Firstly, it would seem there aren't too many people who want to answer your question, even though you have quite a number of TU's.
I know I'm not a raving greeny, although I do know where you can find a few. As for being a mining mogul, I don't think I make the cut there either but alas I hold a substantial amount of shares in BLR which may paint me as not quite being a neutral source of information. Anyway, have a look at this information (address supplied) and tell me what you think.
The short version of the studies from the North Dakota government website, is that after testing many wells of varying depths all over that region in the 70's and 90's, it would seem many show naturally occurring readings way above what health officials would deem as safe (20 micrograms per litre). In particular wells that were 150 feet or less in depth seemed to be most affected.
What could this mean? Draw your own conclusions, I am trying to be neutral today. LOL
http://www.ndhealth.gov/wq/gw/pubs/uranium.htm
Other things to keep in mind
*BLR AGM on 22/11/10 *CUP decision (third time lucky) due 24/11/10 late our time *6 to 12 drill holes to shore up 100 Million pound JORC resouce *Borshoff is hiding in the grass with his binoculars
Lastly, Kevdog please tell me where on my last post I mention the word "Lawsuit", I believe the words I used were "Legal action"...... and can you change the wording on the TAC website from "Low grade" to "High grade" Uranium, thanks in advance.
I must me crazy, I topped up again yesterday, and the volume at 3.7 cents indicates to me someone else did as well.
See you at the AGM
SwissB
BLR Price at posting:
3.2¢ Sentiment: LT Buy Disclosure: Held
