Caving Methods at Miami

THE matters I had intended to present to you ap-peared in the March 12 issue of Engineering and Mining Journal over the signature of George J. Young, so that although I should like to talk to you for about three hours on this subject, unfortunately it has all been done before. The subject originally sug-gested to me was the trend in mining methods. You will find that fully set forth much more clearly than I could hope to do, in Mr. Young's article, so that I shall confine my attention to a few points of interest in specific cases. You are undoubtedly familiar with the problem that was presented to the Miami Copper Co. when they had exhausted their so-called high-grade orebody. They had what appeared to be a large tonnage of material which their preliminary development work and such drilling as was done indicated contained one per cent copper or a-little over, and how to mine that profitably by underground methods was the question. It was somewhat complicated by the fact that the nature of the ground made them doubtful of their ability to cave it successfully. It was unquestionably harder ground than that of the more highly mineralized sections of the Miami and Inspiration- ore zone which had been mined. However, they had kept very accurate and complete records of past accomplishments and knew what they had to work with and what modifications with respect to costs would be necessary in order to solve this problem. Under the old method of working, they were extract-ing about 71/2 tons per man employed in the mining department; that is to say all labor, direct and indirect required to put the ore in the mill bins, and this, with the grade of ore which they had, resulted in a satis-factory financial outcome. Under their modified method now in use, they have raised that output per man to 29 tons per man shift. That is almost four times what they were doing with the old method.