Thursday, November 14, 2019

Garibaldi - Feeder

Wow, Garibaldi lots of drill results from Nickel Mountain (link).

Note: I'm going to using NiEq% grades using a ratio of 3.2% Cu = 1% Ni. 
I haven't included any of the other metals as the PGEs, Au and Ag don't always appear to be associated with the massive sulfide intervals and as I don;t know their recoveries, I don't know if an economic amount of the metals will be recovered and paid for by any smelter.

To no surprise, all of the holes are drilled in the same 300m x 200m area that we've all come to love

I added the scale bar
You can get a 3D model from here (link)


Drilling has focused in 3 main areas

  1. NW Zone - Holes EL-19-55 to 61
  2. Discovery Zone - Holes EL-19-51 to 53
  3. Deep Feeder zone - Hole EL-19-54

NW Zone

Seven holes were drilled into this zone to see if the massive sulfides in the NW zone link up with the sulfides mapped at surface in the NE Zone. 

You'll see that the surface sulfides are found at the contact between the E&L Intrusion (purple) and the Hazelton Sediments (light green), 

On the section that the holes generally hit a narrow massive sulfide zone with a small (up to 15m core length) zone of disseminated (<1% NiEq) mineralization above it. Holes 55 and 56 didn't hit any massive sulfides, and suggests that the system is dying to depth in this direction.

Discovery/NE Zones

For the discovery zone I'll write about 2 areas - Upper and Lower sulfide zones

Lower zone = main Discovery massive sulfide zone
Upper zone = small sulfide zone found ~25m above the main zone

Lower Zone

Here is a long section through the lower/main Discovery zone, I've clipped out the spurious information
We an see that hole 54 was a ~20m step-out from the massive sulfides hit in hole 53, and hit nearly 5m of massive sulfides grading 6.5% NiEq.

What is also interesting is that holes 17-12, 18-37 may not have been drilled deep enough to intersect this zone. Maybe there is a (small) chance that Garibaldi could re-enter these holes and drill them an additional 50m to check.

Here is a plan map of the Lower Sulfide zone. It is a busy figure

The known sulfide mineralization i about 130m x 30m and if it is 8m thick, we get:
  • 130 x 30 x 8 x 4.5 = 140,000 tonnes of material
Still very small, to get a 1Mt deposit, at similar thicknesses we need a footprint of
  • 1,000,000 / 4.5 = 220,000 cubic meters
  • 220,000 / 8 = 27,780 m2
  • or a zone that is 30m wide and 930m long (or a strike length that is 7 times longer than the current footprint.
It is small! 

Upper Zone

Drill-hole 51 hit a narrow zone of massive sulfide mineralization ~25m above the Discovery zone. It seems to line up with other massive sulfide occurrences in early drilling.

However, drill-hole 18-24 didn't hit anything on the up-dip continuation of this zone, so suggests that it is a small, localized sulfide body.

Deep Feeder

Hole 54 plunged the depths of Nickel Mountain.

It got a 10m zone of <1% NiEq, but nothing special. This hole was drilled to follow-up on the small zone hit in hole 17-01 (they are ~10m apart). Personally, I think that rather than being a feeder zone, what we may be seeing is the effect of s chunk of Hazelton Group sediments in the Nickel Mountain Gabbros that, due to a change in local chemistry, has led to the local precipitation of sulfides from the gabbros.

We can see on the section accompanying the press release (link) that there is a close spatial relationship between the Hazelton group and mineralization.

However, most of these points are rhetorical, to me, I can't see the evidence from the drilling that supports a big Ni sulfide system at Nickel Mountain.

I did an update to the Officially Bad Resources, make of them as you want


  1. Another swing and miss for GGI in 2019. One can only think that they make one more attempt in 2020 before calling it a day. Too much money being spent on unimpressive results.

    1. Don't get your panties in a twist; less than half of this year's drill program has been reported so far.

    2. We were hearing about how amazing hole 53 was going to be for months and it didn't produce. Maybe I've soured due to the lack of communication and the absurdly slow turn around on assays but I doubt very much they will pull anything equal or better than 53 this year.

      Also, I don't wear panties. The chaffing outweighs the benefit of additional support.


    4. We'll see what the latest results give us, I still want to see some drilling away from the known mineralization as I'm concerned that Nickel Mountain will become susceptible to collapse.

  2. Sooo, more holes reported but less nickel altogether then the last report?
    How does that work?

    1. Some of the new holes drilled close to the main Discovery zone, which is the bulk of the Officially Bad (TM) resource didn't hit much mineralization.
      As a result, in my model that reduced the size of the mineralization accordingly.

    2. However, with so many holes in a small area, I can't wait for GGI to give us a resource calculation next year! Maybe around April 1st

  3. Ok , everyone off the mountain, no nickel to see here.

  4. Why did your resource estimate drop from what you had in your September 13 post? You lost 24,639 tonnes of >1% Ni and 14,456 tonnes of >2% Ni.

    1. The main reason was that some of the new holes that drilled around the lower sulfide (Discovery Zone) didn't hit anything (e.g. EL-19-51), which clipped a chunk off the officially bad (TM) resource.

      I have my model projecting the grade ~50m beyond the last drill-hole (~twice the average drill-hole pacing), but when you get holes with low grade or no mineralization <20m from earlier high-grade holes, it does clip the resources accordingly.

  5. 30 Years in this industry; I've never read something as silly as

    "Some of the new holes drilled close to the main Discovery zone, which is the bulk of the Officially Bad (TM) resource didn't hit much mineralization. As a result, in my model that reduced the size of the mineralization accordingly."

    This project is going forward not back - MM

    1. True, reading it how it makes little sense! A case of reading what I thought I had written, rather than what i actually wrote!
      I was trying to write:

      A number of the new holes were drilled to test the extension of the Lower Discovery Sulfide zone.

      These hole didn't return any significant sulfide intercepts. This resulted in the size of this zone being smaller than what had been predicted in the September model.

      As the lower zone is the largest and thickest area of massive sulfide mineralization, the reduction is size led to a reduction in tonnes.

  6. 30 years is the industry and you don't understand that with the additional drill holes with lower values in the area of influence of a drill hole with higher values reduces the area of influence in the resource model of the higher value drill hole.

    And holy crap that's a lot of holes in a small area for an exploration play.. Maybe they should put in a exploration adit or decline - but maybe they plan to mine it out by adding more holes in the same area

    1. Yes, we have ~60 holes drilled into an area that is 300m x 200m.

      They've found 2-3 small sulfide lenses, but nothing large. They'll keep drilling as the high grade hits keep some people believing

  7. I think it is time to stop covering this project/company. There are many other equally crappy projects/companies to follow.


  9. Hello grumpy geologists everywhere. I'm a wannabe (learning) investor and like gold as a safe haven which makes me interested in mining. I'm aware of an exploration stock where the geologist has just bought $500k of shares. Assay results aren't released yet (not that I'd understand them anyway!). Actions speak louder than words and if the guy with the skills and knowledge is stumping up huge $ it would suggest that he knows something few don't. Other directors haven't bought AFAIK. Is it worth a punt as a long shot or should I forget about it? Thanks

  10. New drilling highlight:

    over 33.22m (65.78 - 99m) 0.62 no

    Do they have a mine now? Haha

  11. I visited your blog You shared great information I really like the information provided by you You have done Great.