Very nice, Ms. Feline, and I agree totally. My boys told me that the area Donner-Tech is drilling was pretty flat--i.e., therefore, you knew that I also made an assumption about collar elevations for determining mineralization strike. I'm impressed too, as sadly, I found few mining geologists in Labrador who knew how to do a 3-point solution (even with a lap-top.)
You also know the diference between magmatic and remoblized nickel-copper mineralization and how textural mineralogical relationships (or fabric) can be used to tell the difference and discriminate the potentially good stuff from the lousy. Thickness can also be used, as DFR/INCO's +115-metre-thick Ovoid is obviously magmatic.
I also agree with your discussion of variation in po (i.e., a geological shorthand for uneconomic pyrrhotite) or facies changes within the troctolite to possibly explain the Bouguer gravity anomaly. That's why I believe Donner isn't telling their investors (or potential investors) the whole story; stepping out 250 meters due west to drill a NNE trending gravity trend really makes little exploration sense to me--I betcha they're really drilling on a EW-trending EM anomaly.
I, too, am concerned about just where Donner-Teck's other 73 boreholes are located. A friend wrote me that Donner's IR-type told her that they are only releasing "significant" borehole results. This is not good or very smart--barren boreholes (i.e., non-significant?) are very important for Donner-Teck if they wish to demonstrate that their mineralization is indeed magmatic and not just thin, uneconomic remobilized high-grade splashes along a fault zone.
Very impressive, Ms. Feline. You know exploration geology and more importantly what it takes to make a mine in Labrador...
Best Regards, T.
P.S. ...and let me know if you ever want a job in nickel exploration. (BTW, I was born on Matahari's birthday too.) |
