Ethical Crystal Mining

I've seen some similar posts regarding this but I have not seen this specific question addressed.

Are there any instances where major destruction to the Earth (I know that is very subjective & relative but bear with me) has been caused for the extraction of mineral specimens specifically?

I am very aware of major destruction for ore mining and mineral specimens sometimes being a by product of that. However, I keep hearing some bashing those of us who collect for encouraging the "rape of the planet" and areas being blasted away to get at these specimens. Yet, in my research, I haven't found where this is being done. Have I just not run across it yet?

I don't count micro-blasting or some light bull dozing as major destruction. I'm very open to others' opinions here as well. Thanks!

As the destruction caused by specimen mining never covers more than a few hectares of territory, and generally only a few square metres, it is utterly insignificant compared to the square kilometres affected by many mining operations. And even large scale mining operations are unlikely to ever affect more than 0.1% of the Earth's surface area. So, contrary to what some environmentalists might think, bad farming and forestry practices, and urbanisation, affect hundreds of times more land than mining ever will. And mineral collecting doesn't even make a ripple.

Yes, I agree Alfredo.

But is there an instance where blasting or major destruction (like deforestation) has occurred to procure minerals or crystals?

I would think that the blasting needs to stay very small scale (micro blasting if at all) so as not to destroy any possible specimens.

PHANIE, I am not positive about this, but I believe the Jackson's Crossroads amethyst site in Georgia clears an overlying forested area to get to barren ground. Then the heavy equipment clears the barren ground overburden to get to the amethyst crystal bearing zone. This is not a huge area by mining standards, but, if true, specifically answers your question. CHEERS..........BOB

Thanks Bob. I checked them out: http://www.digforcrystals.com/jacksonscrossroads.html From what I can see its about the same as Ron Coleman's mine. So no major blasting going on here, right?

To me this is no different than an organic farmer clearing the land to plant the crops & CERTAINLY much better than the other destruction we do in the name of urbanization among many other things.

Impact on nature is not what concern me first regarding specimen mining, but is of cours an issue...

What comes to my mind is where the chrystal mining is suporting terrorists, mob controled mines, gowernments opressing their people, bad conditions for workers and childs forced to work - a lot of issues that can make the shining crystals fade in our conscience.

A fairtraid marking of specimens would probably raise prices of mineral specimens, but might be worth it?

(I think the Weardale fluorites will be regarded fairtrade and with little impact on nature - being run by a gang of "grumpy old men", backfilling an old quarry )

Peter, I'm with you 100% on that, but are those things your referring to being directly caused by crystal mining or ore mining?

That's what I'm trying to get clear on.

PHANIE To my mind all these specimen mining areas are very small scale in the overall scheme of things, but if they tear up the surface in any way, that should answer your specific question. Other sites that MAY......and I emphasize MAY answer your question include the Herkimer diamond mine sites in NY State and Sheffler's geode mine site in the midwest. Both existed for years and as they enlarged into adjacent areas they cleared the surface (forested areas or farmland etc) then moved the overburden to get into the mineralized zones. There must be many more small collector mineral prospects where the surface had to be cleared to get into the underlying mineral zones. All these answer your specific question if the surface....whatever that surface may be.....was disturbed as part of clearing. If you insist on measuring the specific size of each disturbed surface area, then your basic question becomes quibbling and is really unanswerable. For example is a 5 acre area of disturbed surface "ok" and a 10 acre "major" surface destruction?? Just quibbling. In my mind you either disturb the surface or you don't..... period. The size of each operation in these small specimen mining sites should not matter. CHEERS...........BOB



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/28/2012 05:36PM by BOB HARMAN.

Yep, got you Bob. That's why I said...its very subjective.

And I have not found any evidence of BLASTING anywhere specifically for mineral specimens in my research. I just wanted to check in here & make certain I wasn't wrong about that. I truly appreciate all your input.

A lot of the people mining pegmatites for mineral specimens will use explosives.

David, are we talking micro blasting using one of these or something more large scale? http://www.micro-blaster.com/video/movies_alt.htm

Phanie, of course there is blasting (with dynamite, not "microblasting) for mineral specimens - It's the cheapest way to move big rocks. Experienced specimen miners can do it with minimal or no damage to the desired crystals. Less experienced miners... well that's another story.

We are talking about dynamite. Underground specimen recovery operations will use explosives (mainly to get close - Sweet Home rhodos needed some serious mining efforts to get to the pockets)

phanie moon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Are there any instances where major destruction to
> the Earth (I know that is very subjective &
> relative but bear with me) has been caused for the
> extraction of mineral specimens specifically?
>

Yes.
Girls' "best friends" are commonly mined in a rather destructive way (size of effected/destroyed territory, use of fuel/energy).

But by mining for mineral collectors?
Not really.

If used properly, dynamite by itself does not do more "damage". It just does it much faster. If there's a pocket, you can work a week on moving the rock, or do it in a few hours, with a few small blasts. So dynamite makes it more profitable to mine for specimens.

If I go on a rockhounding trip, the environmental damage is mostly done by burning gasoline in my car, not by digging a hole in the mountains.
It's a pure luxury thing, one must be aware of that.
I got a pretty crystal and burned 200 liters of gasoline for it.
If I was not a mineral maniac but a pyromaniac and I just burn the gasoline in the park to enjoy the fire, I might get sued for polluting the environment. Perhaps by people who wear diamond earrings.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/28/2012 11:35PM by Amir C. Akhavan.

Amir, I'm thinking you're on the right track here b/c I've been researching this for a long time & I can't find an instance where large scale blasting has been done exclusively for mineral collectors.

David, would you say that using the explosives is the exception or the rule? I've been finding it very difficult to research anything about this.

<<If I was not a mineral maniac but a pyromaniac and I just burn the gasoline in the park to enjoy the fire, I might get sued for polluting the environment. Perhaps by people who wear diamond earrings. grinning smiley>>

The people who don't use explosives are placer miners and those working deposits in weathered rocks near the surface where mechanical equipment would work to break up rock. Most of the specimens that come from pegmatites will have been exposed by blasting (pockets of good stuff can be few and far between). Places such as the Sweet Home mine, the native copper from the UP of Michigan all require the friendly persuasion of dynamite to get near the specimens.

The rules and regulations for explosives are such that amateur collecting isn't feasible.

It has gotten to the point where getting access to underground stopes, and being able to work with hand tools isn't particularly feasible anymore.

Blasting for mineral specimen or gem recovery has been used at the Palermom mine in NH, as well as a number of pegmatites in Maine.

But how would they know about these deep pockets of minerals without exploratory mining or blasting in the first place while looking for something else?

And as for copper mining, isn't that considered industrial ore mining...so minerals minded from there are considered by-products of the copper mining?

"And as for copper mining, isn't that considered industrial ore mining...so minerals minded from there are considered by-products of the copper mining? " - not when all you are looking for are copper specimens.

"But how would they know about these deep pockets of minerals without exploratory mining or blasting in the first place while looking for something else? " - when you are out in the boonies (ie no easy transportation to get large quantities of feldspar or quartz to market) the only thing you are looking for are high value items such as gemstones and specimens. The pegmatites will have minerals at or near the surface.

David, so if its at or near the surface then the blasting is not for deep pockets and its surface scratching.

Also do you know of sites where copper derived specimens have been mined but straight copper has not from the same locale?