rpt on combined helicopter-borne mag/em/vlf sur - … · 2017-01-17 · report on combined...

S2FWNEW40 8 .6061 BOYER LAKE010

REPORT ON

COMBINED HELICOPTER-BORNE

MAGNETIC, ELECTROMAGNETIC AND VLF

SURVEY

UPPER MANITOU LAKES AREA, ONTARIO

for

PROPHET et al

by

AERODAT LIMITED

April, 1985

**

I

I• ^P S2Fe7NE««48 2 .6061 BOYER LAKE 010C

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

1. INTRODUCTION 1-1

I 2. SURVEY AREA LOCATION 2-1

3. AIRCRAFT AND EQUIPMENT 3-1

3.1 Aircraft 3-1

I 3.2 Equipment 3-1

3.2.1 Electromagnetic System 3-1

I 3.2.2 VLF-EM System 3-2

3.2.3 Magnetometer 3-2

3.2.4 Magnetic Base Station 3-2

I 3.2.5 Radar Altimeter 3-2

3.2.6 Tracking Camera 3-3

I 3.2.7 Analog Recorder 3-3

3.2.8 Digital Recorder 3-4

4. DATA PRESENTATION 1

I 4.1 Base Map and Flight Path Recovery 4-1

4.2 Electromagnetic Profiles 4-2

I 4.3 Total Field Magnetic Contours 4-3

4.4 VLF-EM Total Field Contours 4-4

5. INTERPRETATION 5-1

I 6. RECOMMENDATIONS 6-1

APPENDIX I - General Interpretive Considerations

I APPENDIX II - Anomaly List

I

I

I

I

ILIST OF MAPS

(scale: 1:15,000) .

I

| Maps

1. Airborne Electromagnetic Survey Interpretation

2. Airborne Electromagnetic Survey Profiles932 Hz (Coaxial)

I3. Total Field Magnetic Contours

" 4. VLF-EM Total Field Contours

IAlso provided but not included as a part of this report:

I Mylar overlays of 4568 Hz coaxial/4175 Hz coplanar electro-

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

magnetic profiles in two colours.

1-1

1. INTRODUCTION

I I I I

This report describes an airborne geophysical survey car-

0 ried out on behalf of Prophet et al by Aerodat Limited.

Equipment operated included a 3-frequency electromagnetic

B system, a magnetometer and a VLF-EM system.

IThe survey area, in the Upper Manitou Lakes region south-

I east of Dryden, Ontario, was flown on March 2 and March 5,

1985. A total of 130 line kilometers of data were acquir-

ed at a line spacing of 200 meters.

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

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

2-1

2. SURVEY AREA LOCATION

The index map below outlines the survey area. The flight

line direction was east/west, and the line spacing was 200

meters.

I

I

I

3-1

3. AIRCRAFT AND EQUIPMENT

3.1 Aircraft

I I I I

The helicopter used for the survey was an Aerospatiale

I A-Star 350D owned and operated by Maple Leaf Helicop

ters Limited. Installation of the geophysical and an-

ciliary equipment was carried out by Aerodat. The

survey aircraft was flown at a mean terrain clearance

of 60 meters.

I3.2 Equipment

3.2.1 Electromagnetic System

| The electromagnetic system was an Aerodat 3-

frequency system. Two vertical coaxial coil

pairs were operated at 932 and 4568 Hz and a

horizontal coplanar coil pair at 4175 Hz.

The transmitter/receiver separation was 7

meters. Inphase and quadrature signals were

measured simultaneously for the 3 frequencies

with a time constant of 0.1 seconds. The elec-

tromagnetic bird was towed 30 meters below the

helicopter.

I

III

3.2.2 VLF-EM System

| The VLF-EM system was a Herz Totem 1A. This in-

strument measures the total field and quadrature

component of the selected frequency. The sen-

I sor was towed in a bird 12 meters below the hel

icopter. The transmitting stations used were

| NLK (Jim Creek, Washington, 24.8 kHz) for lines

10 - 1011, and NAA (Cutler, Maine, 24.0 kHz)

for lines 1021 - 1271.

I3.2.3 Magnetometer

I The magnetometer was a Geometries G803 proton

precession type. The sensitivity of the in-

strument was 1 gamma at a 0.5 second sampling

I rate. The sensor was towed in a bird 12

meters below the helicopter.

I 3.2.4 Magnetic Base Station

An IFG proton precession type magnetometer was

I operated at the base of operations to record

diurnal variations of the earth's magnetic

| field. The clock of the base station was syn-

I

I

I

chronized with that of the airborne system.

I3-3

I3.2.5 Radar Altimeter

• A Hoffman HRA-100 radar altimeter was used to

• record terrain clearance. The output from the

instrument is a linear function of altitude

• for maximum accuracy.

• 3.2.6 Tracking Camera

• A Geocam tracking camera was used to record

flight path on 35 mm film. The camera was op-

• erated in strip mode and the fiducial numbers

for cross-reference to the analog and digital

• data were imprinted on the margin of the film.

I3.2.7 Analog Recorder

• An RMS dot-matrix recorder was used to display

the data during the survey. In addition to

• manual and time fiducials, the following data

• was recorded.

• Channel Input Scale

01 Low Frequency Inphase 2 ppm/mm

I 02 Low Frequency Quadrature 2 ppm/mm

03 High Frequency Inphase 2 ppm/mm

| 04 High Frequency Quadrature 2 ppm/mm

I

I

III

Channel Input Scale

• 05 Mid Frequency Inphase 4 ppm/mm

• 06 Mid Frequency Quadrature 4 ppm/mm

07 VLF-EM Total Field 2.5% /mm

I 08 VLF-EM Quadrature 2.5% /mm

00 Altimeter (500 ft. at top• of chart) 10 ft/mm

14 Magnetometer 5 gamma/mm

| 15 Magnetometer . 50 gamma/mm

3.2.8 Digital Recorder

• A Perle DAC/NAV data system recorded the survey

on magnetic tape. Information recorded was as

g follows:

I Equipment Interval

EM 0.1 seconds

I VLF-EM 0.5 seconds

Magnetometer 0.5 seconds

Altimeter 0.5 seconds

I

I

I

I I

I

II4. DATA PRESENTATION

I4-1 Base Map and Flight Path Recovery

A photo map base at 1:15,000 scale was prepared

I by enlargement of aerial photographs of the area.

It was used during the course of the survey for

I visual navigation as well as for final flight path

• recovery and map presentation.

I 4.2 Electromagnetic Profiles

I The electromagnetic data was recorded digitally at a

sample rate of 10/second with a time constant of 0.1

I seconds. A two stage digital filtering process was

_ carried out to reject major sferic events, and to re-

* duce system noise. The process is outlined below.

•

•

Local atmospheric activity can produce sharp, large

amplitude events that cannot be removed by conven

tional filtering procedures. Smoothing or stack-

• incr will reduce their amplitude but leave a broader

residual response that can be confused with a geologi-

• cal phenomenon. To avoid this possibility, a computer

algorithm searches out and rejects the major sferic

events .

I

I

I

II •I

The signal to noise ratio was further enhanced by the

I application of a low pass digital filter. It has zero

• phase shift which prevents any lag or peak displace

ment from occurring, and it suppresses only varia-

I tions with a wavelength less than about 0.25 seconds.

This low effective time constant permits maximum pro-

• file shape resolution.

J Following the filtering processes, a base level cor-

_ rection was made. The correction applied is a linear

• functionof time that ensures that the corrected ampli-

• tude of the various inphase and quadrature components

is zero when no conductive or permeable source is pre-

| sent. The filtered and levelled data was then present-

_ ed in profile map form.

The inphase and quadrature responses of the 932 Hz

• coaxial configuration coils were presented in profile

• form with flight path and electromagnetic anomaly in

formation on the base map. The inphase and quadrature

I profiles of the 4568 Hz coaxial/4175 Hz coplanar coil

configurations have been presented with flight path as

I a two colour mylar overlay.

I I I

I I

4-3

I4.4 Total Field Magnetic Contours

The aeromagnetic data was corrected for diurnal var-

• iations by subtraction of the digitally recorded base

• station magnetic profile. No correction for regional

variation was applied.

™ The corrected profile data was interpolated onto a reg-

• ular grid at a 25 m true scale interval using a cubic

spline technique. The grid provided the basis for

• threading the presented contours at a 10 gamma interval,

• The aeromagnetic data has been presented with flight

path and electromagnetic anomaly information on the

• base map.

4.4 VLF-EM Total Field Contours

• The VLF-EM signal from NAA (Cutler, Maine) or NLK

• (Jim Creek, Washington) was compiled in map form.

• The mean response level of the total field signal was

removed and the data was gridded and contoured at an

I interval of 2%.

• The VLF-EM total field data has been presented with

flight path and electromagnetic anomaly information.

I

I

• 5. INTERPRETATION

IA large number of electromagnetic anomalies were identified

I from the electromagnetic profiles, and subsequent conductor

_ axes interpreted. The selection of anomalies was based on a

• number of geophysical considerations, which are outlined in

• Appendix I and expanded upon in the paragraphs following.

The interpretation of conductor axes from these anomalies

fj i s discussed, along with their observed magnetic correlation,

Anomaly Selection

• The single most important feature of anomaly recognition

• is the response profile shape. Several properties of the

source can be determined from this information using char-

I acteristic curves for Aerodat's coaxial/coplanar configura-

_ tion. Anomalies that exhibit profile shapes characteristic

™ of a thin steeply dipping conductive body are generally con-

I sidered to be of bedrock origin, while those with profile

shapes characteristic of a thin flat-lying body are often •

I attributed to a conductive overburden source.

• For each anomaly, the apparent conductance has been cal

culated based on the model of a vertical half -plane. These

• are listed in Appendix II. Conductance values of less than

I I

III

approximately 4 mhos suggest electrolytic conduction as in

| faults or shears, or possible minor disseminated minerali-

_ zation. A higher conductance value is indicative of elec-

™ tronic conduction, which is characteristic of significant

I

I

sulphide or graphite mineralization,

When the exploration target is gold formations, the empha-Isis for conductor identification is placed on the conduct-

I or's probability of being of bedrock as opposed to over-

burden origin. The conductor's estimated conductance is

• not a stressed factor. Although gold itself is highly

• conductive, it cannot be expected to exist in sufficiently

large and well connected quantity to yield a direct air-

| borne electromagnetic response. However, accessory minera-

_ lization such as sulphide or graphite may produce a good

™ conductance as an indirect indication. Gold might be lo-

I cated within a fault, shear zone or contact that may produce

a significant response due to contained clay or conductive

I fluids. This type of conductor, referred to as "structural"

is usually associated with low conductances, less than 4

mhos.

• When sulphide mineralization is the exploration target,

• greater emphasis can be placed on individual anomaly charac-

I I

I I

teristics, including profile shape, estimated conductance,

• and conductor axis length. As mentioned in the Appendix,

the reponse profile shape is largely determined by the geo-

• metrical orientation, physical size, and depth of the caus-

• ative body. High conductance values, say greater than 10

mhos, are a positive indication of either sulphide or gra-

J phite mineralization. When the strike length of a conductor

• axis is long, shorter sections containing "anomalies"

• within the anomalous zone are generally of greatest interest.

IElectromagnetic Conductor Axes

IConductor axes have been interpreted from the electromagne-

J tic anomalies based on the geophysical considerations dis-

cussed above. Many axes exhibit response profile character-

• istics that suggest a probable source geometry, while others

• feature less distinctive profile shapes. Those with pro

file characteristics indicative of a bedrock origin have

P been coded as such, and those with marginal electromagnetic

_ responses have been labelled "possible bedrocks".

In general, a conductor's probability of being of bedrock

B origin is greater when it is associated with a magnetic fea-

• ture, as they are indicators of the underlying geology.

I I

III

For this reason, apparent correlations between conductive

| and magnetic responses have been coded on the interpreta-

_ tion map. However, the favourability of a coinciding or

™ flanking magnetic anomaly would be best assessed with the

I benefit of additional geological and geophysical informa

tion.

I_ The electromagnetic response over much of the survey area is

* low, indicating a resistive surficial environment. Most of

I the surficial type responses occur over drainage, such as

lakes or rivers. Numerous bedrock conductor axes have been

| interpreted and are described below:

™ A. This conductor, coinciding with a magnetic anomaly,

• appears to be due to a flat-lying body, but the estimated

conductances are higher than that due to typical overburden.

I_ B. This weak conductor flanks a magnetic anomaly.

I C. This east/west striking high conductance axis lies a-

long a magnetic contact. The profile characteristics sug-

| gest a lens type conductive source.

™ D. This high conductance axis strikes parallel to a mag-

I I

I5-5

I netic contact. The anomaly to the north indicates a dip

to the southeast.

• E. Located northwest of and striking parallel to D, this

axis features similar characteristics. The anomaly to the

I south indicates a dip to the northwest.

• F. This low amplitude single line anomaly flanks a large

• magnetic body.

• G. The high conductance (36 mhos) anomaly on line 1121 <!

is broad and has low amplitudes, both factors suggesting

• a significant depth (estimated at 90m in Appendix II).

• This axis is located to the northeast of a relatively large

magnetic body.

IThe remaining conductors may be similar to those de-

• scribed above but possess less distinguishable response

• profile attributes. Some of the possible bedrock axes,

where coincident with drainage features may in fact be due

• to associated conductive sediments.

I

I

I

I

6. RECOMMENDAT IONS

II•

INumerous bedrock conductors have been interpreted from the

• electromagnetic survey results. Some of the axes feature

geophysical characteristics suggestive of sulphide or gra-

• phite mineralization (A, C, G) and may warrant consideration

• as potential base metal prospects. The identification of

gold exploration targets is aided by the electromagnetic and

|| magnetic results presented, but is dependent largely upon

the favourability of local geological conditions, which are

• best established by those most familiar with the geology.

IBased on the results of the geophysical survey, additional

J investigation is recommended. However, the further pri-

_ oritization of the interpreted conductors requires a more

• detailed analysis of the available geological and geophys-

• ical information.

• Respectfully submitted,

AERODAT LIMITED

April 19, 1985 Glenn A. Boustead, B.A.Sc.

I

I

I

I

APPENDIX I

GENERAL INTERPRETIVE CONSIDERATIONS

I I II Electromagnetic

• The Aerodat 3 frequency system utilizes 2 different

transmitter-receiver coil geometries. The traditional

I coaxial coil configuration is operated at 2 widely

m separated frequencies and the horizontal coplanar coil

pair is operated at a frequency approximately aligned

• with one of the coaxial frequencies.

• The electromagnetic response measured by the helicopter

system is a function of the "electrical" and "geometrical"

• properties of the conductor. The "electrical" property

of a conductor is determined largely by its conductivity

• and its size and shape; the "geometrical" property of the

• response is largely a function of the conductors shape

and orientation with respect to the measuring transmitter

I and receiver.

Electrical Considerations

• For a given conductive body the measure of its conductivity

or conductance is closely related to the measured phase

I shift between the received and transmitted electromagnetic

field. A small phase shift indicates a relatively high

• conductance, a large phase shift lower conductance. A

• small phase shift results in a large in-phase to quadrature

I

I• £ - 2 - APPENDIX I

Iratio and a large phase shift a low ratio. This relation-

• ship is shown quantitatively for a vertical half-plane

model on the accompanying phasor diagram. Other physical

™ models will show the same trend but different quantitative

• relationships.

• The phasor diagram for the vertical half-plane model, as

presented, is for the coaxial coil configuration with the

I amplitudes in ppm as measured at the response peak over

the conductor. To assist the interpretation of the survey

I results the computer is used to identify the apparent

• conductance and depth at selected anomalies. The results

of this calculation are presented in table form in Appendix II

I and the conductance and in-phase amplitude are presented in

symbolized form on the map presentation.

The conductance and depth values as presented are correct

| only as far as the model approximates the real geological

_ situation. The actual geological source may be of limited

" length, have significant dip, its conductivity and thickness

• may vary with depth and/or strike and adjacent bodies and

overburden may have modified the response. In general the

| conductance estimate is less affected by these limitations

_ than is the depth estimate, but both should be considered as

™ relative rather than absolute guides to the anomaly's

I properties.

I

I I

APPENDIX I

Conductance in mhos is the reciprocal of resistance in

ohms and in the case of narrow slab-like bodies is the

™ product of electrical conductivity and thickness.

• Most overburden will have an indicated conductance of less

• than 2 mhos; however, more conductive clays may have an

apparent conductance of say 2 to 4 mhos. Also in the low

I conductance range will be electrolytic conductors in faults

and shears.

The higher ranges of conductance, greater than 4 mhos,

| indicate that a significant fraction of the electrical

_ conduction is electronic rather than electrolytic in

• nature. Materials that conduct electronically are limited

I to certain metallic sulphides and to graphite. High

conductance anomalies, roughly 10 mhos or greater, are

I generally limited to sulphide or graphite bearing rocks.

I Sulphide minerals with the exception of sphalerite, cinnabar

and stibnite are good conductors; however, they may occur

• in a disseminated manner that inhibits electrical conduction

• through the rock mass. In this case the apparent conductance

can seriously underrate the quality of the conductor in

I geological terms. In a similar sense the relatively non

conducting sulphide minerals noted above may be present in

• significant concentration in association with minor conductive

I

I

11 {11111111111

ft - 4 - APPENDIX I

sulphides, and the electromagnetic response only relate

to

is

of

the minor associated mineralization. Indicated conductance

also of little direct significance for the identification

gold mineralization. Although gold is highly conductive

it would not be expected to exist in sufficient quantity

to create a recognizable anomaly, but minor accessory sulphide

mineralization could provide a useful indirect indication.

In summary, the estimated conductance of a conductor can

provide a relatively positive identification of significant

sulphide or graphite mineralization; however, a moderate

to

of

low conductance value does not rule out the possibility

significant economic mineralization.

Geometrical Considerations

Geometrical information about the geologic conductor can

often be interpreted from the profile shape of the anomaly.

The change in shape is primarily related to the change in

inductive coupling among the transmitter, the target, and

1

1

1

1

1

1

the

In

the

the

receiver.

the case of a thin, steeply dipping, sheet-like conductor,

coaxial coil pair will yield a near symmetric peak over

conductor. On the other hand the coplanar coil pair will

pass through a null couple relationship and yield a minimum

over the conductor, flanked by positive 'side lobes. As the

dip of the conductor decreases from vertical, the coaxial

IA - 5 - APPENDIX I

I anomaly shape changes only slightly, but in the case of

the coplanar coil pair the side lobe on the down dip side

| strengthens relative to that on the up dip side.

I As the thickness of the conductor increases, induced

current flow across the thickness of the conductor becomes

• relatively significant and complete null coupling with the

• coplanar coils is no longer possible. As a result, the

apparent minimum of the coplanar response over the conductor

• diminishes with increasing thickness, and in the limiting

case of a fully 3 dimensional body or a horizontal layer

• or half-space, the minimum disappears completely.

| A horizontal conducting layer such as overburden will produce

• a response in the coaxial and coplanar coils that is a

function of altitude (and conductivity if not uniform). The

I profile shape will be similar in both coil configurations

with an amplitude ratio {coplanar/coaxial) of about 4/1*.

In the case of a spherical conductor, the induced currents

I are confined to the volume of the sphere, but not relatively

restricted to any arbitrary plane as in the case of a sheet-

• like form. The response of the coplanar coil pair directly

• over the sphere may be up to 8* times greater than that of

the coaxial coil pair.

I

I I

I• W - 6 - APPENDIX I

I In summary, a steeply dipping, sheet-like conductor will

display a decrease in the coplanar response coincident

™ with the peak of the coaxial response. The relative

• strength of this coplanar null is related inversely to

the thickness of the conductor; a pronounced null indicates

J a relatively thin conductor. The dip of such a conductor

_ can be inferred from the relative amplitudes of the side-lobes.

IMassive conductors that could be approximated by a conducting

I sphere will display a simple single peak profile form on both

• coaxial and coplanar coils, with a ratio between the coplanar

to coaxial response amplitudes as high as 8.*

• Overburden anomalies often produce broad poorly defined

• anomaly profiles. In most cases the response of the coplanar

coils closely follows that of the coaxial coils with a

| relative amplitude ratio of 4.*

• Occasionally if the edge of an overburden zone is sharply

defined with some significant depth extent, an edge effect

• will occur in the coaxial coils. In the case of a horizontal

• conductive ring or ribbon, the coaxial response will consist

of two peaks, one over each edge; whereas the coplanar coil

I will yield a single peak.

I

I I

I I - 7 - APPENDIX I

• *It should be noted at this point that Aerodat's

definition of the measured ppm unit is related to

| the primary field sensed in the receiving coil

_ without normalization to the maximum coupled {coaxial

™ configuration). If such normalization were applied

I to the Aerodat units, the amplitude of the coplanar

coil pair would be halved.

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I I I

APPENDIX I

Magnetics

• The Total Field Magnetic Map shows contours of the

total magnetic field, uncorrected for regional varia-

• tion. Whether an EM anomaly with a magnetic correl-

• ation is more likely to be caused by a sulphide

deposit than one without depends on the type of

I mineralization. An apparent coincidence between an

EM and a magnetic anomaly may be caused by a conductor

• which is also magnetic, or by a conductor which lies

• in close proximity to a magnetic body. The majority

of conductors which are also magnetic are sulphides

I containing pyrrhotite and/or magnetite. Conductive

and magnetic bodies in close association can be, and

• often are, graphite and magnetite. It is often very

• difficult to distinguish between these cases. If

the conductor is also magnetic, it will usually

I produce an EM anomaly whose general pattern resembles

_ that of the magnetics. Depending on the magnetic

• permeability of the conducting body, the amplitude of

• the inphase EM anomaly will be weakened, and if the

conductivity is also weak, the inphase EM anomaly

I may even be reversed in sign.

I

I I

I

•

I I

- 9 - APPENDIX I

~VLF Electromagnetics

• The VLF-EM method employs the radiation from powerful

military radio transmitters as the primary signals.

I The magnetic field associated with the primary field

• is elliptically polarized in the vicinity of electrical

conductors. The Herz Totem uses three coils in the X,

I Y, Z configuration to measure the total field and

vertical quadrature component of the polarization

• ellipse.

| The relatively high frequency of VLF 15-25 kHz provides

_ high response factors for bodies of low conductance.

• Relatively "disconnected" sulphide ores have been found

• to produce measurable VLF signals. For the same reason,

poor conductors such as sheared contacts, breccia zones,

I narrow faults, alteration zones and porous flow tops

_ normally produce VLF anomalies. The method can therefore

™ be used effectively for geological mapping. The only

I relative disadvantage of the method lies in its sensitivity

to conductive overburden. In conductive ground the depth

| of exploration is severely limited.

I The effect of strike direction is important in the sense

of the relation of the conductor axis-relative to the

energizing electromagnetic field. A conductor aligned

along a radius drawn from a transmitting station will be

I I - 10 -

APPENDIX I

• in a maximum coupled orientation and thereby produce a

stronger response than a similar conductor at a different

• strike angle. Theoretically it would be possible for a

_ conductor, oriented tangentially to the transmitter to

™ produce no signal. The most obvious effect of the strike

• angle consideration is that conductors favourably oriented

with respect to the transmitter location and also near

| perpendicular to the flight direction are most clearly

_ rendered and usually dominate the map presentation.

The total field response is an indicator of the existence

• and position of a conductivity anomaly. The response will

• be a maximum over the conductor, without any special filtering,

and strongly favour the upper edge of the conductor even in

• the case of a relatively shallow dip.

• The vertical quadrature component over steeply dipping sheet

like conductor will be a cross-over type response with the

I cross-over closely associated with the upper edge of the

_ conductor.

The response is a cross-over type due to the fact that it

• is the vertical rather than total field quadrature component

• that is measured. The response shape is due largely to

geometrical rather than conductivity considerations and

• the distance between the maximum and minimum on either side

of the cross-over is related to target depth. For a given

| target geometry, the larger this distance the greater the

I

I• 9 - 11 - APPENDIX I

I depth.

I The amplitude of the quadrature response, as opposed

to shape is function of target conductance and depth

| as well as the conductivity of the overburden and host

• rock. As the primary field travels down to the conductor

™ through conductive material it is both attenuated and

I phase shifted in a negative sense. The secondary field

produced by this altered field at the target also has an

I associated phase shift. This phase shift is positive and

_ is larger for relatively poor conductors. This secondary

™ field is attenuated and phase shifted in a negative sense

I during return travel to the surface. The net effect of

these 3 phase shifts determine the phase of the secondary

| field sensed at the receiver.

I A relatively poor conductor in resistive ground will yield

a net positive phase shift. A relatively good conductor

• in more conductive ground will yield a net negative phase

• shift. A combination is possible whereby the net phase

shift is zero and the response is purely in-phase with no

• quadrature component.

I A net positive phase shift combined with the geometrical

cross-over shape will lead to a positive quadrature response

I on the side of approach and a negative on the side of

M departure. A net negative phase shift would produce the

reverse. A further sign reversal occurs with a 180 degree

I

I I - 12 - APPENDIX

change in instrument orientation as occurs on reciprocal

line headings. During digital processing of the quad-

• rature data for map presentation this is corrected for

by normalizing the sign to one of the flight line headings

I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I I

APPENDIX II

I I I I I I I I I I I

Anomaly List

I

I

I

I

I

I I I

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

PAGE

ANOMALY LIST

FLIGHT

111

111111

2222

2

22222

222222

22

222

2

2

2

2

LINE ANOMALY

101010

303030303030

61616161

81

9191919191

101101101101101101

141141

151151151

161

171

1011

1021

ABC

ABCDEF

ABCH

A

ABCDE

ABCDEF

AB

ABC

A

A

A

A

CATEGORY

000

000000

0000

0

00000

000000

00

020

0

0

2

1

FREQUENCY INPHA3E

2.61.76.3

6.66.84.32.32.22.7

1.20.80.50.3

4.3

4.11.10.41.53.2

-1.20.8

-0.90.7

-0.412.4

-0.51.0

1.83.62.2

0.9

0.1

8.9

7.2

4548 QUAD.

2.43.1

23*5

19.825.418.411.813.823.9

6.14.55.77.1

12*2

9,22.83.0

13.815,1

3.86.65.66.14.615.4

-0.5-0.5

0.31.22.9

9.4

13.0

4.3

6.6

CONDUCTOR BIRD CTP DEPTH HEIGHT

MHOS MTRS MTRS

0.60.10.1

0.10.10,00.00.00.0

0.00.00,00,0

0.1

0.20.00.00.00.0

0.00.00.00,00,00,8

0.00.0

6,93,20.3

0.0

0.0

2.6

1.0

52300

000000

81300

0

023300

000005

00

966248

0

0

35

25

344037

393541404229

33314246

40

5144433233

403637353238

3436

333429

36

35

32

35

Estimated depth may be unreliable because the stronger part of the conductor may be deeper or to one side of the flisht line* or because of a shallow dip or overburden effects,

111111111111111111

£ ANOMALY LIST

FREQUENCY 4548 FLIGHT LINE ANOMALY CATEGORY INPHASE QUAD*

222

222

22

2

22

22

22

2

2

2

2

11

111

1

111

1

2

102110211021

103110311031

10411041

1081

10911091

11011101

11211121

1131

1141

1151

1161

11901190

120012001200

1210

122012201220

1240

1271

Estimated

BCD

ABC

AB

A

AB

AB

AB

A

A

A

A

AB

ABC

A

ABC

A

A

depth mauof the conductor maw

1liner or because of

100

020

00

0

00

00

00

0

0

0

0

00

000

0

000

0

0

bebea

9.34.54.9

6.811.95.4

4.94.8

0.9

3.23.4

11.912.4

1.93.4

0.0

2.7

2.0

1.6

9.713.1

5.74.0

11.7

5.3

2.56.86.7

10.3

1.8

unreliabledeeper orshallow dip

5.78.110.6

13.37.210.5

13.212.6

-0.4

19,520.9

40.559.8

0.19.6

2.5

7.7

16.4

14.5

25,729.3

17,015,825.1

17.8

11.418.421.1

33,9

12.8

because

PAGE 2

CONDUCTOR BIRD CTP DEPTH HEIGHT

MHOS MTRS MTRS

1.90,30,2

0,32,10,3

0,10,1

0,0

0,00,0

0,20,1

36.40.1

0.0

0.1

0.0

0,0

0,20,3

0,10,00,3

0,1

0,00.20.1

0,2

0,0

272011

2247

60

0

00

00

9013

0

13

0

0

00

000

0

700

0

0

the strongerto one side ofor overburden

the fl

353033

393437

3149

29

2930

2824

4028

41

31

27

28

3233

354236

33

273430

27

32

partisht

effects.

of Work J^M-

Ontario

ReportNalurnl ,_ . . _ . Resources (Geophysical, Geological.

Geochemica! and Expenditures)

The Minii1 yi>p of SuivpyU)

Helicopteri Magnetometer, EM and VLF-EMClaim HolrleiU)

Prophet Resources Ltd.

52Fe7NEe»48 a .6061 BOYER LAKE 900Boyer Lake m

Protpertor't Licence No.

T1502

!>.0. Box 10041, Pacific Centre, 701 West Georgia St., Van., B.C. V7Y 1A1Date of S urvey (from & to) total Mi lei of line Cut_>u'vey Company

Aerodat LimitedN«mtt end Address of Author (of Geo "Technical report)

Mr. G. Boustead, c/o Aerodat Limited, 3883 Nashua Dr., Mississauga, L4V 1R3Credits. Requested per Each Claim in Columns at rightSpecial Provisions

For first survey:

Enter 40 days. (This includes line cutting)

For each additional survey: using the same grid:

Enter 20 days (for each)

Man Days

Complete reverse side and enter total(s) here

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

Geochemical

Electromagnetic

Magnetometer

Radiometric

Days perClaim

______

Days perClaim

Days per Claim

4020

Expenditures (excludes power stripping)

Mining Claims Traversed (List in numciical sequence)

Type Of Work Performed

Performed on Claim(s)

Calculation of Expenditure Days Credits

Total ExpendituresTotal

Days Credits

$ 15 -

InstructionsTotal Days Credits may be apportioned 81 the claim holder's choice. Enter number of days credits per claim selected in columns 81 right.

Dale _March 20:85

, ft or Aoent

Certification Verifying Report of Work

Mining ClaimPrefix

K

•

1\ _

|- 1-+ -

j

r

Number

75893175893275893375893^758936758937726674726675726678726679726680

! 726681726682

| 726683i 726684; 726685

!•-726686726687

j

Expend. Days Cr.

\i

'

1&U14-For Office Use Only

Total Days Recorded

/oso^

Cr. Date Recorded

*7/j£ <?~j

-^^T./<?<*

•£«£L^M^M^

"s Recorded t.

| Mining ClaimPrefix Number

i

i

iREtiEIVFn•"• •» « v C U

W* 0 4 1985

* fAWDS SUTIO,

i\i

K| F fj O R .\li.HIvl^O DiV.

Ti) K ii ^ u V/ t,

hiiAK 2? 't9B::AH 17i8.9ilP.'l!il3il!2iMi

r

Expend. Days Cr.

I

! ' . '

t.

PMntr

"Total number of mining _ claims covered by this J O report of work.

r i^ /;Mimrm. Rfgp«rfct4k— -^

JJ£^ ^tfi

^^^f-

C//*>.. ••••

>exWfieiI hereby certify that I have a personal and intimate knowledge of the facts set forth in the Report of Work annexetfhereto, having performed the work

or witnessed same during and/or after its completion and the annexed report is true.

Name and Postal Address of Persoa CertifyingL.D.S. Winter, 1849 Oriole Drive, Sudbury, Ontario. P3E 2W5

Date CertifiedMarch 20j85

136? (81/9)

Ministry olNaturalResources

Ontnnp

Report of Work(Geophysical, Geological, Gcoclipmical awl txpnnilitntps)

The Mining Act

Imtructloni: - Plensr lypr 01 print- II numlipt ol mining claims travelled

f xrppifs tpnrr on this fotm, attach a list.Note: - Only t layi- r tpdiu calculated In thp

"f xppndituip!." ipriion may he enteredin thr "f xppnd. Days Cr." columni.

- Do not usr ihadrd BIBBS belowType ol' V I '^ *'' O U' VF y M '

Helicopter; Magnetometer, EM and VLF-EMClaim Holder U>Beved Resources Inc.

'fioyer0 ' £a\e M. 2582PIOIPPC toi't I Icencp No.

T1681AilHrpjs •P.O. Box 10041, Pacific Centre, ?01 West Georgia St., Van., B.C. V?Y 1A1

Company Datp of Survey (from & to) lotel Miles'of line Cut

Aerodat Limited Q2 jO^ f$$Nume and Address of Author (of Geo Technical report)

G. Boustead, c/o Aerodat Limited, 3883 Nashua Dr., Mississauga, L4V 1R3Ctcclits Requested per Each Claim in Columns at right Mining Claims Traversed (List in numeiical sequence)Special Provisions

For first survey:




Man Days


Airborne Credits


Geophysical

- Electromagnetic

- Magnetometer

• Radiometiic

- Other

Geological

Geochemical

Geophysical

- Electromagnetic

• Magnetometer

- Radiometric

- Other

Geological

Geochemical

Electromagnetic

Magnetometer

Radiometric

Days Clai

perm

——

Days petClaim

Days perClaim

4020

Expenditures (excludes power stripping)Type Of Work Performed


Calc ulation of Expenditure Days Credits

Total Expenditures

$ + 15

:Total

)sys Credits

Instructions Total Days Credits may be apportioned at the claim holder's choice. Enter number of days credits per claim selected in columns at right.

jDate j fteteyiiad Holde/pMarch 20:85 /^ fa

'i ("Agent (SignatureA

• u*^l S

Certification Verifying Report of Workhereby certify that 1 have a personal

or witnessed same during and/or after

^"

^

Mining ClaimPrefix Number

K 726724726725

726726

726727726728

726729726730

726734726735

726736726737

i 726740I 726741; 726744

.

i

Expend, Days Cr.

— ————

7^7cJl4Fo

*55Wa"ys^r Recorded

84o^,*-. — 1

rOffirrUMriiii 9

Date Ry-^rded

M4.$2dM**r>fltp A riQi^^M^fiJfc^^M^ffl^dijM

^ W?. r: /^/^

Mining ClaimPrefix | Number

1.,_. _ .....j . . ........ . .

I

R4CWV-W

^R 0 4 1985

dlMNQ LANDS SECTl/*"•- W 1 1

"

i X E TJ O Ri. i.ii :•:,:;•:; DAf -{•' !:'> » -•• !•.-. y v/!. t

i J f u/\p 2 2 \4

Expend. Days Cr.

1 —————

)N

A

•^ \ '

>iRf.

Pi

HTotal number of mining , claims covered by this l*f report of work.

•^ \^—J ~~-~^-

MinJDfl^SJjQlfi'-^^ ^S' J

\-f^ \&£('<-£>--i-? •*-ys£tt-—'jQr'TtJ'fei""^TZp|rAtf.f . 1 ——5^ff ( 1 ' J 1 ~J^

•V "O '_ ^ f^-^ *•** fl ^^*^^^^7^m:=sand intimate knowledge of the facts set forth in the Report of Work annex«!Jier£K\ having perfoWned the work its completion and the annexed report is true.

Name and Postal Address of Person CertifyingL.D.S. Winter, 1849 Oriole Drive, Sudbury, Ontario. P3E 2W5

Date CertifiedMarch 20:85 ^^^^ZL^

)*\'6

136? (81/9)

Ministry otNaUitRlResources

Ontario

Report of Work(Geophysical, Geological, Geochrmical and Expenditures)

The Mining Act

ItHttuctloni: - Please type 01 print.- II numl)pi o t m ining clnim<. travmptl

exceeds ipnce on this, lotm, attach a tin.Nott: - Only days credits calculated In thp

"Expendituies" section may t>p enteiedIn thp "Expend. Days Ct." columns.

- Do not use ihadrd areas below.lowmhip ot ArmBoyer Lake M.2582

otpoctor1! Licence No.

TyiK1 of Suive'yU)

Helicopters Magnetometer, EM and VLF-EMClaim HolderUl

June Resources Inc.,Address ,

P.O. Box 10041, Pacific Centre, 701 West Georgia St., Van., B.C. V7Y 1A1

"~|Prc

T1503

Survey Company

Aerodat LimitedName and Addrets o1 Author (of Geo Technical report)

Date ot Survey (from & to)_ .03 85 completey j Mo. | Vi. Day ] Mo. | Yr.

Total Mil»s of line Cut"

Name and Addrets of Author (of Geo Technical report)G. Boustead, c/o Aerodat Limited, 3883 Nashua Dr., Mississauga, L4V 1R3

Cicdiu Requested per Each Claim in Columns at right Mining Claims Traversed (List in numerical sequence)Special Provisions

For first survey:




Man Days

Complete reverse side and enter total (s) here

Airborne Credits


Geophysical

- Electromagnetic

- Magnetometer

• Radiometric

- Other

Geological

Geochemical

Geophysical

• Electromagnet

• Magnetometer

- Radiometric

- Other

Geological

Geochemical

ic

Electromagnetic

Magnetometer

Radiometric

Days perClaim

Days per Claim

Days perClaim

4020

Expenditures (excludes power stripping)Type of Work Performed


Celt ulation of Expenditure Days Credits

Total Expenditures

$ H- 15

[Total

Jays Credits

Instructions Total Days Credits may be apportioned at the claim holder's choice. Enter number of days credits per claim selected n columns at right.

sfDate / &ec&*<fed H

March 20:85 . i^S<*ôlder or Agent (Signature)

•-eu,^fc-"*^-^

(


K 726738726739726742

726743726745

_£ i?-

7-

86760

36761

86762

. 7 26763726764726765726766726767726768

! 726769726770726771726772726773

Expend. Day* Cr.

7*4 7A4

-

For Office Use OnlyTotal Days Cr. Recorded

K* ° iCertification Verifying Report of Wor1T~ —— "*•*•— *S

hereby certify that 1 have 8 personal or witnessed same during and/or after

Date Recjyaeo

TZ&xx/**.iete ADD£0^fic|£^^^^^|CiAc£{

r^Sf T /? !

Mining ClaimPrefix

RE

A

MiNINC

NumberExpend. Days Cr.

CEIVEIJ ——^R fi 4 1985" 1

i LANDS SECTION

HEN'

! CD '"' v ' '-: J ° MAR 2

MTI • A ft " '" — '"'• r timi

.,,.._

> R A

• ; V/ !"r, < f Oft:

i ii i ii iiiiin'r

Total number of mining claims covered by this << Q report of work. •!• 7

MMtS=Mining^Rj

^^^

&tfi— -^ flkfJ^yf^(?t'-rî~^»-*^}î-a -l -SfeBSfeMftCij,; "" T"

^XW V T y^^^^p^ ( ¥*~~~,— n

• ———— —————————— f ——— -? ——— V-/- ————— •*

and intimate knowledge of the facts set forth in the Report of Work annexedrterefo, having performed the work its completion and the annexed report is true.

Name end Postal Address of Person Certifying

L.D.S. Winter, 1849 Oriole Drive, Sudbury , Ontario. P3E 2W5Date Certified

March 20:85CerUrieifeb£_J#gna/ure) ^ _

X--<fÔ-^X^-^vu-^c^-

S\\l*~u

\)

136? ( 81/9)


Ontario

Report ol Work(Geophysical, Geological, Geochemical and fcxpondiuitrs) 0V_>

The Mining Act

Instructions - P lpasr t ype or print.II nu nil IP i pi mining rlBlrro URVPIMM*pxcrrtl!. tpnw on this lorm, Bltm l> n list.

Not«: - Only rinys ctediu celculsted in ihr"t xpondituies" lection may br PMIPIPI!in ihr "Expend. Days Cr." column!..

- Do not mr ihecfrd eieas belowA'«»n1 ypp ot &u'VpyU)

Helicopter» Magnetometer, EM and VLF-EMClaim Holdpi (t)

Green River Resources Ltd.Address

P.O. Box 10041, Pacific Centre, 701 West Georgia St., Van., B.C. V7Y 1A1

Turtlepond Lake M.2663Peoiportoi'i Licence No.

T1504

Survey CompimyAerodat Limited

J{ 1A O(yJ' UsrveMUrpni & l p ' -5 -L02 03 85 completeDay I Mo. I Yi. Day j Mo. | Yr.

Total Mi let of line Cut

Name and Address of Author (of Oeo-Technical report)

G. Boustead, c/o Aerodat Limited, 3883 Nashua Dr., Mississauga, L^-V 1R3Credits Requestod pei Each Claim in Columns ai rightSpecial Provisions

For first survey:


For each additional survey:using the same grid:


Man Days


Airborne Credits

Note: Special provisions

to Airborne Surveys.

Geophysical

• Electromagnetic

- Magnetometer

- Radiometric

- Other

Geological

Geochemical

Geophysical

• Electromagnetic

• Magnetometer

- Radiometric

- Other

Geological

Geochemical

Electromagnetic

Magnetometer

Radiometric

Days pe-Claim

Days perClaim

Days per Claim

4020

Mining Claims Traversed (List in numciical sequence)




Total ExpendituresTotal

Days Credits

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


K 726703726704726705726706726707726708726709726710726711

, 726712726713726714726715726716

Expend. Days C'.

- —— ——

Mining ClaimPrefix

RE

.1INIKG

1

-\f

J L

f. MVif

Number

CEIVEC

R 0 4 1985

LANDS SECTI

'• ~ > ", '•— :• -c c:x

' — • '<•' ib L V/

I^AR ^ £ u^ .f>'^.ilil2,i,2

•

Expend. Days Cr.

m —

A~

£li»5

p w?i4iSie

^| ^^ J f /% ^^ Total number of mining m 1 £ jL »f *y claims covered by this 1 h, i Ot*'^ ^? J 1 report of work.

Date

March 20:85 i^yCertification Verifying/Report yl y_

I hereby certify that I nave a p/rsonaHand t r\limawwnow\edge. of the facts set forth in the Report of Work ann or witnessed same during and/or afrer its comrjl^iWi and the annexed report is true.

eto, having performed the work

Name and Postal Address of Person Certifying

L.D.S. Winter, 1849 Oriole Dr., Sudbury, Ontario. P3E 2W5Date Certified

March 20:85Cert


Ontario

Report of Work(Geophysical, Geological. Geochemical end Expenditures)

'*. 67/85"

The Mining Ad1 ype of Suiveyd)"~~" ~~~ ~~~

Helicopter: Magnetometer, EM and VLF-EMClaim>loirtet(i>Marge Enterprises Ltd.

Imtructloni: - Pleasr typp 01 print.- If numl>pi ol mininp claims \iBVPtiml

exceeds iparf on this form, attach* lid. Not*: - Only days credits calculated in thr

"f xprmlitutes" lection may tip enteiecl in thr "Expend. Days Ct." columns.

- Do not use thedcd areas belowT ownihip 01 AreaTurtleppnd Lake M.2663ijO 7t?|FroTpVtor'i Licence No.V l T1505

AddressP.O. Box 10041, Pacific Centre, ?01 West Georgia St., Van., B.C. V?Y 1A1

Total Miles of line CutSufvey CompanyAerodat LimitedName imcl Address of Autho/ (of OBO Technical report)

Date of Survey (from & to)02 , 03 85 i completeDay j Mo. | Yi. | Day f Mo. | Yr,

Name and Address 01 Autho; (O1 OBO Technical report!G. Boustead,c/o Aerodat Limited, 3883 Nashua Dr., Mississauga, L4V 1R3

Credits Requested per Each Claim in Columns at righl Mining Claims Traversed (List in numeiical sequence)Special Provisions

For first survey:




Man Days


Airborne Credits


Geophysical

• Electromagnetic

• Magnetometer

• Radiometric

- Other

Geological

Geochemical

Geophysical

- Electromagnetic

• Magnetometer

- Radiometric

- Other

Geological

Geochemical

Electromagnetic

Magnetometer

Radiometric

Days perClaim

Days per Claim

Days perClaim

40

20



Celt ulation of Expenditure Days Credits

Total Expenditures

$ + 15

CTotal

)ays Credits

Instructions Total Days Credits may be apportioned at the claim holder's choice. Enter number of days credits per claim selected in columns at right.

.,Date j fyecQTjj&a H older or Agent (Signature) ,

March 20:85 SQ/^-r^^o^Z —— -kCertification Verifying Report of (Vor&-<__ _

hereby certify that I have 3 personal or witnessed same during and/or after

Nan

L.

^^^^

Mining ClaimPrefix Numbet

K 758935726676

j r

J "r

l~r

i ————

r

'26677'26688'25689'26690'26691'26692726693

| 726694, r

^ —— r

'26695'26696

^26697: T

\ — f

'26698'26699

726700r

r~~*/'26701'26702

I

Expend. Days C>.

n 3 / x 7 4i//?v6 C? / VEfl.

3SB£

_) ^-— ———

V

uQttiee -Use Orrly —— - -..„Date Record*^

nim n L|ilfi>nf1"l

^

Mining ClaimPrefix

1*E(•

flpj• •• >r

INING j

—;' .-. |

- - } '

Number

I 0 4 IQftn•* Iwv'u

0

•AMDS SECTIfll

.T'rT/^T-4, *"*

'> '• * I'-i 'j

MAW 2 r<

_-.

'' i

iHrAF.t '

7i8.-0^1Hltia44as

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

.,„__Mining Rejjy

/and intimate knowledge of the facts set forth in the Report of Work anne»ed_ its completion and the annexed report is true.

f~\-- • •"-'

zt *"

3*S,- 1 "fj?

}f

Expend. Days Cr.

II

- ,- I

: ;

• '"•' 1

~£5sT\/ ;

£2^&e\o, having performed the work

ie and Postal Address of Person Certifying

D.S. Winter, 1849 Oriole Dr., Sudbury, Ontario. P3E 2W5 _ _ /••Date Certified

March 20:85er^r iMf^jWg f'^fis.^fl.

>>

MiniBtryolNaturalResources

Ontario

Report ot Work(Geophysical, Geological, Geochcmical and Expenditures)

The Mining Act

Instructions: - Pleaip type 01 print.- If numbei of mining claims traversed

exceeds space on this form, attach B listNote: - Only dnyt credits calculated in the

"Expenditures" section may be enteredIn the "Expend. Days Cr." columns.

- Do not use shaded areas below.lownihip 01 A tenBoyer Lake M.2582

Proipoclor'i Licence No.

lypp ot SurveyU)

Helicopterj Magnetometer, EM and VLF-EMClaim HoldeiU)

Marlat Resources Ltd.AddressP.O. Box 10041 Pacific Centre, 701 West Georgia St., Vane., B.C. V7Y 1A1

Survey Company

Aerodat LimitedDate of Survey (from & to)02 ,03Say Mo. Yr.

completeDay J Mo. J Yr.

Total Milts of line Cut

Mame and Address of Author (of Geo Technical report)

G. Boustead, c/o Aerodat Limited, 3883 Nashua Dr., Mississauga, L4V 1R3Credits Requested per Each Claim in Columns at tightSpecial Provisions

For first survey:Enter 40 days. (This includes line cutting)



Man Days

Complete reverse side and enter total (s) here

Airborne Credits


Geophysical

• Electromagnetic

- Magnetometer

- Radiometric

• Other

Geological

Geochemical

Geophysical

• Electromagnetic

- Magnetometer

• Radiometric

• Other

Geological

Geochemical

Electromagnetic

Magnetometer

Radiometric

Days perClaim

Days perClaim

Days perClaim

4020

Expenditures (excludes power stripping)

Mining Claims Traversed (List in numetical sequence)

Type of Work Performed



Total Expenditures

-5-

Totel Days Credits

$Instructions

Total Days Credits may be apportioned at the claim holder's choice. Enter number of days credits per clfl,im selected in columns at right.


K 7267317267327267337267^6726747

1 726748' 7 26749726750726751726752

: 72675372675^

• 726755i 726756726757726758726759

E xpend. Days Cr.

/ £ ^J ^^ A/ ^~ O j ff^ i'

Mining ClaimPrefix

-

M

IW»MU

d

r,\*m*,t

Number

RECf=|\J

APRO'I 1

£> JNING LANOo q

..... ..._...,.,. »t * ' . •

1.1 \ i [ '.-*

J MA 1 ' ?.'— - v '«^

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

».s ..

L^-i

j \

2 '

l:£

Expend. Days Cr.

ED

)85

tCTIOfi

..._....

'" i 'i;;:•.[; ^

Pi'"" ' / / *

: '1 • •":. ,! . ,'

17

Mar. 20s 85Certification Verifying FTepOrfrtrf'Work '

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

'eto, having performed the work

Name and Postal Address of Person Certifying

L.-..P i.|Sj.._ Jirrterj...! 849.. £r_i£le.-.Dr,_,. _ouu_u.u Ontario. P3E 2W5Date CertifiedMar. 20s85

136? (61/9)

Ontario

Ministry of Natural Resources

GEOPHYSICAL - GEOLOGICAL - GEOCHEMICAL TECHNICAL DATA STATEMENT

FUc.

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

TECHNICAL REPORT MUST CONTAIN INTERPRETATION, CONCLUSIONS ETC.

Type of Siirvey( S) Airborne ElYI. VLF-EM & maenetometerTownship or Area Boyer Lake(M2 £>82) 7 Turtleuond Lake i/u / \ Green RiverClaim Holder(s) M -cv^ ^v%

Resources, June Resourcej

Beved Resources. Maria t ResourcesSurvey fiompany AerOdat Limited

. , , Glenn A. Boustead, B.A.Sc.Author of Report

AHHress of Author 3883 Nashua Dr.. Mississauea. Ont

Covering Dates of Surv

Total Miles of Line Cul

SPECIAL PROVISICCREDITS REQUEST

ey March 2 and ^ 1Q8<5

>N§ TED

ENTER 40 days (includes line cutting) for first survey.

ENTER 20 days for each additional survey using same grid.

AIRBORNE CREDITS20

Magnetometer..... .......

A "r^Y* 1 ~\ ^ QDATE: Aprl1 ^ '

Res. Oenl.

Previous SurveysFile No. Type

(Special provi

Electromagi(enter <

(linecutting to office)n/a

DAYS~ L i per claim Geophysical

Electromagnetic......,,. .._.._

Radiometric Dfher

Oeologiral

lion credit* do not apply to airborne surveys)

netir , RpHjometrirlays per claim)

/ **J^(~^ / ' ~-Jf ^TITRP.- A*a^-^- 64M^\JUs^

Author of Report or Agent

Qualifications ^/.ft /I f

Date Claim Holder

M26WHNING CLAIMS TRAVERSED List numerically

Green RiverResourcesjprefix) *

K726703/(number)

72670^ s

726705 s

726706^

726767 '?

726?08-/

726769^

726710^

726711^

726712^

726713^

72671^s

726715726716 <;

TOTAL CLAIMS 100

If space insufficient, attach list

837 (5/79)

GEOPHYSICAL TECHNICAL DATA

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

Number of Stations————————————————————————Number of Readings _ Station interval ___________________________Line spacing_____

Profile scale______________________________________________Contour interval.

Instrument _

ao

z,cp <N

B

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

U Instrument

E2;3O

|

Oojl cnnfi gyration

Tojl separation

AccuracyMethod: Q Fixed transmitter Q Shoot back D In line Frecmencv.

C3 Parallel line

Parameters measured.

InstrumentScale constant.Corrections made.

Base station value and location

Elevation accuracy.

Instrument ____Method D Time Domain D Frequency Domain Parameters - On time __________________________ Frequency —————

—Off time__________________________ Range ———————— Delay time ________________________— Integration time —————————————————————

Power.__________——————————————————————————————————————————

Electrode array — Electrode spacing,

Type of electrode

SELF POTENTIAL

Instrument.——————————————————————————————————————_ Range.Survey Method ———————————————————————————————————————————

Corrections made.

RADIOMETRIC

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 SURVEYSHelicopter EM, VLF-EM and magnetometerType of surveym—————— —————————————————2————————

Instmment(s) M > Aerodat 3 freq. , VLF; Herz Totem 1A, Mag. Geometries G803 proton(specify for each type of survey) pr & C6 S si OH

Accurac EM; see report, VLF-EM; see report, Mag, see report. ____________(specify for each type of survey)

Aircraft ^ A "Star 3 5°D Aerospatiale _____________________________ . . , Mean terrain clearance of fy$ meters Sensor altitudeNavigation and flight path recovery m-th^i Hofftaan HRA-100 radar altimeter, Geocam trackingcamera with flight path recored on 35 mm film; photo base map scale 1; 15 OOP.. , .. , 60 meters T. 0 . 200 metersAircraft altitude__ ____________________________ Line Spacing..... „ t . 1 30 line kilometers r> i • i 89.3 line km 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.

Mesh size of fraction used for analysis.

ANALYTICAL METHODSValues expressed in: per cent D

p. p. m. EDp.p.b. D

Cu, Pb,

Others_

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

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

Field Laboratory AnalysisNo. (___________

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

Extraction Method. Analytical Method . Reagents Used__

Commercial Laboratory (_ Name of Laboratory__ Extraction Method__ Analytical Method —— Reagents Used ____

.tests)

.tests)

-tests)

General. General.

MINING CLAIMS TRAVERSED (Continued)

Marge Enterprises Ltd. Beved Resources Inc.

726676 x 726677'. 726688 726689 y7266907726691^ 726692 X726693 726694 X726695 '726696 / 726697'

726698 /726699'

726700 / 726701^ 726702

Prophet Resources Ltd. K758931 y 758932 / 726685

726686726687

/ /J

758936 y758937y 726674 y726675 y 726678 y 726679 y

726680 726^81 y726682 y726683 y

726725 726726^

726728^

726730^ 726734^726735^ 726736 //

726737-^ 726740 726741^

726744

June Resources Inc.

726739^726742726743^,726745726760^726761726762'

726764-/ 726765 X 726766^ 726767^ 726768^ 726769 X

726770'726771^726772726773 y

MINING CLAIMS TRAVERSED (Continued)

Mar la t Resources Ltd.

726732'726733 7726746 7726747^7267^-8^726749726750'726751 7726752^726753

726756 y 726757^726758 j726759

5*12.TEL: (7O5I 522.'

WINTERBOURNE EXPLORATIONS LTD. le-ie ORIOLE DRIVE6UDBURY, ONTARIO

P3E 2W5

April 29, 1985

Superintendent, Mining Lands Section,Ministry of Natural Resources,Lands Management Branch,Rm 6451 - Whitney Block,99 Wellesley St. W.,Toronto, Ontario.M?A 1W3

Gentlemen,

Enclosed are 2 copies of a completed airborne survey covering the 6 claim blocks held "by the following 6 companies in the Upper Manitou Lakes area, District of Kenora, Ontario.

1. Green River Resources Ltd.2. Marge Enterprises Ltd. R ECEIVED3. Prophet Resources Ltd.k. Beved Resources Inc. ^AY 6 * 19855. June Resources Inc. n,*,,.,*6. Marlat Resources Ltd. MINING WN°S SECTION

The claim blocks for each company are outlined on each map in the report and the claim numbers are shown on Map 1 of each report. I trust you will find this satisfactory but if there are any problems or questions coneerning this work please contact me at the above address or telephone number.

Yours truly

LDSWrpmw L.D.S. Winter.

enclosures

/Mining Lands Section

Control Sheet

File

TYPE OF SURVEY i/ GEOPHYSICAL

GEOLOGICAL

GEOCHEMICAL

EXPENDITURE

MINING LANDS COMMENTS:

Signature of Assessor

Date

C/1ruo; ro

LU

Q

O JQ LoJ

H

C H

ro

BUTLER LAKE- G-257692°45

49° 37' 30

0)in c\j6

iUJ

49°30

X'\ PoulsonTremeer

Lake

WABIGOON

D inorwt c

NDIAN RESERVEHumphrey

to fie

697555\ ^97551 V.7I9558 J J"I9559 | (719560

WABIGOON

^ 7I95BO | 719579 , . . ]\ I |7I8753 | 718737 \ \

fi< IK JJV K ! K ?! K' I V?S 719577 / ' ^IJ7I958! 17I9582C^JS7I^578| (^17195751719576

L ....___I

SATTER LY

ORK5E

Turtlepond

Karhinnassin740756 ! 7407551740754

K

640453? |740757 I 7 40758 I 7_40759

K ' K IK'/ X i I

Whttewatet , . ._..,7569IS | 6404^57 6404(^58 1740762 I j_ Q fag

" ~ K ~ ~rK ^^ K~ ~ 17 i K ' K

' y "• ' 740764i740763

K

1725635740761 I 740760 „ _

1651943 '6L1944 ,651945{740766)740765 | wpl_'A. Not' 72563 I_ . A Lf I ——-——-.---—-- ——

740796 .740795

K IK ' K

7407861 740787 '740794

K I K K

Minnehano740771 | 740772 | 74/0779

K

1740774174X^773740780 .740785' 740788 1 740793

j 726710 | 72 6709 | 726708 '72

K IK - . K

03 1726^04 '726705 |7Z6\706

K * ^ K ' K ~"

6699 ,7266/98

7266951 726696 ;/72l>697

49°30'

92°3O92°45'

BOYER LAKE - G-2572

495923

LEGEND

PATENTED LANDCROWN LAND SALELEASESLOCATED LANDLICENSE OF OCCUPATIONMINING RIGHTS ONLYSURFACE RIGHTS ONLYROADSIMPROVED ROADSKING'S HIGHWAYSRAILWAYSPOWER LINESMARSH OR MUSKEGMINESCANCELLEDPATENTED S.R.O.

c.s.

&JL?

c.e

REFERENCESAREAS_WITHDRAWN_FRpM DISPOSITION

M.R.O. M INING R IGHTSONLY

S.R.O. -SURFACE RIGHTSONLY

M.+ S. - MINING AND SURFACE RIGHTS

Description Order No. Date Disposition File

ROADS INDICATED DRYDEN PAPER CO. ARE PRIVATE ROADS, BUT MAY BE USED BY PROSPECTORS ONLY AFTER PERMISSION IS OBTAINED FROM DRYDEN PAPER CO, DRYDEN ONTARIO

f LOO :_NGRRSERViNij TML RIGHT TO HOL2 THE WATERS OF THEWASIGOON K VER AND W'ABfGOON LAKE, INCLUDINGDINOHWiC, T .RTLEPOND, AND MINNEHAHA LA* ES, ANDCROOKED Rl\tR, TO AN ELEVATION NOT EXCLUDING1209.9?.'WATER POWuR LEASE AGRLtMENT Nu. I, 28FLB.[9^0

SCALE: 1 INCH = 40 CHAINS

FEET0 1OOO 4OOO 6OOO 80OO

0 200METflES

20OO(2 K M

AREA TURTLEPOND LAKE

M.N.R. ADMINISTRATIVE DISTRICT

DRYDENMINING DIVISION

KENORALAND TITLES/ REGISTRY DIVISION

KENORA

MinistryofNatural Management

Resources BranchOntario

Date FEBRUARY. 1984 Number

-

O i

01ro Q> ro

52F07NE»e48 3.8<»61 BOYER LAKE 200

oI

C/lru\ron

LJ

UJ

O

r-v.

Turtlepond Lake -92°45'

49°30'

00mCVJ

<UJK: O

OX

49°22'3O"~

1670260 670,259 |67O258 // 53 4674 535339 | Vs. ^ 65468B i 6546 ',87 ' 7*692 . 7Z$6 9-lV |7Z W90 i726«9r-— — — -^ —I— — —*•— — +— —— J—-^r -|— —— T— — -f- —I — — —I/~*(TK — ~ r~ — ~ —

670315 |67 0316—~ PV 6703YI7

; K K jj K

/ _'

' L/,726679

ViVIV726674 ,726679 ,726586

—— _l—— -——)— — ——

758937 726660 7266B5I <J * \J JfJ I V . ^^ - — — — V — A- —

670325 | I f J>.w.R. 670326 603 340. 603339jMi._ —| — — 4- — -4- — —

K IK

758936 i 726681 i 726684

758931 '

K • K I 756982

2I2-670ZII If'6702,-

K

670328 '670327 ' 6C4309 I 6043 10

K I K I

756985 756984 , 756983

I | 566716 [566717 566718 ,589057 ,539058 589059 589O60- —I

l< ' K IK | K

1589069 '589070 J539056 'SO0790 6O0789 '

K ' K

'589O87 '589088 |589089\|I -^ I . )

589067569068

756974 , -.-j-___|.I5fi471 '756969 1756966r ——

- — — 4- _ —

1756975 75S96

|72G752. 726747

,66 4882740234 -r733 | 05 |733104 |730Q99

K D K . K ' K

726763 | 726762 |726757 |7l26756

740280Trafalgar

'754580 754578 _ _ _i_ _ _

K WasheibemagcI 790O42 , 790041 783815

?5459e|754587 754580

K . K IK79O035 783813 |783808if r,. i — —n i ~\ ~ K

|8l/0343/iSK 5 699

754896 754893 \754586 '754581-- ——— ——--,---, 783907 783804 |I 79008 790036 783812 783909'

— ~"^75^585 ,754502 I_ . ———— -

6874 5 I _ J.6 B 746 \f / ' © 783805 771812 77I8

^734583 |754534l7734IOJK 773407773408

J7456 687455 '6874S4 IS87453—— _^_ ———| ___ ,— ——i—— —— *— L—— —— _

68746I/ I

I77342Q'7734Z| I \

-—^-i a74t?. | 5874 58

) Monitou7 K K

I 69GOI4__ 73TK~ ~~ TK ' 4 77340. 773404 ^49098 |649O93

49042| 649041|77j4J6 I773_4js 4K Moshfr K

87467 687466 687462 '7733521773353 773446 ' 773447

hi 9 1 i 3 I I 1 91 130 jfl'1]l"l§ 5 9 'll 3 ^[__ _ _ _ _ I __ _ _L __ _J

IK IK

64909I 1 687474 | 687471 687466 35I4G3. 687463 773354

719597 1719592 t68747OI 687469 687465,687464

7734441773443 ,773442 6490941 687475 ' J\ | ' 7733 551 773357j-L- _ ___ ^ __( __ p . ___

Kennewapekko

649047

I773437 1' ' 77 3438 1 7 73439 I 773440 77344) I I

773434 < «>< 649050-Vr-'ir-719599 |7I9594 |5

717192 '717191773431 775433

LO 00 LO C\J

cb

Of-^ o

E o o> a>

JZto o

-_49°223O

92°30'

Meggisi Lake - G-2688BCh 494923

LEGEND

HIGHWAY AND ROUTE No

OTHER ROADS

TRAILS

SURVEYED LINESTOWNSHIPS BASE LINES, ETC.LOTS. MINING CLAIMS. PARCELS, ETC

UNSURVEYED LINESLOT LINESPARCEL BOUNDARYMINING CLAIMS ETC

RAILWAY AND RIGHT OF WAY

UTILITY LINES

NON PERENNIAL STREAM

FLOODING OR FLOODING RIGHTS

SUBDIVISION OR COMPOSITE PLAN

RESERVATIONS

ORIGINAL SHORELINE

MARSH OR MUSKEG

MINES

TRAVERSE MONUMENT

DISPOSITION OF CROWN LANDS

OF DOCUMENT SYMBOLPATENT, SURF ACE & MINING RIGHTS

. SURFACE RIGHTS ONLY .

, MINING RIGHTS ONLY

LEASE, SURFACE & MINING RIGHTS.

" .SURFACE RIGHTSONLY._ ...

" .MINING RIGHTSONLY .. __

LICENCE Of OCCUPATION

ORDER IN COUNCIL

RESERVATION

CANCELLED

SAND& GRAVEL

eB V

oc

eNOTE M INING RIGHTS lNPARC£LSPATtNT£OPRlORTOMAY6,

1913 V fSTED ifM ORIGINAL P ATENTEE BV THE PUBLIC LANDS A CT rt S O 1970 CHAP 380 S EC 6 3. SUBSEC 1

REFERENCESAREAS WITHDRAWN FROM D ISPOSITION

M.R.O. MINING RIGHTSONLY

S.R.O. SURFACt RIGHTSONLY

M.+ S. - MINING AND SURFAC.E RIGHTb

Deter iplion

PARK RESERVE

fj e r No Date n>«DOsition

71/83 23/«/83 5 B M

Fite

188515

NATURAL RESOURCES

MAY 9 «85

TITLES SECTION

SCALE 1 INCH = 40 CHAINS

0 iOOO 2OOO 4OOO 60OO BOOO

0 ?00 lOOOME TRi

2OOO(2 KM

AREA

BOYER LAKEMNR ADMINISTRATIVE DISTRICT

DRYDENMINING DIVISION

KENORALAND TITLES/ R EGISTRY D IVISION

KENORA

MinistryofNatural

LandManagement

BranchOntario

Oitt Numbir

-

onru V-

OD

gm

uoOJ 10

52F07NE0e48 2.8061 BOYER LAKE £10

PROPHET et al

AIRBORNE ELECTROMAGNETIC SURVEY INTERPRETATION MAP

UPPER MANITOU LAKES AREAONTARIO >

SCALE 1/15,000 0 Kilometre

1/2 1/2 Mile

VAERODAT LIMITED

DATE'' March 1985

N.T.S. 52F/SE.52F/NE

MAP No =

J8509

Horizontal control.....

Average b iid

Line spacing.

bowd on photo laydown

30 rrninB$

200 metroa

AEROOAT HEM SYSTEM RESPONSE VERTICAL HALF-PLANE

, ^

KID IN PHASE (ppm)

EM Anomaly A, in pV.ssn •mpllly.jG Conductivity IhitKnusn produtl 2

In1irpr§t«d bedrock cor>duclor

Posilblt bedrock conductor a xis

Axli wlfh flanking magnetic onomal/

Axis with colncldBnt maornllc anomaly

1271

4160

221

21 1

tfft&LA

72 £7 V?

AKE

PROPHET et al

AIRBORNE ELECTROMAGNETIC SURVEY PROFILES -932 Hz (coaxial)

UPPER MANITOU LAKES AREAONTARIO

SCALE 1/15,000 0 Ki lometre

1/2 Mile

VAERODAT LIMITED

DATF-:

N.T. S. No '

MAP No^

March 1985

52F/SE , 52F/NE

2J8509

49° 30' -—-

Pmcher

10

0

llN

4230

4210

1031

102

101 1

1271

41804190

221

4120

PROPHET et al

TOTAL FIELD MAGNETIC MAP


SCALE I/!5,OOO 0 Ki lometre

1/2

DATE"-'

N.T.S. No ••

MAP No'

1/2 Mile

March 1985

52F/SE , 52F/NE

3J8509

W gammas...... . —•""" *""™"

10 cjanmias. ......

iensor elevation. . 48 metres

324

rrrr, 1051

27

011

41804190

PROPHET et al

VLF-EM TOTAL FIELD CONTOURSNLK (Wash.)24.8kHz; NAA(Maine)24.0kHz.


Kilomefe

WAERODAT LIMITED•<A

DATF =

N.7.S. No

MAP No^

March 1985

52F/SE , 52F/NE

4

4 9 "

STATIONS' NLK

NAA

Lines 10- 1011

Lines 1021- 127

Sensor elevation .. .48 metres

J8509

1051

1271

01 14190

4180

221

rpt on combined helicopter-borne mag/em/vlf sur - … · 2017-01-17 · report on combined...

Documents