report on geophysical survey red paint … i i i i i i i i i i 1 homestake mineral development...

I I I I I I I I I I I

Homestake Mineral Development Conpany

1 640 - 1380 Burrard Street Vancouver, B.C. V6Z 2H3

I

_

I

I

I

52G03SWee16 2.11035 NORWAY LAKE 010

REPORT ON GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY

RED PAINT LAKE PROPERTY

NORWAY LAKE AREA

THUNDER BAY MIN1N6 DIVISION, ONTARIO

NTS 52G/03

Prepared for:

<604> 684-2345

I Prepared by:

T. Chandler

Hootestake Mineral Development Company

November 27, 1987

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

SUMMARY

Homestake Mineral Development Company is the holder of 32 unpatented mineral claims covering approximately 518 hectares in the Red Paint Lake area, Thunder Bay Mining Division, Ontario.

The claim group covers a portion of the Upsala-Firesteel River metasedimentary-metavolcanic belt, consisting primarily of subaqueous tholeiitic mafic metavolcanics locally interlayered with a thin unit of felsic tnetavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks. Past work records and recent reconnaissance evaluation by Homestake suggested potential for massive sulphides within the felsic sequence where chloritoid bearing altered zones are manifested.

A limited Max nun 1 horizontal loop EM survey has defined a quality conductor correlative with the area of observed alteration and coincident with a swampy linear depression. The conductor appears to be a steeply dipping near-surface thin sheet, possibly due to sulphide mineralization or graphitic schists. The conductive horizon remains open along strike.

Followup drilling is required to test the best portions of the conductor.


2.11ess NORWAY LAKE 010C

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

SUMMARY. ..................... i

1. INTRODUCTION1.1. Scope. ................. 11.2. Location and Access. .......... 11.3. Property Ownership ........... 11.4. Logistics. ............... 51.5. Physiography .............. 51.6. Previous Work. ............. 5

2. GEOPHYSICS2.1. Instrumentation. ............ 62.2. Survey Method. ............. 62.3. Results. ................ 7

3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........ 7

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS .......... 8

Appendix 1 - Maps

Figures

1. Location Map, Red Paint Lake Property ..... 22. Claim and survey index nap. .......... 3

Tables

1. Claim status summary. ............. 4

Haps

1. Hlem Survey profiles, 100« separation1777 Hz 1:2500. .............. Appendix 1

2. Hlem Survey profiles, 100m separation444 Hz 1:2500 ............... Appendix 1

3. Hlem Survey profiles, 50m separation1777 Hz 1:2500. .............. Appendix 1

4. HI em Survey profiles, 50m separation444 Hz 1:2500 ............... Appendix 1


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Scope

This report summarizes the results o i a M ax Min i horizontal loop EM survey conducted over a portion of the Red Paint Lake Property, Norway Lake area, Thunder Bay Mining Division, Ontario.

This survey was conducted to evaluate the potential for base metal/gold mineralization associated with a particular sequence of Archaean age metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks. A separate Homestake Mineral Development Company report (Christie, 6.J. and Flanagan, J.M., 1987) describes the preliminary geological reconnaissance and 1ithogeochenical work which provided the basis for recommending the survey method and target area. The reader is referred to that report for background information regarding the regional and property geology in the Red Paint Lake area.

1.2 Location and Access

The Red paint Lake Property is located immediately east of Red Paint Lake, approximately 37 km. NE of Atikokan and 215 km. NW of Thunder Bay (Figure 1).

The centre of the property is situated at latitude 49 2' 45" N and longitude 91 23' W on 1:50,000 N.T.S sheet 52G/03. The magnetic declination is approximately 1 E.

Access to the property is obtained through a network of logging roads situated about 45 km. north of the sawmill town of Sapawe. Sapawe is accessible via Highway 623, 24 km. east of Atikokan.

1.3 Property Ownership

The Red Paint Lake Property consists of 32 unpatented mineral claims covering approximately 518 hectares (Figure 2). Claim status details are summarized in Table 1. All the claims are wholly owned by Homestake Mineral Development Company.

50 km

Figure 1. Map showing the location of the Red Paint Lake Property, Norway Lake Area, Thunder Bay Mining Division, Ontario ( Property Location).

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

-3-

HOMESTAKEMINERAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY

Figure 2. Detailed claim map of the Red Paint Lake Property. HLEM Survey ar»a

rite cooeH.ow.57 6.3


Table 1,

Claim No.

974031974032974033974034974035974036974064974065974066974067974068974069974070974071974072974073974074974077974078974079974326974327974328974329974330974331974332974333974334974335974336974337

Mining Claim Status - Red Paint Lake Property

Anniversary Date (Record Date)

February 16, 1987

Total Credits Required to 1988

20 Days


1.4 Logistics

The horizontal loop EM survey was carried out by personnel oi Northwest Geophysics Limited under contract to Homestake Mineral Development Company. The survey Mas limited to a restricted portion o i t he property in the vicinity of stratabound sulphide mineralization at a metasediment/metavolcanic contact. The survey totalled 5.0 line km. over 1.4 km. of baseline and IS crosslines spaced at 100m intervals. The work was completed by two geophysical technicians over a two day period: October 14-15 incl., 1987.

1.5 Physiography

Topographic relief on the property is moderate with abundant outcrop. In the survey area local relief is 10-15 meters with a central swampy gully dominating the axis of the survey grid. A low hill parallels this linear trough on the north side of the grid within the volcanic assemblage.

Overburden consists of a thin cover of sand and boulders. Ice movement appears to have been towards the SW.

1.6 Previous Work

The Red Paint Lake area has experienced sporadic exploration activity since the 1890's when gold was first discovered in the area. A small mine - the Golden Winner - was established and in 1900 15 tons of ore were milled grading 0.29 oz gold/ton on average. Subsequent minor flurries of staking and exploration activity, concentrating on gold, took place during the 1937-1939 and 1946 to 1952 periods. After a lull the area experienced renewed exploration when Barringer Research commenced a series of geological, geophysical and soil geochemistry surveys which redefined and extended the known Alcock copper Showing. No followup drilling was attempted and the claims were allowed to drop.

In the late 1970's Nining North Explorations Limited commenced a comprehensive regional evaluation within the Red Paint Lake greenstone belt. A total of 163 claims were staked and limited trenching carried out on several base metal targets. Later geological napping, soil sampling and a series of geophysical surveys were conducted. Previously known anomalous zones were further enhanced and a new copper anomaly discovered within carbonate altered volcanic 0.8 km. SW of the Alcock showing.

In 1983 the area was re-mapped by the O.6.S. and Billiton


optioned the Mining North property. They conducted soil and till geochemical surveys over a volcaniclastic/metasediment unit within the ma-fic volcanic deemed favourable for base and precious metal mineralization. In 1984 three target areas were trenched, sampled and mapped in detail. Low bedrock geochemical values Mere obtained and the claims were allowed to lapse.

Homestake staked 32 claims in 1987 to cover the Alcock Showing and other zones of intense iron carbonate alteration. Reconnaissance mapping and lithogeochemical sampling were carried out over most of the claims aided by a wide-spaced (200m.) grid totalling 14.8 line km. Although no areas of significant bedrock gold values were detected, a prospective volcanogenic massive sulphide target area was outlined by locally intense chloritoid alteration within sericite schists along the north contact of a metasedimentary/metavolcanic horizon. An HLEM survey, subject of this report, was commissioned to aid in defining potential massive sulphide targets for follow-up.

2. GEOPHYSICS

2.1 Instrumentation

The instrument used for this survey was a Max win 1 owned and operated under contract by Northwest Geophysics Ltd. The Maxmin 1 is a horizontal loop electromagnetic system <HLEM). The transmitter and receiver are interconnected by a reference cable permitting the measurement of the EM field (primary and secondary) at the receiver as a percentage of the theoretical primary field at the receiver. The components measured are the in-phase and out-of-phase as a percentage of the primary field. Measurements at more than one frequency provide a check on the accuracy of the method and permit detection of overburden conductivity effects. In this case 444 Hz and 1777 Hz were employed for the low and high frequencies respectively.

2.2 Survey Method

The survey was limited to a 1.4 km. long E-W grid over the anomalous and altered horizon. Grid lines were re-cut and re established from the previous Billiton soil survey grid with 100 meter spaced lines and 25m picketed stations. The survey limits extended from lines 900W to 500E and from station SOS to 500S maximum for a total survey of 5.0 line-km.

The entire grid area was covered at 100m coil spacing and 25m station readings for both the low and high frequencies. Over anomalies the station separation was reduced to 12.5m on most lines. Further detailed surveying was carried out over selected anomalies on 5 lines using 50m coil spacing and 12.5m station

I ^ .)ia"2S

I7

| readings for both frequencies. The survey was completed in two days using a two ffian field crew. The survey results were

I computerized, collated, edited and plotted by Northwest Geophysics (Maps 1 through 4).

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

2.3 Results

Maps 1 and 2 display the profiled survey results for the 100m coil separation data at each frequency. The conductor was detected over the entire length of the grid although it weakens slightly on the extreme east lines. In general the results depict a narrow, strongly conductive near-surface zone extending from 900W/150S to 500E/212.5S. The conductor is roughly coincident with the swampy gully and is nowhere fully exposed. Examination of the profiles suggests a near vertical to occasionally steeply north dipping conductor. The strength of the response varies along strike but is consistent with a narrow sheet-like conductive source. The strongest conductivity was obtained over lines 00 to 100W and also on line 900W. Survey results correlate well at both frequencies with the 1777 Hz data exhibiting the best anomaly definition.

Maps 3 and 4 show the 50m coil separation detail profiles over the conductor on 5 of the lines. The results of the detail survey provide essentially the same information as the base 100m separation survey,

3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOHHENDATIONS

The Maxmin 1 HLEH survey was successful in delineating a moderate to strongly conductive horizon at or near the north contact of a metasediment/netavolcanic sequence. The zone correlates with a swampy depression south of napped sericite- chloritoid schist alteration. Siliceous (rhyolitic?) brecciated rocks and layered chert hosting disseninations and clasts of pyrite occur to the south of the conductive zone. Minor graphitic seams and partings occur within the cherty units. The conductor in the surveyed area is not exposed due to swamp and overburden.

Follow-up work in the form of one or two short drillholes would be required to test the nature of the conductor. If the conductor consists of massive sulphides the geochemical data collected to date suggests low to negligible base metal content. Alternatively the conductor may represent a formational conductor associated with graphitic sediments.

8

I STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

_ I, Terence E. Chandler, of 4749 Fernglen Place, Burnaby, British Columbia do hereby certify that:

1. I hold an Honours B.Sc. degree in geology -from Carleton University (1975).

2. I have continuously practiced as a geologist since 1975 and am

I currently employed by Homestake Mineral Development Company of Vancouver, B.C.

IApril 12, 1988 Terence E. Chandler

I Exploration Geologist

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

~m mOntario

Type of

Ministry of Report of Work^orthern Developmentand Mines _ (Geophysical, Geological, I AA/o

\ Geochemical and ExpendituttirAV-~~ ..„.._ . r\ ^6^oH--1!^ J M'mr

_«^~*'

•<l ••!••*•! I •••••••»! •! •!••••• •>••••• I

5aG«3SW0«16 3.11«35 NORWAY LAKE

Prospector's Licence NoClaim HolderUI

Survey Company Date of Survey (from & to)

S7ay I Mo. I Yr.

Total>4*f6s of line Cut

Name and Address of Author (of Geo-Tecrinical report)

Credits Requested per Each Claim in Columns at rightSpecial Provisions

For first survey:

Enter 40 days. (This includes tine cutting)

For each additional survey: using the same grid:

Enter 20 days (for each)

Man Days

Complete reverse side and enter total Is) here

RECEIVE

FEB 2 9 1988

MINING LANDS SEC'Airborne Credits

Note: Special provisions credits do not apply to Airborne Surveys.

Geophysical

Electromagnetic

Magnetometer

Radiometric

Other

Geological

Geochemical

Geophysical

Electromagnetic

"\ • Magnetometer

Radiometric

Other

Geological ;ONGeochemical

Electromagnetic

Magnetometer

Radiometric

Days per Claim

*iO

Days per Claim

Days per Claim

Expenditures (excludes power stripping)Type of Work Performed

Performed on

Calculation of Expenditure Days Credits

Total ExpendituresTotal

Days Credits

$ *- 15 =

InstructionsTotal Days Credits may be apportioned at the claim holder's choice. Enter number of days credits per claim (elected in columns at right.

Date

'UXA^HatiorTVi

//Recorded Holder or Agent (Signature)

CertificatiorTVerifying Report of Work

Mining Claims Traversed (List in numerical sequence)

Total number of mining claims covered by this report of work.

DatS Approved at Recorded

I hereby certify that I have a personal and intimate knowledge of the facts set forth in the Report of Work annexed hereto, having performed the work or witnessed same during and/or after its completion and the annexed report is true.

Name and Pottal Address of Person Certifying

DateCertified Certifie/nfy (Si

^1362 (85/12) /

5 §Hs8

Ministry ofNorthern Developmentand Mines

Ontario

Geophyslcal-Geologlcal-Geochemical Technical Data Statement

File_

TO BE ATTACHED AS AN APPENDIX TO TECHNICAL REPORTFACTS SHOWN HERE NEED NOT BE REPEATED IN REPORT

TECHNICAL REPORT MUST CONTAIN INTERPRETATION, CONCLUSIONS ETC.

Type of Survey(s). Township or Area. Claim Holder(s)_ M ( fJ ELK. Ac

MINING CLAIMS TRAVERSED List numerically

fi/* t/&^o en S-^TSurvey Company

Author of Report .

Address of Author /3-C.

Covering Dates of Survey_fr.

Total Mites of Line Cut _(Unecutting to office)

SPECIAL PROVISIONS CREDITS REQUESTED

ENTER 40 days (includes line cutting) for first survey.ENTER 20 days for each additional survey using same grid.

DAYS« 1-1 Per claim Geophysical

—Electromagnetic___2_£——Magnetometer_______—Radiometric—————————Other____________Geological.Geochemical.

AIRBORNE CREDITS (Special provision crediti do not apply to airborne lurveyi)

Magnetometer. .Electromagnetic. . Radiometric

DATE • Ajfjrif/2.

(enter days per claim)^-

SIGNATURE:^^

(number)

i

Author of Report or Agent

Res. Geol.. .Qualifications.Previous Surveys

File No. Type Date Claim Holder

TOTAL CLAIMS.

837 (8511S)

GEOPHYSICAL TECHNICAL DATA

GROUND SURVEYS — If more than one survey, specify data for each type of survey

Number of Stations ____3.2O

Station interval ___2S A-^ Profile scale_________LLContour interval _

ou^-d. J2.5~)~.

.Number of Readings _Line spacing _____

GNETICInstrument

Accuracy — Scale constant. Diurnal correction method.Base Station check-in interval (hours). Base Station location and value ___

ROMAGNETIC

ELE

InstrumentCoil configuration Coil separation __

Accuracy. Method:

Parameters measured.

52)

D Fixed transmitter D Shoot back Bin line/7?7

D Parallel line

{specify V.L.F. station)

GRA

Instrument.Scale constantCorrections made.

Base station value and location.

Elevation

Instrument

INDUCED POLARIZATIO

Parameters — On time _______________________

H r1 _ DHay t"rr»e

& — Integration time

55 „uJ Power _ ———————————— ——— _____________rf

Electrode array ————— __ ————————————— -Electrode spacing _______________________ _____

Tvoe of electrode , _.... .., ————————————

FrequencyRange

SELF POTENTIALInstrument________________________________________ Range.Survey Method _____________________________________________

Corrections made.

RADIOMETR1C Instrument____Values measured.Energy windows (levels) _____________________________________

Height of instrument____________________________Background Count. Size of detector_____________________________________________ Overburden ________________________________________________

(type, depth — include outcrop map)

OTHERS (SEISMIC, DRILL WELL LOGGING ETC.) Type of survey_________________________ Instrument ___________________________

Accuracy——————————————————————————Parameters measured.

Additional information (for understanding results).

AIRBORNE SURVEYS Type of survey(s) ____

Instrument(s) ——————(specify for each type of survey)

Accuracy_________________(specify for each type of survey)

Aircraft used__________________________________

Sensor altitude.Navigation and flight path recovery method.

Aircraft altitude______________________________Line Sparing Miles flown over total area________________________Over claims only.

GEOCHEMICAL SURVEY - PROCEDURE RECORD

Numbers of claims from which samples taken.

Total Number of Samples. Type of Sample.

(Nature of Material)

Average Sample Weight——————— Method of Collection————————

Soil Horizon Sampled _ Horizon Development. Sample Depth———— Terrain————————

Drainage Development——————————— Estimated Range of Overburden Thickness.

ANALYTICAL METHODSValues expressed in: per cent

p. p.m. p. p. b.

n D

Cu, Pb,

Others_

Zn, Ni, Co, Ag, Mo, As.-(circle)

Field Analysis (.Extraction Method. Analytical Method- Reagents Used——

Field Laboratory Analysis No. (___________

SAMPLE PREPARATION(Includes drying, screening, crushing, ashing)

Mesh size of fraction used for analysis————

Extraction Method. Analytical Method _ Reagents Used__

Commercial Laboratory (_ Name of Laboratory_ Extraction Method__ Analytical Method —— Reagents Used _____

.tests)

.tests)

.tests)

General. General.

Ontario


Ministere du Developpement du Nord et des Mines

May 18, 1988 Your File: W8804-114 Our file: 2.11035

Mining RecorderMinistry of Northern Development and Mines435 James Street SouthP.O. Box 5000Thunder Bay, OntarioP7C 566

Dear Sir:

.i;;,{;A;. B'JMVEY

ixST FILF3 OFFICE

WAY 2 6 1983

RE: Notice of Intent dated May 3, 1988 I ^ ,,. ,AGeophysical (Magnetometer) Survey submittid flKjL.^ *- ' V k Mining Claims TB 974065 et al in the Area of NorwayTaTce"^'""

The assessment work credits, as listed with the above-mentioned Notice of Intent, have been approved as of the above date.

Please inform the recorded holder of these mining claims and so indicate on your records.

Yours sincerely,

W.R. Cowan, ManagerMining Lands SectionMines and Minerals Division

Whitney Block, Room 6610 Queen's Park Toronto, Ontario M7A 1W3

Telephone: (416) 965-4888

Enclosure: Technical Assessment Work Credits

cc: Mr. G.H. FergusonMining & Lands Commissioner Toronto, Ontario

Homestake Mineral Development CompanySuite 6401380 Burrard StreetVancouver, B.C.V6Z 2H3

Resident Geologist Thunder Bay, Ontario


Technical Assessment Work Credits

OntarioDate

May 3, 1988

File

2.11035Mining Recorder's Report of Work No.

W8804-114

Recorded Holder

Homestake Mineral Development CompanyJWUWilSSp'&r Area

Norway Lake

Type of survey and number of Assessment days credit per claim

Geophysical

Section 77 (19) See "Mining Claims Assessed" column

Geological rtays

Geonhemical Hays

Man days | | Airborne I I

Special provision Q£] Ground 5<1

£T] Credits have been reduced because of partial coverage of claims.

f~1 Credits have been reduced because of corrections to work dates and figures of applicant.

Mining Claims Assessed

TB 974065-66 974332 to 36 inclusive

Special credits under section 77 (16) for the following mining claims

Mo credits have been allowed for the following mining claims

[~~| not sufficiently covered by the survey | | insufficient technical data filed

The Mining Recorder may reduce the above credits if necessary in order that the total number of approved assessment days recorded on each claim does not exceed the maximum allowed as follows: Geophysical 80; Geologocal - 40; Geochemical 40; Section 77(19) - 60,

826 (85/12)

(Cl

Gulliver Lake G-sso91° 30* 91° 15'

"3 49°07'3Q" —

a .J

13 O

CD

g4j9i^- l'V-J " _ J_K_ L _

^at J rtui t>io r J __ ^___ ^_ _ ,

_. \L.--- -

n—49°O7'3O'

COinin

iO

a

c o(.0

"Ov.a-Cotr

— 49° OO'

28' 27' 26 25 24' 22 Z\ 20 19 18 17

Sawbill Bay - Mcrmion Lake G-55852G03SW0ai6 2.11035 NORWAY LAKE 200

cutting io b« undertaken btlw««n Apr. I/Q8 and Mar 31/89 information coil Bob McColm at 8O7 - 597-6971.

LEGENDHIGHWAY AND ROUTE No. OTHER ROADS

TRAILS SURVEYED LINES:

TOWNSHIPS. BASE LINES. ETC.LOTS. MINING CLAIMS, PARCELS, ETC.

UNSL'RVEYED LINES:LOT LINESPARCEL BOUNDARYMINING CLAIMS ETC.

RAJLSTAY AND RIGHT OF WAY * UTILITY LINES *•• NON-#tftENNIAL STREAM , ^ - FLOOOIMG OR FLOOOlNd RIGHTS iSUBDIVISION OR COMPOSITE PUMKRESERVATIONSORIGINAL SHORELINEMARSH OR MUSKEG ^''+MINESTRAVERSE MONUMENT

DISPOSITION OF CROWN LANDS

DOCUMENT SYMBOL

PATENT, SURFACE & MINING RIGHTS-__—.SURFACE RIGHTS ONLYT ._,.__._______ O

" . MINING RIGHTS ONLY .._________„___ QLEASE. SURFACE & MINING RIGHTS...——__..._.„„. •

" . SURFACE RIGHTS ONLY.__„„_.__.______ O- . MINING RIGHTSONLY...—.„.._..___..„._. B

LICENCE OF OCCUPATION .___„___.„___.___ TORDERS-COUNCIL „„_____„.„__.._____,__.____ OCRESERVATION _______________.„.._.„..__„„„_. ©CANCELLED _____.„„_______.__„_„„„_....._.„ ttSANO* GRAVEL ___.__„_____.__._.__..__„„. ®

NOTE: fcMMM»Q MIQMTS IN P ARCELS PATiNTIO PMlOH TO MAV ». 1*13. VMTIU IN ORIGINAL PATBNTIift KV THE FUBl."?. LAMOS ACT. n.t.O. 1970, CHAP. 3M, i«C, U, tUASCC 1.

SCALE: 1 INCH = 40 CHAINS

FEET0 100O 20OO 40OO 6OOO 30M

MCTMES10OO

(1 KMI2000

(2 KM)

AREA

NORWAY?LAKE_ -. ^ ;'^

M.N.R. ADMINISTRATIVE D ISTRICT r? b

AT1KOK&N •MINING DIVISION

THUNDER BAYLAND TITLES/ R EGISTRY D IVISION

RAINY RJVER/KENORA

Ontario

Ministryof *-»ndNatural Resources Branch

Oil * N 0 V.2 7 , 1 8 8 1 vTJ i»

G-545

100S

200S

300S

400S

500S

52G83SW0ei16 2 .11035 NORWAY LAKE £10

Inatrument : MAXMIN 1

Coil Spacing : 100m

Vertical Scal«: 1 cm - 25X Frequency : 1777 Hz

In Phase i _*_M. _

Quadrature : ,. A ... A ......

26m On i i iMm i

100m

2. 110

HOMESTAKE MINERALSHLEM SURVEY

FREQ. 1777 HERTZPROJECT: RED PAINT LAKE PROJECT # :

BASELINE AZIMUTH : 90 Deg.5700 RP

SCALE - 1: 2500 DATE : 10/14/87 SURVEY BY : NWG NTS : 52 G/3

RLE: HRPL100NORTHWEST GEOPHYSICS LTD. FIGURE 1

V«r», 3.97 M 0* 1M7 it 7*82 of pM «t 200.0V / 7*7.88 | HV71K UMT t NCWTHWWT WWHYSICS LID,

0

ioo

200S

300S

Instrument ; MAXMIN 1Coil Spacing : 100mVertical Scale: 1 cm - 25XFrequency : 444 HzIn Phow : _H—M——Quadrature : ., 4...A......

50n i I Qnn i i

Mm i100m

BASELINE

2. 11035


FREQ. +44 HERTZPROJECT: RED PAINT LAKE PROJECT # : 5700 RP

BASELINE AZIMUTH : 90 Deg.


____FILE: HRPL100 NORTHWEST GEOPHYSICS LTD. F IGURE 2

«t 1MT7 «t HO* Normal Pnflto 0«b« of *M at 300,OW / 3«7.8S HB71IQ LTD.

52G83SW0816 2.11035 NORWAY LAKE

5COW

100S-

200S.

300S-

400S.

rt 1M7 «t Ml HWTMl On** of pW •! 400.TW / 390.0B HV71B2 UMT i MOfTWWT «OPK»W» UU

/oooj333

DOBASELINE-CO

3

Inatrument : MAXMIN 1

Coil Spacing : 50m

Vertical Scale: 1 cm - 25X

Fr»qu«r>cy : 1777 Hz

In Phase : M M__

Quadrature : .. A ...A ......

3Bn i i i 100m


FREQ. 1777 HERTZPROJECT: RED PAINT LAKE PROJECT | : 5700 RP


SCALE - 1: 2500 DATE : 10/15/87SURVEY BY : NWG NTS : 52 G/3

RLE: HRPL50NOBTHWBST GEOPHYSICS LTD. FIGURE 3

S2G03SW00I6 2.11035 NORWAY LAKE S30

406BASELINE

100S

200S

300S

^——7^V33

400S

Instrument : WAXMIN 1

Coll Spacing : 50m

Vertical Scol«: 1 cm - 25%

Frequency : 444 Hz

In Pho« : --» x——

Quadrature : ..*...*......

SQto 36mtill100m i


FREQ. 444 HERTZPROJECT: RED PAINT LAKE PROJECT f : 5700 RP



RLE: HRPL50 NORTHWEST GEOPHYSICS LTD. F IGURE 4

V«r». 3,97 Wwl IS Oat 1 M7 it 7i5S Normal Prvflto CM** «f pW «t W0.1W / 280.06 SwW ^ HT71i2 UMT t NOrTIM«*T aEOFHVSICS LID.

52G03SM016 2.11*35 NORWAY LAKE 240

report on geophysical survey red paint … i i i i i i i i i i 1 homestake mineral development...

Documents