Chucka/Chucie
Re: Your question (I think) on MXAM having the "spillover" area south of IPM's Black Rock Basin.
At the AGM, Tom Dodge showed a cross-section of the area from the north (the Little Harguahala Mtns) to the south (to the Eagletail's). From the drill data he concluded that the basin rose to the south and formed a "lip" that could have precluded the minerals/metals from flowing further to the south, effectively keeping them on IPM's property and off of MXAM's property (simplisticly speaking).
I think this is very speculative for at least two reasons. First, we're looking at the present-day shape of the basin - what was it's shape at the time the Little H Mtns were eroding and depositing their goodies in the basin(assuming that was the source of the goodies? Had the south end of the basin already been elevated to its present position or was it at some lower position which would not have contained the basin fill material? Second, part of Tom's hypothesis was that the metals are heavier and would have settled in the basin area and would not have accompanied any spillover that did occur. Based on the problems IPM had separating the metals by gravity means last year, I don't think there is enough density difference to have caused the metals to settle out rather than remain in suspension with the rest of the minerals. Of course, that's the condition now - again, we don't know what it was eons ago when the basin was filling.
Now, let me say, as did Tom, that this is all hypothesis based on incomplete information and all conclusions should be looked at with skepticism. You may recall Tom saying his views were very preliminary and could change with additional info - I don't know what they are now and obviously my views are based on even less info than Tom's.
Nevertheless, I wouldn't conclude that MXAM's CP property doesn't contain metals just because it sits to the south of IPM's basin edge property. In fact, the CP property had already been drilled and at the time MXAM acquired it they commented on the metal content. Their March 7, 1997 PR stated (in part) that the four test holes indicated a total of 26,400,000 tons ore with an average of 0.055 oz gold/ton and that Hewlett concluded that "IT IS CERTAIN THAT ADDITIONAL DRILLING WILL PROVE A CONSIDERABLY LARGER TONNAGE THAN DRILLED TO DATE". (This part of their PR was in CAPS)
I had forgotten, but the PR also stated that URANCO, the previous owner of the property, was obligated to drill 60 additional exploratory wells within 6 months of the signing of the agreement - the PR only stated that a letter of intent had been signed so I don't know the date of the final agreement, but it would be interesting to find out if the additional drilling has taken place or not.
FWIW
Alan |
