Ann: Trek to acquire strategic base metal exploration tenement, page-37

So this fairly open minded query underlined below still remains - my earlier post on this repeated. It quotes some other content from the body of the FMG report and the quote from Trek on the stream sediment anomalism.

I put this somewhat cheekily, but I'm happy to be convinced exactly why this is a great target. But the " FMG sampling was done well before lithium was a commodity of such vital importance in the electrification thematic" response doesn't appear to be correct and hence does not appear to be a valid response to my query.

----

I had a look at the referenced FMG surrender report. That indicates FMG didn't think much of 'some very thin pegmatites", "hosting lithium rich mica minerals". The mineralised dyke hosting the 1.6% Li2O rock sample they reported was considered "too small in scale to warrant any further exploration work". And none of their other rock chip samples reported any significant Li.

I'm not sure what Trek (or BlackCat) are seeing here, other than "multiple outcropping pegmatites in the area of stream sediment anomalism" - which I'm imagining are the same "very thin pegmatites" that FMG reported. Maybe not. But I am not sure why they consider this area a priority LCT target. Maybe they're just doing this to get BlackCat off all our backs. The assays will tell, I guess. Or @blackcat might have some comment. I'd be happy to understand just why they think it's a priority target.

We'll see. In the meantime, back to those VMS and IOCG targets.