Gilpin observer., 1906-08-02
NEWS FROM HE1MINES and MILLS
Cripple Creek District Tunnel,

Cripple Creek District Tunnel.
The Catch Park, or intermediate"
tunnel, outlined last October by Engi-
neer d. w. Brunton of Denver, to the
mine owners of the Cripple Creek dis.
trict, will probably be adopted, instead
OF the Window Rock. as originally in
tended, says the Colorado Springs
correspondent of the Denver Republi-
can, Brunton recommended three tun-
nels, the Cape Horn, Catch Park and
Window Rock, which. would drain the
Cripple Creek district at Cos, 740 and
1000 feet, respectively, below the pres
feet below, the surface, SO that the
Catch Park would carry off water at a
depth of 1,S40 feet.
The cost would range considerably
less'than 100000, and the time of con-
structiton would be. about twenty
MONTHS, ~.
Minipg men, who have hesitated
about subscribing to the deeper bore,
or Window Rock tunnel point out that
the fall of the rock formation is SO
slight that the expense .of. using. the
water for generating electric power
would be extremely heavy. The water
must be ditiched for a great distance.
1t is also contended that it will be bet
ter to drive bore in one year and a
half, Or two years, that will provide
relief for from fifteen to twenty years,
than to wait three OF more years to
build a much more expensive bore.
The Ell Paso, Granite and Portland
companies, 1t is understood, favor the
intermediate tunnel, while the Elkton
and Strong have inclined toward THE
deep tunnel. 1t appears comparatively
easy, however, to get together on the
intermediate proposition, and steps
will be taken at once in this regard.
The distance from the tunnel portal
TO the El'Paso shaft will be 14,500 feet;
the Ell Paso shaft-to the. main water,
course, 1000 portal to tunnel shaft
1850 feet. and the depth of tunnel
shaft, 500 feet. The elevation OF the
portal is 5000 feet, or 753 feet below
the portal of the Cripple Creek tunnel
The time required. to sink the tunnel
shaft. with sump and stations, allow
ing daily rate of progress in the
shaft of three and half feet, POI days.
During the time this is being done,
the heading from the portal will have
been in operation 261 days, and at an
average rate of progress of ten feet
day, will have been driven 2,610 feet.
portal heading and the bottom of the
shaft 1860 feet, which by attack from
the tunnel shaft and portal heading,
could be driven through in 1913 days.
During this time the heading from the
tunnel shaft to the eastward will have
advanced $3.50 feet, thus reaching
point 1000 feet from the main water
course when connection will be made
between the portal and shaft work
ings.
This 1000 feet would be driven in
100 days, making the time required for
effective drainage as follows: Sinking
tunnel shaft, sump and cutting sta
ton, 261 days; making connections
between shaft and portal headings. 39S
days, connecting tunnel shaft workings
with main water course, 100 days. To
tai, 765 days, or approximately 2.1
years.
Cost of Work: Sinking shaft and
sump $50 feet at $40 per foot, $32, 800;
cutting station. $4,000; driving tunnel
heading $500 feet, at $50 per foot.
s131, 800; driving tunnel from bottom
of tunnel shaft, 1860 feet, at $25 per
foot, $4,000; driving tunnel heading
1000 feet, at $3.50 per foot. $22,500;
buildings, road and depreciation on
machinery, $4O,700; total. $430,000.
Depth gained, 740 feet. Cost per verti
cal foot drained, $5S1. e.
Should 1t be necessary in order to
obtain effective drainage on the east
ern portion of the district, to drive
across on the Vindicator shaft, a dis
tance of IL GAO feet, this could be done
in 1,164 days, or 3.2 years, at cost OF
$50 per foot, or 1921 900. This amount,
however, should not all be charged to
drainage, as this crosscut would be
of great value for both prospecting
and ventilation.