They must demonstrate a measured resource, at the moment it is...

They must demonstrate a measured resource, at the moment it is still speculative (more hypothetical, if anything).

"They took 606kg of sample; that is big - much bigger than you would get from sampling drill holes - and arguably more representative than drilling" wow, what a silly thing to say.

606 / 50 = 12.12kg per sample. To put that into a drilling perspective, an average 5.5" RC drilling hole will produce a 1m sample with a weight, ranging from 10 - 25kg (depending on ground formation type). Therefore if we say the average is 17.5kg per RC meter, we can divide 606 by 17.5 equals a possible 34.6m!!!

To believe that a possible 34.6m of drilling is enough to feel happy about is WRONG!!

To state that their bulk samples, taken from the SURFACE is more "representative" than drilling through the entire dump, is also wrong. That is why this type of sampling can't be used to build a JORC resource.

Please try and understand my earlier post "The uneven distribution of any remaining mineralised material in a waste dump, is extremely difficult to define", because what is on the surface, may (most likely, until confirmed by drilling) not be the same through the entire WASTE dump.