The GUC Is No Longer Fully Defined by MagneticsI'm sure you have all seen this presentation:
https://www.balmoralresources.com/assets/docs/ppt/2019%2001%2017%20Balmoral%20T1%20Ni%20Discoveries%20V3i.pdf Up untill now, BAR seems to have been selecting GUC drill locations based upon the magnetic signature which defines the surface expression of the peridotite intrusive that hosts the Type 2 H3 deposit at Grasset. The presentation indicates that the H1 deposit at Grasset is a "
Type 1-Intrusive Contact". A bit of a mismatch in that H1 is Type 1, while H3 is Type 2.
Anyway the new find, which is
Type 1-Volcanic Contact was initially missed because it is lower in the stratigraphy and outside of the magnetics signature of the intrusive peridotite.
This means that the existing outline of the GUC mineralization is no longer accurate. It will eventually be extended to the NE.
What is also interesting is that the entire depositional sequence is tilted and dips to the SW. So it is entirely possible that the komatiite new find will be intersected at shallow depth to the NE. While it might not outcrop, it might be found just below the overburden, a couple of hundred meters to the northeast. ANd this new exploration fairway should extend the full 7 km to the H1 zone at Grasset, where it might again be found slightly to the NE of H1.
If my memory serves me, there is another strong mag anomaly to the east of H1. Possibly another intrusive that might have had a hole drilled into it. I can't remember. Maybe BAR should explore to the east of that mag anomaly, as well.