[meteorite-list] New Campo -Myth Busted?

From: Adam Hupe <raremeteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue Aug 24 13:02:15 2004
Message-ID: <00b601c489fa$cf211e60$6401a8c0_at_c1720188a>

Dear List,

I would like to thank those who responded to my inquiry about old versus new
Campos. I am looking to explore new areas and thought this locality might
have been worth investigating but have since changed my mind. Below are a
set of responses that best address this issue. The authors would like to
remain anonymous so I left their names out.

Email #1

Your "well informed source" is correct on both counts. Illegal exportation
and there are no mountainside finds. The terrain is basically flat and the
strewn field is shorter and wider than presented in Cassiday's various
papers. The reports of a specimen recovery 70-80 km down-range are repeated,
but have never been evidenced. The difference between 'new' and 'old' Campos
is the depth of recovery. Cassiday's specimens recovered 1962-73 are both
'new' and 'old'. Recovered at depth within the craters are 'new'; those
recovered from surface ejecta or from farmers' fields are 'old'. Repeated
irrigation and the use of fertilizers has taken its toll. Cassiday used a
WW2 metal detector in his search. With the increasing demand by collectors -
beginning about 1989 - much more powerful detectors are being used in
recovery; the deeper recoveries being more stable. Not all of the 'new'
specimens are stable as some specimens continue to be found at shallow
depths. The extremely flat surface of the region is subject to sheet
deposition 1-2 cm/100 yr (think Kansas). Runoff is limited to shallow
depressions and occasional shallow channels; the slopes of which might be
miss translated as mountain-sides.

The pre-entry meteoroid is estimated to be ~ 3 m in diameter and masses ~
840,000 kg (Lieberman, et al., in MAPS Feb 2002) and suggests that many more
specimens will be smuggled out in the coming years.

Other than the variously published photos by Cassidy et, al. I was only able
to locate photos of the "Haag" specimen. Its recovery down-range is
consistent with aerial break-up scenarios and is probably the Campo del
Cielo main mass.

Another Note:

The place where the "New Campos" are found is the same that the one of the
"Old Campos". The difference is the "old" are near the surface, so them
intensely undergone the effects of the meteorization, mainly the humidity.
The "new" are deeper so that them could conserve its regmagliptes and have a
greater stability. The "New Campos" began to appear when the zone was
released with powerful metal detectors. Previously the espec?mentes were
found on the surface or raised when the fields were plowed.
The Campo del Cielo strewn field has 45km by 15km. But it has an area of
approximately 1500 hectares where the greater concentration is verified.
Many authors affirm that the strewn field reaches 80 km, because stories
exist on the denominated "Mes?n de Fierro", probably situated 70 km to the
NE of the main site. But until today it was not verified.

I hope you found this information to be as interesting as I did,

Received on Tue 24 Aug 2004 12:52:57 PM PDT

Help support this free mailing list:

Yahoo MyWeb