Hi Colleen.As for their previous production, since I am not a mineral extraction and processing expert I cannot comment except to say the numbers are misleading and confusing. I could guess why there are differences in the production figures but I will not since again, not my area of expertise.
The data that Alan assembled, is the data I studied quite awhile ago, It is where I came up with my theory of "alluvial pools". When you go looking for alluvial/placer gold you look in low lying areas, where the gold will likely accumulate as a result of natural runoff. If you start washing the residuals, you will run into very high numbers. However, within hours/days you will deplete the resevoir. So 4 days of production of "significant quantity" was not allarming to me. What was a telltale sign however, was once they got through the alluvial collection resevoir, they hit uneconomical values. Which tells me with increasing depth the alluvial gold disappears! Which is also not surprising. This raised my concern of the "third dimension=depth", a concern I still have.
Also the grab samples in most cases "appear to be rather small".
sec.gov
For me... this is somewhat alarming, because it appears to be "selective grab". Very few geologists will grab, where there appears to be little reason to suspect the prescence of gold. Also note that when "grabbing" in the mine shafts no depth is associated with the grab! Under "normal" circumstances depth is attached! Spacing in depth is maintained to show the continuity is not random. ie. Grabs were done at 5m -10m, 15m, etc. etc.
Just an observation not a conclusion!!
the Chief
|
