Bernard,
Er, good point! I hadn't thought about limestone.
I can't think of a reasonable way to bend my definition to fit, so it'll
just have to be an exception - in the best traditions of the English
language.
Best regards, Martin
----- Original Message -----
From: <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 30 May 2000 00:37
Subject: Re: Mining versus quarrying - Martin
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> I agree in part, but what about limestone? This material goes through
quite a
> few intense processes to become cement for example - let alone a few other
> chemical products. Coal goes through less process from mine to end user
than
> most - floatation is used of course in some cases, but in many instances
it
> is crushed (when applicable) & sized only. Slate quarries when underground
> have always been known as slate mines, but those who dig in same have
always
> been known as quarrymen! In my books - & I have spoken to various
Inspectors
> on this - they regard anything underground as a mine, and mine regs.
apply.
> Anything above ground - open-sky, open-cast, open-pit methods whatever you
> chose to call it - is a form of quarrying, and in most if not all cases
> quarry regs. apply, but, I have to say, the definitive of the term does
vary
> country to country! Kind Regards, Bernard
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|