Hello Gemseacher
Firstly, the whole NR while very possibly from LF who is a very nice lady seems of questionable origin to me and while it may be entirely factual, why is it showing up on Stockwatch and not one of the standard newswires and on Sedar where it is supposed to be?
That aside, for the sake of argument, lets assume its true. HB indicated earlier this spring that the first six to eight targets were not their best ones, but because they were out in the middle of larger lakes, they were going to drill them first due to the usual annual drilling limitation called ice melting.
He clearly told me that their best targets were inshore and on land and both could and would be drilled later possibly into the summer.
Having said that, if HB and CJ thought that the targets they did drill because they met all of the usual criteria, then it stands to reason that the usual criteria may not apply as reliably at Yamba as they do in Africa.
In fact, both BHP, Archon and Kennecott have been finding a number of diamondiferous pipes over the past two years that did not exhibit some and in frequent cases, any of the usual geochemical and geophysical markers that have been used for the past ten to thirty years to guide exploration. One of Aber's best pipes in fact had lousy geochemistry and another had an inconclusive geophysical signature. I can't recall the exact details, but WSP's sill/dike hardly has any pyropes, chrome diopsides or illmenites if memory serves. In fact when you look at it, it is remarkably un-kimberlitic in its appearance and in many cases, where not heavily brecciated, it is remarkably fine grained and featureless except for narrow white stringers of calcite if I recall correctly.
Keep in mind, the usual geochemistry basically (simplistically put) only tells geologists that the kimberlite may have preferentially sampled the peridotitic diamond preservation field (G-10's vs G-9's) and how much reabsorb ion might have occurred during emplacement. It does not tell them the grade nor might it offer too many clues if the kimberlite is significantly eclogitic rather than peridotitic.
Fipke's old partner (Blume I believe) who runs Archon has developed some new techniques for finding some of these pipes, and both Kennecott and DeBeers have been working on a few of their own.
It makes perfect sense to revisit existing geochemical and geophysical data and apply these new techniques to see if they offer any insights. I am sure we would all appreciate increasing the probability of hitting kimberlite on the remaining nine 2000 targets. If these new techniques would help in that regard, I am all for it. In fact, if they suggest that some of the remaining 75 potential targets are screaming probabilities, so much the better.
More efficient expenditure of our drilling dollars is certainly a theme voiced by many on this thread over the past few years. Sticking to techniques that are not producing does not make any more sense in exploration decisions than it does in picking mining juniors in which to invest.
Keep these simple truths in mind. There are numerous highly diamondiferous economic pipes both north of our Yamba claims and south of them. If memory serves me, HB has at least eight unique grain geochemistries of short transportation, that do not match up with any of the known kimberlites on our claims. He also has three distinct trains that have highly advantageous geochemistry indicative of pipes that have preferentially sampled the diamond stability field. Most of the geochemical trains on our claims have been highly reworked by post glacial flooding and mixing and may be both close to useless in determining direction to source and number of sources (pipes). The same structural liniments associated with Aber's, DiaMet's and Tahera's diamondiferous pipes (north and south of us) run right through our claims.
If there is another NWT property with all of Yamba's exploration potential, I am certainly not aware of it.
Until HB and CJ tell me that Yamba is a date that won't come across no matter how much you (we) spend on her, I will remain optimistic about our potential here.
What I would appreciate however is SUF putting a little $$ where it said it sas going to in its NR last week, and come clean in a NR tomorrow to tell us what they did/did not find, what they are going to do to improve the odds, when if at all are they going back to drilling Yamba and how many targets WILL BE DRILLED THIS YEAR.
Regards |
