't know if he ever found it though.

That sounds like an accurate summary to me. You're right about the easiest and most profitable gold deposits being played out. Knowing that, I have opted for gold that would be too small or in quantities lower than what a commercial operation would consider. Plus, like I have pointed out before, recreational prospecting with a portable sluice along with panning are the only methods you can use unless you file a claim.

[FCD]

That sounds like an accurate summary to me. You're right about the easiest and most profitable gold deposits being played out. Knowing that, I have opted for gold that would be too small or in quantities lower than what a commercial operation would consider. Plus, like I have pointed out before, recreational prospecting with a portable sluice along with panning are the only methods you can use unless you file a claim.

I haven't studied the laws too much (especially Michigan's), other than knowing they are complicated (very).  I've done quite a bit of study on the laws around water rights which are governed by very old laws, as are mining rights, and the two subjects cross paths frequently when researching water rights claims.  The reason for noting this is I'm pretty sure the guy I knew (and his dad) didn't have any formal claims to use their dredge equipment.  As I recall, they just had to be mindful they weren't using their equipment on anyone else's claim (which was no easy feat).  I also seem to recall that moving bodies of water such as rivers and streams were exempt from many of the mining claims.  This was likely because there were claims to the water which pre-dated the mining claims.  And, here's some factoids which may be relevant to you in your mining efforts. ...

There's a legal concept / precedent known as "First in Time; First in Right".  This concept governs water laws in the United States.  It is particularly important in areas west of the Continental Divide where water is much more scarce than east of the Divide.  However, this same concept exists for the all of the United States.  How it works is the first person to settle an area has rights to all the water upstream of the location they settle.  So, for example, the first settlers in California (in the SF area) have rights to all the water all the way up to the highest peaks which feed these tributaries.  It was probably another 100 years roughly before areas in the Rockies were settled.  Therefore, the people downstream of these places own all the rights to the water.  Over the centuries many people sold off these rights not realizing what they were selling.  Today, the States are all involved also and it's a convoluted mess of legal catch 22's.  So, why would this matter to you?

Well, in the case of the guy I knew, he would often run into situations where there was a mining claim on the "land", but there could be no such claim on the "water" which ran across the land.  So, as long as they didn't set foot on the bank they were fully within their rights to mine to their heart's content.  This often meant portages of their gear up and down the river without touching the banks on either side.  This was back in the late 80's, and there have been many environmental laws passed since then which would prevent the mining they were doing (i.e. dredging streams and rivers) today, but it wouldn't necessarily affect the type of mining you are looking at doing.  The only other consideration (at least here in Colorado) is that you cannot divert the natural course of a river.  So, you couldn't divert a river through a sluice and then back to it's original path.  But, you could do something "in" a river as long as it didn't divert the path (or introduce too much silt, contaminants, or, or, or...but I think you get the point).

I worked for a big earthwork company in Michigan for a few years as an engineer.  I remember, even back then, Michigan was gonzo crazy about anything to do with water in terms of laws.  And that was a very long time ago, so I can only imagine it's gotten worse since then.  I thought Colorado was crazy, but they were nothing compared to MI.  We used to joke that if you ever came onto a job site and saw a cattail to run over pull it out and quickly bury it because cattails automatically indicated "Wetlands" in the eyes of the MI DNR, and it would hold up your whole project, not to mention add millions of dollars due to all the mitigation efforts which had to be undertaken when areas were classified as wetlands.

[Michigan Swampbuck]

I haven't studied the laws too much (especially Michigan's), other than knowing they are complicated (very).  I've done quite a bit of study on the laws around water rights which are governed by very old laws, as are mining rights, and the two subjects cross paths frequently when researching water rights claims.  The reason for noting this is I'm pretty sure the guy I knew (and his dad) didn't have any formal claims to use their dredge equipment.  As I recall, they just had to be mindful they weren't using their equipment on anyone else's claim (which was no easy feat).  I also seem to recall that moving bodies of water such as rivers and streams were exempt from many of the mining claims.  This was likely because there were claims to the water which pre-dated the mining claims.  And, here's some factoids which may be relevant to you in your mining efforts. ...

There's a legal concept / precedent known as "First in Time; First in Right".  This concept governs water laws in the United States.  It is particularly important in areas west of the Continental Divide where water is much more scarce than east of the Divide.  However, this same concept exists for the all of the United States.  How it works is the first person to settle an area has rights to all the water upstream of the location they settle.  So, for example, the first settlers in California (in the SF area) have rights to all the water all the way up to the highest peaks which feed these tributaries.  It was probably another 100 years roughly before areas in the Rockies were settled.  Therefore, the people downstream of these places own all the rights to the water.  Over the centuries many people sold off these rights not realizing what they were selling.  Today, the States are all involved also and it's a convoluted mess of legal catch 22's.  So, why would this matter to you?

Well, in the case of the guy I knew, he would often run into situations where there was a mining claim on the "land", but there could be no such claim on the "water" which ran across the land.  So, as long as they didn't set foot on the bank they were fully within their rights to mine to their heart's content.  This often meant portages of their gear up and down the river without touching the banks on either side.  This was back in the late 80's, and there have been many environmental laws passed since then which would prevent the mining they were doing (i.e. dredging streams and rivers) today, but it wouldn't necessarily affect the type of mining you are looking at doing.  The only other consideration (at least here in Colorado) is that you cannot divert the natural course of a river.  So, you couldn't divert a river through a sluice and then back to it's original path.  But, you could do something "in" a river as long as it didn't divert the path (or introduce too much silt, contaminants, or, or, or...but I think you get the point).

I worked for a big earthwork company in Michigan for a few years as an engineer.  I remember, even back then, Michigan was gonzo crazy about anything to do with water in terms of laws.  And that was a very long time ago, so I can only imagine it's gotten worse since then.  I thought Colorado was crazy, but they were nothing compared to MI.  We used to joke that if you ever came onto a job site and saw a cattail to run over pull it out and quickly bury it because cattails automatically indicated "Wetlands" in the eyes of the MI DNR, and it would hold up your whole project, not to mention add millions of dollars due to all the mitigation efforts which had to be undertaken when areas were classified as wetlands.

Good to know about mining and water rights and I should be looking into that even though I am just playing in my own creek. Actually, I joined ATS because Michigan was trying to place ground water in to a state trust. Thank God that idea fell flat because the feds manage the Great Lakes and Michigan has all surface waters in a trust already.

Concerning the river right of way you described, here in Michigan, you can travel a river if it had been used during the logging era to float logs to the mill (even go fishing on it). However, the soil in the river bed is owned by the property owner. Federal land is mostly open to panning as they own the mineral rights, but with state land, you have to check if the state has the mineral rights.

This idea I have water rights upstream from my property may not apply since the source of my creek is on private property that has been occupied longer then I have been on my property. On the other hand, I feel certain that my neighbors up stream couldn't purposely alter or dam the creek and ruin things further down stream, just as I shouldn't. I am in a sensitive water shed for a major river a few miles away and that couldn't be legal due to a number of laws.

Concerning wetlands, that would get me in deep trouble. My swamp is loaded with rare and endangered plants and animals. There is a local wildlife sanctuary in the national forest, and my property blows that away for diversity. I can't even tell you what I have found here in the nearly 30 years of my occupation, the DNR would cream their jeans and kick me off my property that is paid off and current for taxes, not to mention I have the mineral rights.

[FCD]

This idea I have water rights upstream from my property may not apply since the source of my creek is on private property that has been occupied longer then I have been on my property.  ...

Yeah, probably not.  Thus the saying "First in Time (meaning who got there first), First in Right".  But it's not really about the person upstream of you...because there's probably a 99% chance there is someone 'downstream' of you who has been there for a century or longer.  These water rights go on for generations.

I was talking with my real estate attorney a while back, and he was telling me stories about all these people who were "Junior Water Rights" holders.  He was talking about these guys like they were gods.  I stopped him and asked him to give me some examples of "Senior Water Rights" holders.  He laughed..."Oh, they're all LONG dead.  They all passed on hundreds of years ago".  He went on to say the "Junior" rights holders were some really big players, and he said many of them were dead now to.  Again, I asked him for examples.  He said..."Well, guys like the Rockefellers, the Gettys, the Carnegies and families like those"  HOLY SHIT!!  That means these "Senior" must have been able to turn water into wine and walk on water sort of stuff...if those are examples of "Juniors"!!  There's corporations in there too, like Union Pacific Railroad and others.  I asked him who was below the "juniors", and he said it goes directly to "acre feet" from there.  Then, it's just a question of how many acre-feet a person has allocated to them.  Some guys have tens of millions of acre-feet rights.  We're an acre-feet rights holder, but just to give you a sense of scale; we're like 6 acre-feet. 

And, to give you another example of scale, around here you can buy a piece of land, say 1 Section (640 acres) for about $1.3m.  That same piece of land with water rights, even modest ones, will start at $10m and probably wind up selling for $30m to $40m.  Properties like these rarely ever get sold outright in the open market.  When they do come up for sale, they're almost always auctioned (thus the huge price jumps).  And, nine times out of ten some municipality  (City or County) buys the land, reallocates the water rights to the City, and then turns around and sells off the land for the $1.3m number.  It's really a bullshit game.  New developments cannot be built unless the developers can show where the water to supply the development will come from (it's called Adjudicated Water Augmentation Plans).  Developers saying the water will come from the existing City water supply is the WRONG answer, so they have to find the water somewhere else.  Often this can be on property hundreds of miles away.  And yep, you guessed it, then they have to build a pipeline to pipe the water all the way from where they buy it to the City in question, and then the City turns around and sells the water right back to the developer who bought it in the first place on a per gallon water price.  It's the craziest shit you've ever seen, and it happens every day.

You probably never cared to know this much about water!  Oops, sorry!

[Michigan Swampbuck]

I find water rights to be interesting and now from you have stated, quite important. Good to know IMO, thanks.