Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of the Treasure Beaches Report.
 |
| Four Groups of Fossils Collected by Four Different Methods. Source: Charleston Fossil Adventures (link below). |
I've never done this kind of thing before, but I happened to see a study of four methods for finding shark's teeth on a beach. I was looking for something else on Youtube when I stumbled upon an interesting video. Although I do occasionally post about fossils, particularly those found on the Treasure Coast, my interest in this video was more about the comparison of four search methods. I've tried some of the same methods when hunting coins and other things besides fossils, including both coins and bottles.
The video produced by a fossil hunter and guide, compared four different methods for hunting shark teeth on a beach known to produce shark teeth and other fossils. The four methods were as I would describe them are (1) what I would call "eyeballing" in dry sand, (2) eyeballing the swash and wet sand, (3) sifting in a shell pile, and (4) sifting an area of plain sand.
I'll comment on the four types of hunting below, but you should keep in mind that the four methods apply to hunting more than fossils.
First of all, you have to take into account that the area where the tests were done was an area known to produce plenty of fossils. You cannot choose any area randomly and expect the same results. There are beaches where you can use all four methods and find none of the types of things you are seeking.
The first method was eyeballing in shell or gravel piles, or as the author says, "surfacing collecting outside the waves." As is the case when eyeballing, he was hunting where there were visible signs of the right types of materials. There was gravel and shells as well as the fossils.
This is the method that resulted in the most fossil finds. They are shown in the top left section of the illustration shown at the top of this post.
As I've said numerous times before, you can scan a lot of area surface area visually - much more than you can metal detect in the same amount of time. Of course, you get depth with a metal detector, which compensates some for the smaller amount of area covered by your coil. Of course, depth matters more or less depending upon the type of target. Some targets are surface targets, other targets tend to be deeper, such as coins. Beach fossils under these circumstances are basically surface targets. Coins, of course, tend to be buried. You can find surface coins under some circumstances, but the percentage of surface coins is small.
I've done many posts in the past on eyeballing. Here is one link The Treasure Beaches Report Direct From Florida's Treasure Coast.: 9/6/11 Report - Visual Detecting, Mule Train & Meteorites. You might want to search treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com for additional posts on eyeballing.
For bottle hunting along waterways, eyeballing seems to be the best method. On dry land, many bottles can be found by digging in the right spots. The best method depends upon the type of target as well as the circumstances or nature of the location.
The second method evaluated in the Youtube video was also eyeballing, but instead of searching exposed piles, the moving water along the waterline or swash was searched, or as the fellow in the video describes it, "walking along the shoreline as the waves are washing through gravel."
The second method produced the group of finds shown on the top right section of the illustration. This method produced the second greatest number of fossils, but if you'll notice, it also produced some of the larger examples, including a couple of big verts. That is an important piece of information that should be taken into account if you are looking for certain things instead of just going for the most finds.
I think the author mentioned somewhere in the video a correlation between size of shells or other debris and the size of the fossils found. That would make sense. The size of shells does generally correlate with the type, size and amount targets. Coins, for example, are more often found in shell piles with large shells, but seldom in piles composed of small or broken shell bits.
The third method used in the tests employed what looked like a gold pan with a screen bottom to sift where shells were visible. As before, this is a beach where fossils are plentiful.
So shifting in a promising shell pile area produced the third greatest number of fossil finds. I'm not sure if surface fossils in this area, if there were any, were included in the count.
He could have used a larger sifter, depending upon the laws. The author explained that South Carolina, where he was at, had a strict laws against using tools so he couldn't use a shovel or anything bigger.
I've done a lot of posts on sifting, and I've done some sifting but not at the ocean beach. He did find fossils that way, but not as many as using either of the eyeballing methods.
The fourth method he tested was sifting where there weren't apparent surface shells. He dug down and sifted the material. The results were meagre, as you can see at the bottom right of the illustration. He only sifted about a cubic foot of sand. It was a time-consuming method. You can see the details in the video.
When digging a small amount of sand to be sifted, the author noticed layers of darker sand where there were a few fossils. A lot of different kinds of materials get classified in various layers.
I did something similar looking for bottles. I didn't try it often of for long, but I dug holes along the wet sand where no bottles were visible. I found no buried bottles doing that. I did find buried bottles while digging for metal targets on dry land, but it takes a really long time and a lot of effort for a few finds. It would not be worth the effort unless you had reason to believe there was a concentration of buried bottles. You could probe first, or maybe see evidence of buried targets if anything has been exposed by erosion.
In general, I suspect the results would be replicated in many situations, but I'm sure there would be situations when the results might not be the same.
The tests were conducted to provide information relative to fossil hunting, but they provided information that might be applied to other types of hunting.
Below is the link for the video discussed today.
THE BEST Method to Find Shark Teeth on the Beach!! (Professionally Tested & Approved!) - YouTube
You might also be interested in some of my posts on fossil hunting. Here are a few links showing Florida fossil finds.
You will also find posts about sifting for coins in treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.
There is some new weather in the Atlantic that I'll be watching for future Treasure Coast metal detecting.
Good hunting,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net