Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

╳Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

Groups

Recent Images in Discussions

LocalitiesHellyer-Que River Mines, Waratah district, Waratah-Wynyard municipality, Tasmania, Australia

8th Apr 2012 08:27 UTCSteve Sorrell Expert

Wondering why this is a single locality entry when these are two separate mines...

Regards

Steve

27th Mar 2022 04:48 UTCSteve Sorrell Expert

Almost 10 years on, and no discussion about this. At the very least, there should be two sub-localities as there are mineral specimens that are definitely attributable to each mine.

27th Mar 2022 10:03 UTCKeith Compton 🌟 Manager

Steve

With apologies to Ralph,

I've added a few of the deposits located here.

Perhaps Ralph can check / add other info when he has time.

Cheers

27th Mar 2022 11:31 UTCSteve Sorrell Expert

Thanks Keith

27th Mar 2022 11:35 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

Sorry Steve I don’t recall seeing this original message. It’s really arguable though, these two working were originally considered separate deposits until we realised it was really just one, separated by a fault. They were largely worked concurrently, by one company with one mill, and most geologists consider them as really one entity despite some separation of original underground and later open cut workings. All the same I don’t have a problem with separating individual workings in Mindat under one parent, and you do have rights to add sublocalities yourself. Mind you many old mines can have a dozen or more distinct workings that can be time consuming to add and locate accurately, eg Montana mine, Zeehan Queen and others at Zeehan could use a lot of work to add them all.

Sock Creek is just a prospect, not a mine, will amend this when I get a minute. Just had two days manning a stall at the Devonport Gem show, following the same at the Hobart Gem show, and need a break.

27th Mar 2022 11:37 UTCKeith Compton 🌟 Manager

Sock Creek changed to prospect

28th Mar 2022 22:19 UTCSteve Sorrell Expert

Thanks Ralph. Looks much better. It needed the split as there are specimens that can be directly attributed to either Hellyer or Que.

28th Mar 2022 22:20 UTCSteve Sorrell Expert

Also, yes, I could have added sublocalities, but wasn't sure of the reasoning behind the entry. Didn't want to stuff it up!

27th Mar 2022 20:11 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

Thanks Keith

29th Mar 2022 20:54 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

I updated Sock Creek and removed it from the group. I have a list of other workings and prospects to add, there are also numerous lodes and lenses but unsure that we really need to add these?

Go to top of page