Report on areas relinquished for EL 23682 Chilling Project, 17 September 2008

Abstract

This report covers work on the relinquished areas of EL 23682, located 50km south of Daly River Crossing. The area lies on the Wingate Plateau, and is not accessible by road. Much of the EL is covered in a thin veneer of Cretaceous sediment, which in the north overlies Lower Proterozoic Chilling Sandstone, which has been intruded by Ti Tree Granophyre. In the south, the Cretaceous cover is more continuous, and it is likely that younger Proterozoic sedimentary units are present above the Lower Proterozoic units. The Cretaceous cover rocks even in the south though do not appear to be more than some tens of metres thick. A notable feature of the area is the presence of widespread springcharged creeks and waterlogged swamps, despite the elevation of the plateau. During the first five years of exploration of EL 23682, work has consisted of: Literature research of previous exploration, geological survey and geophysical survey over the EL and surrounding district, data compilation, Helicopter- supported geological reconnaissance and collection of stream sediment samples, analysis by low level scans for 63 elements including precious metals and platinoids, interpretation of results, intensive helicopter - supported follow-up stream sediment sampling on closer sample spacing, ICP and Fire assay-ICP low level scans of stream sediment samples, completion of detailed Airborne Radiometrics and Magnetics. In addition, contacts were made with other stakeholders in the area for introduction purposes, and the Sacred Sites register was searched. While the area has not been intensively sampled in the past, it has not responded to the methods used in the past (BLEG) for gold exploration, and no previous encouragement from diamond exploration was received. Our initial reconnaissance results indicated a substantially higher level of gold content in stream sediments, but the results of our follow up sampling did not confirm markedly elevated values. The laboratory has suggested that the difference maybe caused by different sample preparation procedures between batches, but it is not possible to rule out contamination during sample preparation. Unfortunately no sample was left from the initial reconnaissance survey to resolve this. No opportunity was available to follow up from the airborne geophysical survey in 2008.