Re: Not Good
in response to
by
posted on
Feb 08, 2013 09:46AM
CUU own 25% Schaft Creek: proven/probable min. reserves/940.8m tonnes = 0.27% copper, 0.19 g/t gold, 0.018% moly and 1.72 g/t silver containing: 5.6b lbs copper, 5.8m ounces gold, 363.5m lbs moly and 51.7m ounces silver; (Recoverable CuEq 0.46%)
Webgogs: "We knew it was there and not worth drilling......Mark my words, it's not waste. But a huge drilling program would be a waste."
I understand it isn't waste, but we treat it as waste as we don't have a the resource category to deem it mill run ore. The Dec 21st NR on the FS states that drilling this 'waste' as a project enhancement:
Project Enhancements
The Feasibility Study makes recommendations for further development of the project that could enhance the economics of Schaft Creek including:
IIRC, Elmer repeated much the same during the Dec 24th conference call and described the waste as an opportunity and that it would be drilled if we have a drill programme this year. In his email to myself, he said this: "I would say the identification of the inferred resource should be considered a positive in that it is now treated as appoint to improve the project economics."
By "appoint" I believe he means "a point".
The FS summary recommendations for Phase I (page 26-2) suggests that the 9 drill holes would only cost $1,819,000 for all the infill driling. That doesn't sound like a lot of money for the impact it would have on the economics.
(Interesting that the first recommendation is to complete the Titan work between GK and ES zone - outside of the FS scope AND was to be completed in Phase I of our 2012 exploration programme ??)
So, TT and Elmer don't think it would be 'a waste' to drill the 171M tonnes to improve the economics and it doesn't appear to be a huge drilling programme or a lot of money. I guess we'll only really know if there is a 2013 programme at Schaft and we drill as recommended.