Hi Folks! Even tho on the road, president Boulay has again taken the time to answer more of our questions! His discussion is, as usual, well-written and addresses questions raised here with lucid clarity.
From MMU president Rick Boulay:
=============================================
Thanks for pointing out technical questions. Here are some thoughts you can post.
Location of our properties
There may be some confusion about the location of our properties. We are located in NW Alberta, about 400 km west of the NE Alberta plays of Tintina and Birch Mountain. They are in Devonian age carbonates which are overlain by early late-Cretaceous sandstones which, BTW, contain the great oil sand deposits of Alberta. The depth to Precambrian basement is small, zero to several hundred metres. We are located 2.5km (i.e. 2,500 metres) above the basement in the upper part of the late-Cretaceous. About 85 million years, the same age as the Ashton pipes, we think.... we'll know as soon as our age date results are finished. Right now we are working with a range of 82 to 87 million years, or 82Ga to 87Ga (Giga years).
We think very highly of the TTS and BMD efforts to pioneer a new metallogenic province. It may be at the same stage of development as the Carlin, Battle Mountain and Getchell trend plays of Nevada were in 1960.
Our metals play is very young, 6 weeks or so, but is coming on strong since stratigraphic correlaration along one axis is already 21km and will likely grow as we follow the unit southward. We anticipate, but certainly do not guarantee, based on general geological principles and an in-depth working knowledge of the area, an N-S axis in excess of 90km. We have taken samples and have exhumed archived samples and they are being processed. We'll see.
Our geochemical grades are very high, except for gold, compared to the other Alberta metal plays. Of course, we only have 11 samples so far. It will be interesting to see how the two plays develop, either independently or geologically related to each other. If there are any budding mining analysts out there it would be interesting to see comparisons of the players on a market cap basis, a potential tonnes basis and on a metal grade basis as the play(s) develop. Marum might compare favourably.
Connection with oil
Some commentators mentioned the fact there may be a connection between our diamond/metal targets and underlying oil accumulations. This is an interesting idea which I have been thinking about for years. First, the Chinchaga is mainly a gas area with only minor developed oil fields, but that is true of many areas of northern Alberta. The oil and gas people, including the academic experts, say that the oil and gas was generated in the late-Cretaceous, about 85Ga ago. Hmmmmmmm!!! Also, many of the major producing pipes in Siberia, especially the best one, the Mir pipe, lies atop (penetrates??) a large oil reservoir which exists in the Cambrian sediments which directly overlie the basement granites. I think there is a very close relationship but it does not help me much in constructing an exploration model and so we have not researched it. There are other hints that the two geological features are related in time and in geology.
Layered vs. Vertical
There has been some discussion about vertical stuctures (pipes) and extrusive layered kimberlitic rocks. Sometimes impatience leads to the over-analysis of available information. I do it too. We will just have to wait for more data to become available. There is some debate in our group as to whether or not the Target 7D drill core intercept represents the crater facies portion of a kimberlite pipe. In certain respects, its a lot more "pipish" than features in other areas which have been declared as pipes. But, we are taking the conservative approach and leaving the matter to be decided by additional work. We don't really care since the volcaniclastics represent far greater volumes and better accessibility. But, it would be nice to pin down a really local source.
As to the question of whether we are looking for pipes or layers, the answer is "both". If is layered it will be extensive, so why not drill where there is also the potential of a pipe. If there is no pipe you may well hit a layered horizon of interest.
Commitment
Our commitment to the Chinchaga and Pinhorn diamond projects in Alberta is very strong. The Chinchaga project will occupy us for a long time. However, we do have other ideas and we intend to be active in diamond exploration for a long time. We don't really make a distinction between Alberta and the NWT, or, say, Colorado. We operate as we can in an area extending from the Arctic Islands to Colorado and from Kansas to the Pacific Ocean. This is an continental scale, emerging, ultramafic volcanic province which now has demonstrated diamond potential. We have several projects in the reconnaissance stage and will advance them in a business-like manner. There is two or three weeks of dead time now, while the results come back and until the Chinchaga dries out. We are taking this opportunity to do light work on some of the reconnaissance projects.
Thickness of Horizontal Layers
There have been some excellent informed technical discussions on the Marum SI thread. Regarding the metallic mineralized layer, I should point out that the upper one, and best visually mineralized one is 5 to 10 metres thick. However, there is mineralization extending well over 70 metres in thickness, with some very high numbers coming from samples which did not look very interesting in terms of sulphide mineralization. Early indications suggest that a "thickness of interest" of at least 70 metres has been defined. My guess is that it is somewhat thicker, based on visual observations.
I'm travelling but I do check my email every day.
Regards, Rick Boulay
=============================================
---------------
Se bueno!
Gotta run folks,
Cheerio!
-j
:>
MMU project website: mmu.simplenet.com |
