It is worth noting that ALL 1381 of DDN's diamonds, reported in the table shown in their news release, would have fallen through the 850 sieve at the SRC, if they had used the same parameters as Snowfield.

It seems that Snowfield was looking for larger diamonds by setting the minimum sieve size at 0.85mm. They were looking for macro diamonds and they found some. Whereas, Diamonds North, it appears, is more interesting to report all diamonds recovered, whether they are micros or macros. This allows them to report a higher carats per tonne, or a higher number of diamonds per tonne. The presence of larger stones, of good quality, has a significant impact upon the economic viability of a potential diamond mine.

I hope that this post helps us all to realize the potential impact upon the total number of diamonds recovered by setting the smallest sieve size to 0.85mm. If you put this together with a coarse crush size of 12mm and the potential effects of the hematite, we may see many more diamonds, of all sizes, reported in the re-processing results. This is not a sure thing, of course, but the possibility is there.