Happy to see some data out there... before I continue, I will say that I have NOT read the report yet, but I did scan the results.
A note is that the report and data is from 1998. And the reason this matters is in reference to the 43-101 reporting standards, which were adopted in 2000. What does this mean in regards to this report?
Again, I have not read it yet, but a certain quality control/ quality assurance (QA/QC) protocol must be followed in order to be 43-101 compliant, this includes such things as how the samples were collected, transported, and even proper locating of the drill collars. The lab certificates ARE included in the report and since this data is not that old they should have information available on these samples. This might be the work that KATX is doing in regards to getting them compliant (?).
If not, then the data cannot be used for a resource report, but the data is still VERY useful. If the proper QA/QC procedures are not verifiable, then KATX would only need to resample/reanalyze the best reported results following correct protocols. A lot cheaper than drill new holes!
Some highlights I observed include a surface rock sample with 0.03% Au and 0.45 oz/t Ag (sample 56929)
Drill holes CAB-98-04, -06, -07, -08, and -10 all had concentrations of Cu of at least 1.5% over 0.3 to 1.0 m intervals. The highest number I observed was 4.2% Cu from CAB-98-08, which was described as 60% disseminated and stringers of sulphides. I did not note the logging of any massive sulphides. A brief scan of the geophysical report note anomalies at 500m and greater and I think only one drill hole went that deep. So that would seem to be a possible target for future exploration!
The newer results should be 43-101 compliant has this standard was proposed in July 1998, so they probably knew the standards before it was adopted. For more information go here:
www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/15019.htm
There are some amendments in the works for the 43-101 that will make it a little cheaper for exploration companies to get to this reporting standard.
Nevertheless – I am really more interested in the pending results from RRs hole #2.
DISCLAIMER: I am an anonymous poster and all opinions and/or interpretations are mine and mine alone and meant to facilitate open and honest discussions. I have no affiliations with this or any other mining company. If this were to change I would make it known and restrict or stop posting on this board. Please don’t ask for my credentials. As such, it is your right to ignore or question anything I post. Nothing I post is meant as a recommendation to buy or sell this or any other stock. Thus, I will not post whether I buy or sell any stock.
AI
