Home PageAbout MindatThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusWho We AreContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatCorporate SponsorshipSponsor a PageSponsored PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryGeologic Time
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralRandom LocalitySearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
Mining CompaniesStatisticsUsersMineral MuseumsClubs & OrganizationsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice SettingsThe Mineral Quiz
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesSearch by ColorNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day GalleryPhotography
╳Discussions
💬 Home🔎 Search📅 LatestGroups
EducationOpen discussion area.Fakes & FraudsOpen discussion area.Field CollectingOpen discussion area.FossilsOpen discussion area.Gems and GemologyOpen discussion area.GeneralOpen discussion area.How to ContributeOpen discussion area.Identity HelpOpen discussion area.Improving Mindat.orgOpen discussion area.LocalitiesOpen discussion area.Lost and Stolen SpecimensOpen discussion area.MarketplaceOpen discussion area.MeteoritesOpen discussion area.Mindat ProductsOpen discussion area.Mineral ExchangesOpen discussion area.Mineral PhotographyOpen discussion area.Mineral ShowsOpen discussion area.Mineralogical ClassificationOpen discussion area.Mineralogy CourseOpen discussion area.MineralsOpen discussion area.Minerals and MuseumsOpen discussion area.PhotosOpen discussion area.Techniques for CollectorsOpen discussion area.The Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryOpen discussion area.UV MineralsOpen discussion area.Recent Images in Discussions
Field CollectingDiamonds in California?
4th Jun 2007 09:03 UTCChristopher Fryberger
4th Jun 2007 10:11 UTCjacques jedwab
4th Jun 2007 13:53 UTCAlan Plante
Yes, diamonds have been found in a couple of places in California. Unfortunately they are extremely rare to find (almost literaally "grains of sand on a beach") - you would have to sift through tons of sands to have a reasonable chance of finding anything.
You would do much better visiting "Crater of Diamonds State Park" in Arkansas. A lot more diamonds have been found there per-volume of dirt sifted. Much better chance of actually finding a stone.
Regards
Alan
4th Jun 2007 15:23 UTCJesse Fisher Expert
4th Jun 2007 15:59 UTCAlan Plante
I like the "grains of sand on a beach" analogy because it just seems to fit the California state of mind: Barbie at Malibu and all! :~}
Alan
4th Jun 2007 20:14 UTCJesse Fisher Expert
4th Jun 2007 22:43 UTCCasey Lenard
Thats new!
I thought you could only find good diamonds in Arkansas.
How big on average are they?
9th Jun 2007 02:48 UTCbob fear
9th Jun 2007 18:24 UTCPhil Walsh
In the late seventies there was an article in one the magazines,"Gems and Minerals" or "Rocks and Gems". Sorry I can't be more specific. There were pictures and references, so I guess there was something to it. It's possible the article was in the "California Mining Journal", but I don't think so.
Phil
9th Jun 2007 19:06 UTCJesse Fisher Expert
27th Jul 2007 09:14 UTCBruce
29th Jul 2007 01:37 UTCByron Thomas
Byron
4th Aug 2007 22:34 UTC07zx10r
5th Aug 2007 01:41 UTCByron Thomas
Byron
14th Nov 2013 00:12 UTCRyland
DeBeers no longer owns the mine, but the new owners ran into environmental regulations, mainly over water quality issues, and the mine has not been re-opened as they promised. If you go up highway 70, just across the bridge, you will see the black periditite rock which as a continuous vein, runs all the way to just east of Bangor. (about 30 miles.) The diamonds either come out of that or from the numerous blue clay pipes which are often associated with gold veins. As you noted, all the land around Cherokee is in private hands, and is difficult to get onto. Cherokee is also known for its numerous good quality quartz crystals, which can indeed be found in some locations just scattered around on top the soil. I doubt that the diamonds are that common, but some of them will glow under a portable uv light, and can be found at night by shining a uv light on them. By the way, I read that more gold has come out of Butte county than all the rest of the counties of California combined!
14th Nov 2013 02:44 UTCMark & Linda Mahlum
17th Jan 2014 20:35 UTCCedar Oaks
About 37 years ago, as a child, I lived in Northern California. In and around Clearlake County, Calif. I was told that the lake there, called Clearlake, was an old water filled volcano.. Some places in lake, the bottom has never been found. Anyways, in researching diamonds and where they're found, it's said they're found around volcanic areas.
Well, I lived in mountains there and I and my mother would go looking for gold and diamonds. Didn't find gold. But, did find diamonds! So, my mother did some research and told me that they are diamonds. But, they're not quite as hard as preferred jewelry diamonds. It is true that best time to find them is after heavy rains. I rode my horse a lot in the woods and along fire roads and would find them all over a certain area, off Hwy 175. The larger ones I would pick up and take home. Over the years, we moved a lot and those diamonds were misplaced somewhere and lost, I thought!
My mother was a pack rat and had kept numerous filing cabinets over the years. She recently passed away and I have undertaken the task of going through them, one piece of paper at a time. I've ran across an envelope, with diamonds written on it. Inside is 13 of these diamonds. Since as a kid, I didn't pay much attention to how exactly she was informed that they were softer diamonds, etc. I thought I'd have them checked out. But, in researching where to take them, etc., I've read that it's illegal to possess raw uncut diamonds, without a certification. Due to the diamond wars and atrocities being committed on people over them, in Africa.
So, now I am leary to take them to a jeweler and have them checked out. Will I be reported and arrested? Should I just throw them away, or turn them over to authorities? Haven't decided yet!
But, I do know that there are diamonds in California. As to what grade, etc...Not sure! If I had the resources and money, I'd consider taking a trip back there and try finding some more. Have them tested and certified as to their origin and maybe there's a market for such? Buy up the properties, in that area and maybe it could be a lucrative investment!
But, there are diamonds in Northern California mountains!
17th Jan 2014 21:42 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
And, even if they were diamonds, it is not correct that "...it's illegal to possess raw uncut diamonds, without a certification. Due to the diamond wars and atrocities being committed on people over them, in Africa." It is only illegal to transport them internationally without going through the bureaucratic procedures of the "Kimberly process". If you were to find one in California and sell it inside the USA, you would have broken no laws. And "Clearlake diamonds", being really quartz, can of course be transported and sold over international boundaries without any special restrictions, other than the need to fill out a customs declaration for the receiving country.
Post some pix!
8th Apr 2014 21:25 UTCMark Davis
they are rare, it took me 12 years to find it.
it was located in Placer County on a private placergold claim
9th Apr 2014 02:16 UTCJake Harper Expert
Jake
21st Apr 2014 23:42 UTCDave Zutz
As we walked through a cow pasture to get to the caves we kept seeing these pieces of quartz like chucks on the ground. When I asked him what they were he said they were California Diamonds. After we went to the caves on our way back all of us kids (there were 5 of us) started picking up the Diamonds. When we got to the car we had a 1 lb. Coffee can full of them. The biggest was bigger than my little finger.
When we got back home to Wiscon by Brother took the biggest one across the street to the UWM geollogy dept. and one of the Proffesors there told him it was a real diamond and it could be cut to make a spectacular stone. He said the only problem is it's very expebsive to cut them.
Since I was 12 and my brother was 14 we didn't have the money to do that.
My Grandfather has since passed away and we never asked him where we were when the Diamonds were found. I just know he lived in the Napa Valley in St. Helena. If anyone has an idea where the place is let me know.
22nd Apr 2014 01:47 UTCChester S. Lemanski, Jr.
Chet Lemanski
22nd Apr 2014 13:02 UTCAlessio Piccioni
23rd Apr 2014 05:42 UTCj!
Chester's got the right of it. What'cha found are called 'Clearlake Diamonds'. I'm guessing most of them double terminated -- a point on each end? Almost all of them that aren't in the local road cuts are on provate property, and chances are that farmer's field is a vineyard these days.
14th Jun 2014 17:53 UTCBig Hippie
12th Oct 2015 07:43 UTCjoe s
12th Oct 2015 13:22 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
Also, Joe S, none of your diagnostic tests are foolproof in telling diamond from other stones. Even a diamond tester isn't foolproof.
12th Oct 2015 15:47 UTCChester S. Lemanski, Jr.
Chet Lemanski
29th Oct 2015 05:19 UTCJerry james Winkle
29th Oct 2015 18:24 UTCJason Ferguson
-------------------------------------------------------
> i would love to display my diamonds but no photo
> larger than 1000kb can be attached.
Jerry,
The simplest solution would be to open your photo in paint and resize the photo. Save as so you do not override the original copy. You can right click the file and click properties and see the file size. You can then go back and resize it again if needed . From a phone I usually crop the photo to reduce the file size or save the picture from Facebook since Facebook converts your photos to a smaller size when you upload them to your page.
19th Nov 2015 02:51 UTCRobert Hobdy
happy hunting
19th Nov 2015 03:09 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
19th Nov 2015 16:14 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
6th Dec 2015 19:30 UTCWilliam green
6th Dec 2015 19:33 UTCDoug Daniels
6th Dec 2015 21:41 UTCBob Harman
I am sure that if Doug D or I had found "handfuls of diamonds, some the size of golf balls" in California or anywhere else, we would not be posting all of this on any collecting website! CHEERS.....BOB
6th Dec 2015 21:52 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
6th Dec 2015 22:01 UTCWayne Corwin
what proof do you have for your wild statement ? :-S ?
7th Dec 2015 04:52 UTCJim Bean 🌟
6th Jan 2016 07:55 UTCKimberleana
7th Jan 2016 07:44 UTCKimberleana
7th Jan 2016 20:10 UTCMike Mangrum
24th Mar 2016 23:17 UTCRobert Hobdy
25th Mar 2016 07:25 UTCPeter Nancarrow 🌟 Expert
.. Yes, diamonds do vary in hardness from one locale to another.
I like to keep an open mind about such things, but I have strong doubts about that statement.
It is not a claim that I have ever encountered before, and from the crystallographic point of view it seems very dubious. However, diamonds do vary in hardness with crystallographic direction (e.g. a cube face is harder than an octahedral if I remember correctly) so perhaps you are referring to such things as the differences between localities where cube diamonds are found compared to those where only octahedra occur?
What evidence/references can you provide to support that claim?
Pete N.
25th Mar 2016 12:55 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
To follow up on Peter's point. There is a great hardness difference even between the faces of a cubic diamond, being measured at 137+/-6 GPa on the (100) face and 167+/-5GPa on the (111) face. To give a general appreciation of the hugeness of that difference, The hardness of corundum is about 23GPa. It follows that the hardness differential between faces of a cubic diamond is greater than the hardness differential between corundum and talc :-)
Directional hardness differential within diamond crystal was shown (entirely without measurement) when man discovered (very laboriously) how to cut the tip off an octahedral diamond to give a flat table. Prior to that, alteration of a diamond's shape had only been possible by cleaving it.
25th Mar 2016 15:54 UTCWilliam C. van Laer Expert
There has been many supposed diamond finds here in Montana, and some of these have been recorded...but that doesn't mean the finds were actually real diamonds! Lester Zeihen once told me that every reported diamond find in this state had been disproved....now except the one large stone that was found near Great Falls over three decades ago by a jogger who spotted it in a roadcut. (I don't have any references to this find at my immediate disposal). Just because it is "reported" does not necessarily make it a fact!
After many years running a mineral business and four working in the Montana Tech Mineral Museum, I've pretty much seen it all. What bothers me most is that people will come to you for your help and advice, but when they don't hear what they want to hear, they becomes upset and often belligerent! I always try to soften my advice or opinion whenever I think it will backfire on me, and sometimes it's just best to let the finder think what they want. But when it comes to mineral identification, especially tougher subjects like diamonds (especially in the rough), recommending taking them to a local jeweler is a really bad idea! It is my experience that most jewelers wouldn't recognize a diamond in the rough, much less other more common minerals, such as chrysoprase (I had a graduate in colored gems from the GIA once told me that my rough chrysoprase was "...the best rough emerald I've ever seen"!
I'm just glad that there are some real experts on this website, they notice these little fantasies!
25th Mar 2016 16:11 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
25th Mar 2016 17:07 UTCBob Harman
The most hilarious thing to me are the posts claiming to have found lots of diamonds, both in California and elsewhere. Now if any of us had REALLY found these would we even think of posting our finds on any collecting website????? And, despite all the great pix on this website, not one of the folks finding diamonds has ever posted a single picture; no camera???? How odd!
BTW, I don't even post my best Indiana geode location on this website........ CHEERS.......BOB
25th Mar 2016 18:41 UTCRanger Dave
Yes, diamonds, not in a store or lost by someone, have been found in California. Mindat shows several dozen spots where diamonds have been found in California. The problem I saw is that many of those reports are very old and somewhat questionable. Many seem to be found in Northern California, an area known for it's volcanoes. The rest were placer finds. Most were very small, the size of a grain of sand and I have no doubt that many of those were bits of quartz rounded by stream action.
I've not heard of any place in the state to go look for diamonds. If you found one it would be a serendipitous find while gold panning.
25th Mar 2016 18:59 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, diamonds, not in a store or lost by someone,
> have been found in California. Mindat shows
> several dozen spots where diamonds have been found
> in California.
Sigh....
Do you know of a verified report of diamond found in California? Y/N.
If Y, where is it and where is its verification report? State museum? Smithsonian?
If N, then enough said.
25th Mar 2016 20:28 UTCKelly Nash 🌟 Expert
25th Mar 2016 20:51 UTCRanger Dave
> in California? Y/N.
I see... If YOU have not heard of it, it does not exist.
Enough said.
25th Mar 2016 21:22 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
-------------------------------------------------------
> Owen Melfyn Lewis Wrote: Do you know of a verified
> report of diamond found
> > in California? Y/N.
>
> I see... If YOU have not heard of it, it does not
> exist.
>
> Enough said.
No. The point is, where's your evidence? As the boys say over a Friday evening couple of hands, 'Put up or shut up' ;-)
25th Mar 2016 21:37 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
-------------------------------------------------------
> There are several (alleged) California diamonds in
> the Smithsonian Collection (the catalog is online
> - Smithsonian Mineral Collection Catalog). They're
> labelled as from Butte, Amador and El Dorado
> counties, and there are small photos of them in
> the catalog (and they do look like diamonds, for
> what that's worth). Whether they have
> "verification reports", I don't know. Of the few
> pictured on Mindat, the posters are, I think,
> somewhat credible (e.g. the one that's ex-Art
> Montgomery, photographed by Rock Currier, but with
> no scale or indication of where it is).
I have a dozen diamonds in my little collection just itching to be made famous with an California attribution :-)
Not to mention my heliodor (bought by way of quite a famous US collection btw) that is solemnly labeled as from the Gelte Krustle Mine in Tadjikistan. Indeed, perhaps it is so - but I have no verification of that . And nor has anyone verified the existence of any such mine ;-)
25th Mar 2016 21:44 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
25th Mar 2016 22:05 UTCRanger Dave
> No. The point is, where's your evidence?
That IS the point. Just because YOU do not see the evidence; it does not exist. I am under no obligation to appease your demands.
25th Mar 2016 22:12 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
25th Mar 2016 23:32 UTCRanger Dave
-------------------------------------------------------
> Evidence is what separates belief from fact.
No one has said otherwise. In polite, adult, conversations one asks for evidence. Childish, egotistical, demands that include personal attacks and condescension, will be, and should be, met with derision.
There are levels of evidence. If someone says they have a penny in their pocket, I'll believe them. My level of evidence for that would be small because it's not important. If someone says I owe them a million dollars, they had better provide uncontrovertible evidence.
That someone would make themselves upset because diamonds have been claimed to have been found in California is fascinating. Then they rudely DEMAND a high level of evidence tells me that something else is going on and that a conversation with that person would not be possible.
25th Mar 2016 23:48 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
If from personal experinece it turns out that every claim of a diamond has turned out not to be a diamond, it is perfectly reasonable to be skeptical. Therefore I see nothing wrong with such an individual demanding a high level of evidence. Now let me turn this around. If indeed someone has a diamond why would they object to, or get upset about, having to providing a high level of evidence? If that is the case I would suspect that as you put it, there is "something else is going".
In fact simply based on probability it is far more likely that such a person does not have a diamond and that "something else is going", rather than the skeptic having something else going on.
26th Mar 2016 00:19 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
-------------------------------------------------------
> You could take it further Owen and say that
> nothing is verified until you've been there, dug
> it out of the ground yourself, and analysed it
> yourself.
Well, you might say that, Jolyon, but I couldn't possibly say so :-)
To be serious and though it's a stiff recommendation, it has a certain value, don't you think? But surely one needs more than one specimen recovered from the same locality and by more that one person to have a reasonable level of authentication?
Fortunately, my interests lie in directions that make 'locality' an occasional 'nice to know' rather than an essential so I'm can afford to be quite relaxed about the whole business.
26th Mar 2016 00:44 UTCBob Harman
All this does nothing other than make open minded geologically oriented educated professionals and field collectors VERY skeptical. At least with a few specific localities and accompanying pix of a few small middling quality finds, we might give some credit to the posters, but the unsubstantiated wild claims are just not worthy of serious consideration. I actually do believe there are a few diamond localities in California and a few diamonds have been found, but most of the posted claims are just not credible. CHEERS.....BOB
26th Mar 2016 01:07 UTCRanger Dave
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hello Ranger Dave,
>
> If from personal experinece it turns out that
> every claim of a diamond has turned out not to be
> a diamond, it is perfectly reasonable to be
> skeptical.
Skeptical, yes. A jerk, no. And based on personal anecdotes like the one you just used, no, it is not reasonable. Every claim has to be taken on it's own merits. No one has proven that every claim about every diamond found in California is false.
> Therefore I see nothing wrong with such
> an individual demanding a high level of evidence.
There is when it's not that important.
> Now let me turn this around. If indeed someone has
> a diamond why would they object to, or get upset
> about, having to providing a high level of
> evidence? If that is the case I would suspect that
> as you put it, there is "something else is
> going".
It's not that important. No one is going to die because of the claims made. No one is going to move to California to mine diamonds. No one is claiming that there is a commercial source of high quality diamonds in California. So, when you have personally seen every rock that's claimed to be a diamond from California, then your claim would be valid.
> In fact simply based on probability it is far more
> likely that such a person does not have a diamond
> and that "something else is going", rather than
> the skeptic having something else going on.
If someone here was being skeptical, that would be an assumption someone could make. Being abusive, acting like a troll, is not being skeptical.
26th Mar 2016 01:10 UTCRanger Dave
-------------------------------------------------------
> REINER is spot on.
No, he was not.
> All this does nothing other than make open minded
> geologically oriented educated professionals and
> field collectors VERY skeptical.
That makes me skeptical of their "open mindedness."
> I actually do believe
> there are a few diamond localities in California
> and a few diamonds have been found, but most of
> the posted claims are just not credible.
Which is what I, and several others, have said.
> CHEERS.....BOB
26th Mar 2016 01:18 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
If an individual claims to have found multiple diamonds in California that starts to stretch credulity somewhat.
26th Mar 2016 02:10 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
26th Mar 2016 02:40 UTCJim Robison
Ranger Dave, most people who comment here and have credibility give their real name, not some made up name. Unless that is your legal name, you gain credibility here by telling us who you are. And claiming to be a "ranger" doesn't give me great confidence. What kind of ranger - forest, fire, park, casual person who ranges around looking for an argument, etc. We tolerate, most times, people who do not give their full names, because we understand that they may be reluctant to ask a question which might somehow highlight their inexperience. People like yourself pop up from time to time, want to argue and point fingers, and not truly listen to what is being said.
But that isn't my point. This site is called MINDAT for a very good reason. The information laid out in the various data bases is just that. Data on specific locations, minerals identified by confirmed methods, and a whole host of related topics. Notice the data specific requirements. The people who establish credibility contribute to the data bases, and/or are qualified to offer opinions that are reliable.
Now it is a fact that many people who join in our discussions are new to the hobby, or not technically trained, or do not have long collecting experience. And we welcome their participation because we respect people who genuinely want to learn about a location, or a rock/mineral, or many other reasons. If you persist in calling people trolls, then your credibility suffers a lot. People who persist in such activities may find themselves blocked from participation. I hope you are not one of those folks.
Tell us who you are please, and your experience in the matters on which you comment. So that you know, I have been studying and collecting for over 60 years and like many of the people on the site have degrees focused in mining, geology, geological engineering, and nearly 40 years of experience both in the mining business and in many things geologically and mineralogically oriented.
So when people ask for specific information, if it can be provided, that is the goal. There are also many threads on the site covering a wide range of related topics. Facts are foremost, along with educated (by schooling or long experience) opinions. And, you have seen, reasonable people often have different opinions about many topics, and we all learn from them.
26th Mar 2016 03:39 UTCDoug Daniels
Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: April 26, 2024 03:34:10
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: April 26, 2024 03:34:10