Ann: Rae Delivers Further Cu Results with 90m@4% from Surface, page-120

Thanks - @Blythefan pretty much what I was also saying - the cross sections published recently didn't include the 2003-2005 Coronation diamond drill holes and some of these drill holes are on the same section as the recent WCN 2024 RC drill holes. Now sure the 1960s era diamond drilling might be a little difficult to reconstruct and place 100% faith in, but diamond drill holes from the 2003-2005 era are very relevant and legitimate holes that should also be plotted on a drill section so that people can understand that most of the 2024 RC drilling by WCN is just infilling and/or repeating existing known mineralization that was already known about.

All I was asking was that the previous historical drilling, which was in the clipping of the cross sections be included on the cross sections so that investors could understand where the 2024 drilling was located in relation to previous drilling. Its not hard, WCN knew about these drill holes, and would undoubtedly have them in their database, so I don't know why its so difficult for WCN to produce a cross section with ALL the relevant drill hole traces in that section. The only reason for omitting the previous drilling in cross sections is if you beleive the previous drill hole traces to be completely rubbish/wrong (in which case you have to explain specifically why), or the only other conclusion that can be reached is that by including the previous and existing drilling done rather spoils a good "discovery" story.....

If a company is deliberately doing confirmatory/infill or even twin drilling then its perfectly fine to do so - you just have to describe it as confirmatory drilling - no one has any problem with that, if it's disclosed as such.

Just because the JORC committee changes the reporting guidelines does not mean WCN get to ignore all the previous drilling that already exists like some posters here suggest, and I would maintain that if the 2003-2005 Coronation diamond drilling has down hole surveys then the data from those drill holes is probably superior to the WCN RC drilling in sample quality as diamond drill core is a true representation of the rocks instu.




As you have put them all onto the WCN sections we can see that - and, independently, another poster@Flyingcactacus put everything (the 1960s, 2003-2005 Coronation era drilling and the recent 2024 WCN drilling) into a 3D view for those that like to think in 3D, and the 3D view tells us the same thing - that most of the 2024 WCN RC drilling is undeniably infill drilling (except for the directors special of DAN25008 drilled down plunge) between and around existing drilling from the 1960s and then the much more recent drilling by Coronation in 2003-2005.

When we start to see step out drilling at Danvers along strike or down dip, then we will be able to see if the previous explorers missed anything or not.