Gang, was wondering if I could ask a couple of easy questions...

Gang, was wondering if I could ask a couple of easy questions (?) about how to interpret a few elements of the annual report.

I may as well ask here and see if any of you chaps can assist (I would be grateful).

On page 9 it has the map of the copper in soil with the drilling pattern outlined on it. It mentions above the map that, this ore-body takes the shape of a "complex northeast-southwest trending shear zone", and from the looks of the drilling, most of the exploration has taken place to the upper right (north-eastern) section of the map.

Questions:

1) - Is there a reason they didn't drill directly into those areas of highest copper in soil? It mentions "previous exploration drilling along strike of a dominant geochemical anomaly has been selectively in filled" - is that the reason? Is this "geochemical anomaly" of better predictive value than the copper in soil - and when was this anomaly was found... was it during those aerial activities I remember reading about once before?

2) are these drill holes directly down, or at angles?

3) If you look at the pic on page 9 you can see holes drilled to the far right of the map - such as 0036 middle right... and 0038, 0037, and 0039 further down the map. As these holes contain intercepts - particularly 0038, this is indication that there may be an even bigger ore body out to the east portion of the drill grid we see on this map - correct? (I can see now why they cannot keep drilling forever and that exploration should go on together with development if this assumption is correct).

4) The same questions/assumptions I have mentioned with regards to it being an open resource and finding intercepts at the borders of the drilling I guess apply to the other locations in the area. Which drill location of the three most interests you guys?

thanks for any and all feedback,

Stan.