Many thanks to Dean, Luke Blaise, and Sam Busetti for fielding a barrage of questions for an extended period of time. The excitement with the projects comes through loud and clear. Some areas are 'no go' for relatively obvious commercial reasons and answers become more circumspect. However, such topics are fairly obvious and so the lack of response is not unexpected.
Good to catch up with
@Zior. Good luck with the interview.
So much covered that not easy to do it full justice and may bore some. Can't wipe the smile off these faces....
Apologies to SB (off image to right) who also had a smile.
Important for companies to interact with the outside world. Getting the balance right is a subjective thing but as many have said the work of LB SB NC and many others (including DT) in the dust and flies is what the rocks, chip trays and plans on the table show a reality to investors.
What is below is from memory and my paraphrasing. Apologies to folks if I misconstrued some issues.
=====================
DT takes a pragmatic view on exploration.
My take is he will pick up an area and try to quickly assess if it is an obvious target for further work.
This is the approach he mentioned for the recently acquired ground north of Abra. His and LB/SBs response on queries about why this ground was picked up was circumspect with broad arm waving comments about similarities to Mangaroon, large base metals accumulation(s) and gold. DT was very definite that the ground was not picked up 'just because it was open'.
His response about what they can do on the ground cleared up a long running query of mine. They are allowed to do non ground disturbing work on the pending tenements which includes mapping and limited sampling with prospecting permits, heritage/environmental surveys and airborne survey. Apparently when DT worked with BHP they sometimes used this approach to assess ground and with the Pragmatic approach mentioned above they sometimes dropped the application.
While on the pragmatic theme.
Wombarella to the SE of Orion/Yampi will be subjected to an Airborne EM survey for Ni potential. If no anomalies are forthcoming the tenement will be dropped.
The focus on REE at Mangaroon is another example with Illaara and Yampi being given less priority this year. My comment but seems fairly obvious.
The same is happening within REE sphere where targets are being prioritised rapidly.
There is always the chance that "No ironstones exist south of the Lyon River" could happen with such an approach but with a large number of other targets pragmatism provides a good first pass.
===================
One area that is somewhat circumspect is the detailed magnetics. Partial thorium results from the combined survey have been released but only a hint of the C1-5 magnetics have been shown so far.
The 2016 Hastings combined airmag surveys came into the public domain and the DRE crew looked at them and spotted C1-5 as being strong candidates for carbonatites.
This imagery and its survey parameters enabled DRE to design their large survey. LNR (formerly FNT) had their ground added to DRE's survey area which gives an idea of the level of detail available. Also, it shows C7 as a distinct feature that field checking that I think gave them some carbonatite.
SW corner of LNR magnetics (=DRE survey!)
C1-5,
EIS co funding on drilling (good pick up
@Cpago55).
The original drilling proposal was modified in a way that puzzled me. The best grade chip samples in C4 were not being tested directly. The Lyon River is of cultural significance and a 100m buffer zone was applied for surface work. The vast majority of holes will be vertical but some can be drilled to test the chip samples at depth. If they intersect something of interest it will be interesting....
The more magnetic parts of the anomalies that form C1-5 are not, apparently, the highest priority targets within what are assumed to be zoned intrusives. Detail of the carbonatite sample on desk.
Probably contains back ground REEs <<0.2% at a guess. Surprising to see this as a fresh rock at surface but that fits DREs pragmatic and budgetary approach. Well within their capacity to explore and market. Ditto for most of the areas they are working in with this sample from Sabre:
Apparently finding the outcrop this came from in the Y3 area took quite a lot of work. Lots of ironstone rubble over a relatively large area with students (?) actually locating it. Not a photogenic rock but there are large crystals of monazite visible in hand specimen - source of REEs. Probably the sample shown in location below.
C6.
The magnetic anomaly for this is large enough to show up on the GSWA geoview Magnetics - horseshoe shaped brown anomaly. LB did show me the immediate area with DRE detail mag. Essentially the same just much better definition.
The Pimple to the north of the "horseshoe" is a mafic intrusive that is visible on GE and the thorium imagery (as a distinct low). DT mentioned an association between mafic intrusives and carbonatites is not uncommon.
Does not have any strong direct thorium response (black/Red wiggles - blue a formational anomaly related to intrusives or some other lithology)
Finally, for this post, DT considers the Micks Well area to be the real deal. Not so convinced on ionic REEs in clays because the extractive technology used in China is labour intensive and environmentally detrimental. Other companies at the conference with such clays put a more positive spin on this type of REE deposit.
(20min delay)