Report on Kinlet Colliery 1903

Kinlet Colliery started significant coal production in 1898. The pit was owned by the Highley Mining Company and was sunk to access reserves around a mile south-west of the company's original pit at Highley. Unfortunately it soon became apparent that there were geological problems, largely due to the presence of basalt. A flow of molten rock into the coal seam shortly after it had been formed had damaged the coal. The company commissioned this report by a mining engineer as a result of the problem

In spite of the gloomy tone of the report, the mine remained open until 1937; however, the geology frequently caused problems and it was never possible to mechanise coal cutting.

25th July 1903 report on the “Black & Bad” coal by Edward B. Wain, of Norton-in-the-Moors to the Directors of the Highley Mining Company

A considerable proportion of the coal raised at the moment is of an inferior nature. The bad coal lies in well defined east to west lines. This was similar to Highley when those workings were approaching the Kinlet Fault. However, at Kinlet there is an additional north-south fault, with some branches from it at a slight angle. The bad or “black” coal is a direct result of faulting where the coal is being worked ie: not due to any general deterioration of the coal in general. The black coal is similar to the “smutty” coal met with elsewhere in the coalfield in the neighbourhood of small faults. It is often the case that where a major fault is found (like the Kinlet Fault) there is a second parallel fault some distance from it, and the coal between the two is often crushed and dislocated. The 10 yard fault you are now proving with the west side workings at Kinlet may be such a fault, and the coal is likely to improve on the rise side. I advise that 2 roads be driven out west, beyond the north-south fault, to test this. The best places would be from the main jig on the south side of the pit, which is through the fault and well in advance of the other workings, and from one of the roads on the west side of, and near, the inbye end of the “main” north level, where the fault is just now being stripped.
The company would be justified in not working the black coal under the terms of their lease. At the moment they are not working sufficient coal to produce royalties equal to the minimum rent so that any deductions from the royalties for “batt” would not be possible.
To claim allowance for batts, it must either be left underground or brought to the surface & discarded. The “black” coal is not uniformly bad and by careful selection it would be possible to take a considerable quantity of fair coal, but the residue would be completely unsaleable therefore it is best not to work it, rather than produce something which can only be sold for a loss of ± 3/- per ton. The only way to get relief is to try and persuade the lessor to reduce the minimum rent, since nothing can be done about the footage or acreage payments. You may surrender the lease at the end of the septennial period, and this may be used to bring some pressure on the lessor. I advise you prove measures west of the present workings, and push ahead with the north side expansion. You have an exceptionally well equipped plant at Kinlet, but it is of no value in the present state of the coal trade, unless underground conditions can be developed to produce a largely increased output of coal of good marketable quality.