Well, I did comment on the Ekwan River sampling program on July 20th. The rest of the NR seemed pretty straight forward to me. The most noteworthy aspect of it was that the infill drilling gave higher grades than the average inferred resource from the last 43-101 resource estimate. That means that the indicated resource (upgraded in the next resource estimate) will have improved economic value for the purposes of the feasibility work now underway.
At the time that NR was released, I was in a very hectic situation. I did have time to meet with Wes in his office for an hour on the 21st, just before I flew out of Toronto. By the time I got an opportunity to sit and think (and internet access), the main points of the NR had been well covered by other posters, IMHO.
My esteemed colleague Khareema did muddy the waters a little bit, with his remarks about core recovery and assays, because many readers didn't notice his closing comment, "tfic", i.e. tongue firmly in cheek. Just to clear up lingering doubts, if there are any, modern core recovery techniques (google 'wireline drilling') should be quite up to the task of extracting samples from the ground, at pretty much any depth. And, there is no sample that is beyond the capability of the laboratories to assay. That said, there are some significant challenges faced in drilling to the depths contemplated by Noront, with respect to the "convergence zone" beneath Eagle's Nest. The mineralized zone they are targetting is at a depth greater than two CN Towers stacked end to end, and may not be much wider than that structure at its widest point above the convergence. Unlike other projects where one hopes to be in the mineralized envelope by simply getting to the appropriate depth, we know that this conduit has very clear boundaries (at least until it reaches the convergence zone, which may be larger/eaiser to hit). There's a learning curve that comes with this new equipment, and I really wasn't expecting them to have perfect success, right off the bat. I'm hopeful that they've learned quickly.
As I mentioned, I met with Wes for over an hour, and I can provide some feedback. One comment that stuck in my mind, with respect to the target of the deep drilling, was, "We know it's there." He wouldn't tell me anything about how they know, but the look in Wes' eyes told me that he himself is convinced. With respect to the budget, he says they are right on track, and are fully funded through next March, the end of the fiscal year. Because of the technical problems going deep, they may accomplish fewer holes than they'd projected, but the directional drilling equipment may allow them to "catch up" to their plans, without exceeding the budget. Infill drilling at moderate depths at Eagle's Nest should be done by the end of August, and those drills may be repositioned to regional exploration activities, pending the results of surface geophysical surveys, including the super-sensitive SQUID loops. This is the driest year they've ever encountered in the ROF, and they're doing surface work now that they would usually have had to postpone until after freeze-up. Triple J results just aren't a priority for them at the moment (they're totally occupied with new nickel targets, and engineering studies towards project feasibility).....he apologizes for implying otherwise, earlier in the year. Members of the Technical Advisory Committee meet for brain-storming sessions every 2-4 weeks, and have done so for a significant period of time. The intent is to interpret the geophysical data, and geological information returned by the core, with a view to determining the structural controls for mineralization. They are convinced that Eagle's Nest was not a unique occurrence, but of course, we must await the drill results to confirm this belief.
Lar
