Hole 42
Although grades for the interval reported weren't great, the fact that we hit some form of mineralisation as well as a narrow high grade zone indicates potential at a larger scale and validates the exploration model. My interpretation of the placement of 42 is that they were trying to get the best of both DDIP & GAIP anomalies by placing the hole a bit further back from the stronger chargeability on the DDIP. The mineralisation seemed to correspond more with the DDIP and so hole 54 was placed to intersect the central area with strongest chargeability.
It's worth noting that this is the first time in a while the company didn't comment on the CC fault zones and as such I won't be updating my resource model yet with this hole. I'd say it's still unclear whether the CC faults extend across the western valley fault . We may even be looking at a new control for mineralisation on this side of the fault.
In saying that, the below interpretation shows continuation with approx. 20m displacement along the fault.
I think we'll be putting a few holes further north soon where the GAIP anomaly coincides with observed faults. This will be another good test to verify potential at scale outside of the CC fault area that is known to be mineralised.
Any thoughts/interpretations on this western valley fault and how it relates to the CC faults?
