Sunday, February 15, 2015

Inferring the Inferred Value? NI43-101

Chidliak came up with an updated inferred resource on CH6 kimberlite and some updated TFFE (Tonnage for future exploration) on CH6, CH7 and CH44.

Valuations on CH7 and CH44 will not be available for over a based on this statement from Peregrine Diamonds:

"NI 43-101 standards and Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy guidelines stipulate that a Mineral Resource needs to have a "reasonable prospect of economic extraction". In assessing whether the CH-6 Inferred Mineral Resource met this standard, Geostrat considered publicly available costs from northern Canadian diamond projects relative to the total estimated in-situ value of the CH-6 Mineral Resource and concluded that there is a reasonable prospect of economic extraction."

To be able to determine if a resource exists, you must first get a valuation to see if it has a potential for economic extraction.

Now, I take this that CH7 and CH44 will not get an inferred resource regardless of how much core drilling has taken place on the property.

Then you fast forward to another company - Dunnedin Ventures Inc.

and here they flag a maiden inferred resource without any valuation --  Dunnedin release

With this snippet:

"The potential diamond valuation or mining characteristics of the Kahuna and Notch kimberlites have not yet been determined.  However, a 2008 evaluation of Kahuna diamond characteristics by Mineral Services Canada (MSC) describes the Kahuna diamond population as having encouraging value characteristics, with a high abundance of colourless and near colourless varieties with octahedral shapes being the dominant morphology.  The Notch kimberlite displays similar diamond characteristics to Kahuna and other significantly diamondiferous kimberlites within the Kahuna Project including the PST and Killiq kimberlites."

They squeak around the issue by saying like kimberlites are like kimberlites and therefore let's use that. They infer a value. An Inferred resource with an inferred valuation...yet they are not allowed to give a number on that inferred valuation..yet the geologist is still allowed to use it to create an insitu and potential economic extraction validity.

I don't want to mess around with the NI43-101 police...but does not mean that since CH45 and CH46 are quite in the vicnity of CH44 and CH7...that we can then infer valuations across those pipes?

I would say if the modeling of CH7 and CH44 are very similar, then the answer to that would be yes.

Not sure how valuable that is anyway...because if you can't find a $ to attribute to the inferred resource..yet, you include an inferred resource in a PEA are stuck, at a dead end.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say Dunnedin is crossing the grey area threshold and more likely they could just release a very narrow spread on the TFFE information and still advertise a grade like CH-7 has a 1.04 cpt grade associated with it.

Interesting concept. However I have to figure out what makes an indicated resource..just more drilling, more carat valuation? what?  Kimberlite pipes being is not that much to a couple of infill drill holes.

No comments:

Post a Comment