53BHNwee?e 2.6214 SAWBILL BAY/MARMION 010
REPORT ON
COMBINED HELICOPTER-BORNE
MAGNETIC, ELECTROMAGNETIC AND VLF
SURVEY
ATIKOKAN AREA, ONTARIO
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l* RECEIVED
l J UN l 7 1985
H MINING LANDS SECTION
l
for
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
by
AERODAT LIMITED
Janaury, 1985
l
l l
l|^^ 52BMNW007e 2.8214 SAWBILL BAY/MARMION 010G
l TABLE OF CONTENTS
M Page No.
l 1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
2. SURVEY AREA LOCATION 2-1
l .3. AIRCRAFT AND EQUIPMENT 3-1
m 3.1 Aircraft 3-1
3.2 Equipment 3-1
l 3.2.1 Electromagnetic System 3-1
3.2.2 VLF-EM System 3-2
l 3.2.3 Magnetometer 3-2
m 3.2.4 Magnetic Base Station 3-2
3.2.5 Radar Altimeter 3-2
l 3.2.6 Tracking Camera 3-3
3.2.7 Analog Recorder 3-3
3.2.8 Digital Recorder 3-4
3.2.9 Radar Positioning System 3-4
l 4. DATA PRESENTATION 4-1
4.1 Base Map and Flight Path Recovery 4-1
l 4.2 Electromagnetic Profile Maps 4-2
m 4.3 Total Field Magnetic Contours 4-3
4.4 VLF-EM Total Field Contours 4-4
l 5. INTERPRETATION 5-1
6. RECOMMENDATIONS 6-1
APPENDIX I - General Interpretive Considerations
APPENDIX II - Anomaly List
LIST OF MAPS
l l ll (Scale: 1:15,000)
l
l
l Maps
~ 1. Airborne Electromagnetic Survey Interpretation
l2. Airborne Electromagnetic Survey Profiles
m 932 Hz (coaxial)
l 3. Total Field Magnetic Contours
l 4. VLF-EM Total Field Contours
Also provided is a two-color master overlay
l of the 4510 Hz coaxial/4137 Hz coplanar pro
files.
l
l
l
l
lll 1. INTRODUCTION
lThis report describes an airborne geophysical survey
l carried out on behalf of Falconbridge Limited by Aero-
dat Limited. Equipment operated included a 3-frequency
l electromagnetic system, a magnetometer, a VLF-EM system
m and a radar positioning system.
. The survey area, to the northeast of Atikokan, Ontario,
was flown on December 10, 1984. A total of 400 line kilo
meters.
l meters of data were collected at a line spacing of 100
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
2-1
2. SURVEY AREA LOCATION
The index map below outlines the survey area. The flight
line direction was approximately 30 0 west of north, at a
line spacing of 100 meters.
91*30'
49 000'
.
l
l
3.1 Aircraft
lll 3. AIRCRAFT AND EQUIPMENT
l
The helicopter used for the survey was an Aerospatiale
l 350D owned and operated by Maple Leaf Helicopters
Limited. Installation of the geophysical and ancil-
| lary equipment was carried out by Aerodat. The sur-
B vey aircraft was flown at a mean terrain clearance
of 60 meters.
l3.2 Equipment
3.2.1 Electromagnetic System
The electromagnetic system was an Aerodat
l 3-frequency system. Two vertical coaxial
coil pairs were operated at 932 and 4510 Hz
g and a horizontal coplanar coil pair at 4137
B Hz. The transmitter/receiver separation
was 7 meters. Inphase and quadrature sig-
I nals were measured simultaneously for the 3
frequencies with a time-constant of 0.1
seconds. The electromagnetic bird was towed
30 meters below the helicopter.
lll
3.2.2 VLF-EM System
The VLF-EM system was a Herz Totem 1A. This
l instrument measures the total field and quad
rature component of the selected frequency.
l The sensor was towed in a bird 12 meters be-
m low the helicopter. The stations used were
NLK (Jim Creek, Washington, 24.8 kHz) for lines
l 10-90, and NSS (Annapolis, Maryland,21.4 kHz)
for lines 100 - 1000.
3.2.3 Magnetometer
The magnetometer was a Geometrics G803 proton
l precession type. The sensitivity of the
instrument was l gamma at a 0.5 second sampl-
I ing rate. The sensor was towed in a bird 12
m meters below the helicopter.
m 3.2.4 Magnetic Base Station
An IFG proton precession type magnetometer
l was operated at the base of operations to
M record diurnal variations of the earth's
magnetic field. The clock of the base sta-
I tion was synchronized with that of the air
borne system.
l
lll
3.2.5 Radar Altimeter
l
l
l
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
" operated in strip mode and the fiducial
l numbers for cross-reference to the analog
and digital data were imprinted on the mar-
|| gin of the film.
l 3.2.7 Analog Recorder
l An RMS dot-matrix recorder was used to dis
play the data during the survey. In addition
f to manual and time fiducials, the following
data was recorded.
Channel Input Scale
l 00 Low Freq. Inphase 2 ppm/mm
m 01 Low Freq. Quadrature 2 ppm/mm
02 High Freq. Inphase 2 ppm/mm
lll
Channel Input Scale
l 03 High Freq. Quadrature 2 ppm/mm
g 04 Mid Freq. Inphase 4 ppm/mm
* 05 Mid Freq. Quadrature 4 ppm/mm
l 06 VLF-EM Total Field 2.51 /mm
07 VLF-EM Quadrature 2.51 /mm
l 13 Altimeter {500 ft. attop of chart) 10 ft./mm
l 14 Magnetometer 5 gamma/mm
15 Magnetometer 50 gamma/mm
3.2.8 Digital Recorder
A Perle DAC/NAV data system recorded the sur-
I vey on magnetic tape. Information re
corded was as follows:
Equipment Interval
l EM 0.1 second
VLF-EM 0.5 second
Magnetometer O.5 second
l Altimeter 0.5 second
MRS III 0.5 second
3.2.9 Radar Positioning System
A Motorola Mini-Ranger (MRS III) radar navi-
l
l
l l l gation system was utilized for both naviga-
I tion and track recovery. Transponders lo
cated at fixed known locations were interro-
| gated several times per second and the ranges
from these points to the helicopter measured
to several meter accuracy. A navigational
l computer triangulates the position of the heli
copter and provides the pilot with navigation
g information. The range/range data was record-
ed on magnetic tape for subsequent flight
' path determination.
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
4. DATA PRESENTATION
ll **
l4. l Base Map and Flight Path Recpjfvery
The base is a screened topographic map at a scale
l of 1:15,000.
U The flight path was derived from the Mini-Ranger
radar positioning system. The distance from the heli-
I copter to two established reference locations was
measured several times per second, and the position
m of the helicopter mathematically calculated by triangu-
m lation. It is estimated that the flight path is
generally accurate to about 10 meters with respect
l to the topographic detail of the base map. The flight
path is presented with fiducials for cross-reference
" to both the analog and digital data.
l4.2 Electromagnetic Profile Maps
The electromagnetic data was recorded digitally at a
l sample rate of 10/second with a time constant of 0.1
seconds. A two stage digital filtering process was
l carried out to reject major sferic events, and to
j reduce system noise. The process is outlined below.
Local atmospheric activity can produce sharp, large
l
lll
amplitude events that cannot be removed by conven-
I tional filtering procedures. Smoothing or stacking
| will reduce their amplitude but leave a broader resi-
dual response that can be confused with a geological
l phenomenon. To avoid this possibility, a computer
algorithm searches out and rejects the major sferic
l events.
l The signal to noise ratio was further enhanced by the
application of a low pass digital filter. It has
m zero phase shift which prevents any lag or peak dis-
M placement from occurring, and it suppresses only varia
tions with a wavelength less than about 0.25 seconds.
l This low effective time constant permits maximum
profile shape resolution.
Following the filtering processes, a base level cor-
I rection was made. The correction applied is a linear
function of time that ensures that the corrected
* amplitude of the various inphase and quadrature com-
I ponents is zero when no conductive or permeable source
is present. The filtered and levelled data was then
l presented in profile map form.
l The inphase and quadrature responses of the 932 Hz
coaxial configuration coils were presented in profile
l
lll
form with flight path and electromagnetic anomaly
g information on the base map. A master overlay with
the inphase and quadrature profiles of both the 4137
* Hz coplanar and 4510 Hz coaxial responses {in two
l colors) with flight path has been provided but not
included as part of this report.
lm 4 * 4 Total Field Magnetic Contours
The aeromagnetic data was corrected for diurnal
l variations by subtraction of the digitally recorded
m base station magnetic profile. No correction for
regional variation was applied.
* The corrected profile data was interpolated onto a
l regular grid at a 25 m true scale interval using a
cubic spline technique. The grid provided the basis
l for threading the presented contours at a 5 gamma
interval.
The aeromagnetic data has been presented with elec-
I tromagnetic anomaly information on the base map.
4.4 VLF-EM Total Field Contours
' The VLF-EM signal from NLK (Jim Creek, Wash.) or
l NSS (Annapolis, Maryland) was compiled in map form.
l
l l l
4-4
The mean response level of the total field signal was
removed and the data was gridded and contoured at an
interval of 2%.
lThe VLF-EM data has been presented with electromagnetic
l anomaly information on the base map.
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
ll * 5. INTERPRETATION
j Geology
mt The geological map corresponding to the survey area is
ODM Geological Map #2065. Acid igneous and metamorphic
l rocks dominate in the region, with a fault/contact in the
northwest corner marking the transition to metavolcanic
l rocks. This contact is evident on the total field magnetic
m map. The location of an abandoned mine (near the center
of the area) is identified on the base map.
The magnetic response is closely associated with the many
j lakes in the survey block - the response is usually higher
over lakes and lower elsewhere. This observation suggests
l that the geological and drainage formations are related.
Geophysics
l Electromagnetic anomalies have been identified based on
j a number of criteria which are discussed in Appendix I.
The single most important feature of anomaly interpre-
I tation is the response profile shape. Several proper
ties of the source can be determined from this informa-
I tion using characteristic curves for Aerodat's coaxial/
j coplanar coil configuration. Anomalies that exhibit pro
file shapes characteristic of a thin steeply dipping
l
l
l l 5-2l conductive body are generally considered to be of bed-
g rock origin, while those with profile shapes charac-
teristic of a thin flat-lying body are often attribut-
I ed to a conductive overburden source. In the survey
area, the anomalies often appear to be of bedrock ori-
| gin based on profile shape alone. However, most are
g positioned over lakes and may be reflecting the topo-
graphy of the lake bottom and the related distribution
l of conductive sediments.
M Apparent conductances have been calculated based on a
vertical half-plane model, and are listed in Appendix II.
l These values are all quite low, suggesting electrolytic
conduction such as that found in faults and shears, or
l overburden conductivity. The anomaly response amplitudes
B are quite high in most cases, which indicates a shallow
conductor depth.
* When the exploration target is gold formations, the empha-
I sis for conductor identification is placed on the conduc
tor's probability of being of bedrock as opposed to over-
| burden origin. The conductor's estimated conductance is
M not a stressed factor. Although gold itself is highly
conductive, it cannot be expected to exist in sufficiently
l large and well connected quantity to yield a direct air
borne electromagnetic response. However, accessory min-
l
l
ll *l eralization such as sulphide or graphite may produce a
good conductance value as an indirect indication. Gold
f might be located within a fault/ shear zone or contact
g that may produce a significant response due to contained
clay or conductive fluids. This type of conductor, re-
I ferred to as "structural" is usually associated with low
conductances, less than 4 mhos.
Electromagnetic conductor axes have been drawn, but none
l have been interpreted as definite bedrock conductors.
Most of the conductors in the area are associated with
l lakes and other drainage features, and all have been in-
m terpreted as "possible" bedrock origin axes. The close
relationship between electromagnetic response levels,
l magnetic responses, and lake positioning discourages
the upgrading of an electromagnetic conductor's inter-
I preted status based on its magnetic association (i.e.
m coincident with or flanking a magnetic anomaly). However,
the potential for some of these conductor axes of having
l a bedrock source may be supported by their location in a
favourable geological environment. VLF-EM axes have been
B included where not limited in extent to pronounced drain-
H age features. V3 flanks a linear magnetic anomaly, at
the east end of which is located an abandoned mine site.
l
l
l
ll" 6. RECOMMENDATIONS
lNumerous electromagnetic and VLF-EM conductive axes have
l been interpreted in the Atikokan survey area. However,
the conductive nature of the drainage features has added
considerable uncertainty to the positive identification
l of bedrock conductors. On the basis of the geophysical
results alone the conductive axes may be due to bedrock
l conductors or narrow channels of conductive overburden.
l Further evaluation of the significance of the data is
best left to those most familiar with the geology of
l the area and with access to additional geological and geo-
m physical information.
l Respectfully submitted,
l
ll January 14, 1985 Glenn A. Boustead, B.A.Se.
l
l
l
l
AERODAT LIMITED
l
l l
APPENDIX I
GENERAL INTERPRETIVE CONSIDERATIONSll Electromagnetic
l The Aerodat 3 frequency system utilizes 2 different
transmitter-receiver coil geometries. The traditional
l coaxial coil configuration is operated at 2 widely
separated frequencies and the horizontal coplanar coil
pair is operated at a frequency approximately aligned
l with one of the coaxial frequencies.
m The electromagnetic response measured by the helicopter
system is a function of the "electrical" and "geometrical"
l properties of the conductor. The "electrical" property
of a conductor is determined largely by its conductivity
l and its size and shape; the "geometrical" property of the
m response is largely a function of the conductors shape
and orientation with respect to the measuring transmitter
l and receiver.
l Electrical Considerations
m For a given conductive body the measure of its conductivity
or conductance is closely related to the measured phase
l 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
lm 4P - 2 - APPENDIX I
ratio and a large phase shift a low ratio. This relation-
I ship is shown quantitatively for a vertical half-plane
model on the accompanying phasor diagram. Other physical
l 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
M amplitudes in ppm as measured at the response peak over
the conductor. To assist the interpretation of the survey
l 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
B 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
l only as far as the model approximates the real geological
situation. The actual geological source may be of limited
l length, have significant dip, its conductivity and thickness
m may vary with depth and/or strike and adjacent bodies and
overburden may have modified the response. In general the
l conductance estimate is less affected by these limitations
than is the depth estimate, but both should be considered as
l
l
relative rather than absolute guides to the anomaly's
properties.
l l
APPENDIX I
l Conductance in mhos is the reciprocal of resistance in
ohms and in the case of narrow slab-like bodies is the
B product of electrical conductivity and thickness.
l Most overburden will have an indicated conductance of less
M than 2 mhos; however, more conductive clays may have an
apparent conductance of say 2 to 4 mhos. Also in the low
l conductance range will be electrolytic conductors in faults
and shears.
lThe higher ranges of conductance, greater than 4 mhos,
l indicate that a significant fraction of the electrical
conduction is electronic rather than electrolytic in
B nature. Materials that conduct electronically are limited
j to certain metallic sulphides and to graphite. High
conductance anomalies, roughly 10 mhos or greater, are
l generally limited to sulphide or graphite bearing rocks.
l Sulphide minerals with the exception of sphalerite, cinnabar
and stibnite are good conductors; however, they may occur
l in a disseminated manner that inhibits electrical conduction
•m through the rock mass. In this case the apparent conductance
can seriously underrate the quality of the conductor in
l geological terms. In a similar sense the relatively non
conducting sulphide minerals noted above may be present in
l significant concentration in association with minor conductive
l
l
11 '11111111111111111
^ - 4 - APPENDIX I
sulphides, and the electromagnetic response only relate
to the minor associated mineralization. Indicated conductance
is also of little direct significance for the identification
of 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 low conductance value does not rule out the possibility
of 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
the receiver.
In the case of a thin, steeply dipping, sheet-like conductor,
the coaxial coil pair will yield a near symmetric peak over
the 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
l l - 5 - APPENDIX Il anomaly shape changes only slightly, but in the case of
the coplanar coil pair the side lobe on the down dip side
g strengthens relative to that on the up dip side.
l As the thickness of the conductor increases, induced
current flow across the thickness of the conductor becomes
l relatively significant and complete null coupling with the
m coplanar coils is no longer possible. As a result, the
apparent minimum of the coplanar response over the conductor
l diminishes with increasing thickness, and in the limiting
case of a fully 3 dimensional body or a horizontal layer
m or half-space, the minimum disappears completely.
l 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
l 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
l are confined to the volume of the sphere, but not relatively
restricted to any arbitrary plane as in the case of a sheet-
I like form. The response of the coplanar coil pair directly
m over the sphere may be up to 8* times greater than that of
the coaxial coil pair.
l
l
l
lM W - 6 - APPENDIX I
l In summary, a steeply dipping, sheet-like conductor will
display a decrease in the coplanar response coincident
l with the peak of the coaxial response. The relative
M strength of this coplanar null is related inversely to
the thickness of the conductor; a pronounced null indicates
l a relatively thin conductor. The dip of such a conductor
can be inferred from the relative amplitudes of the side-lobes,
Massive conductors that could be approximated by a conducting
l 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.*
l
l
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
l relative amplitude ratio of 4.*
l Occasionally if the edge of an overburden zone is sharply
defined with some significant depth extent, an edge effect
l will occur in the coaxial coils. In the case of a horizontal
B conductive ring or ribbon, the coaxial response will consist
of two peaks, one over each edge; whereas the coplanar coil
l will yield a single peak.
l
l
l
l l - 7 - APPENDIX Il *It should be noted at this point that Aerodat's
definition of the measured ppm unit is related to
l the primary field sensed in the receiving coil
without normalization to the maximum coupled (coaxial
' configuration). If such normalization were applied
l to the Aerodat units, the amplitude of the coplanar
coil pair would be halved.
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
APPENDIX I
l ll Magnetics
l The Total Field Magnetic Map shows contours of the
total magnetic field, uncorrected for regional varia-
I tion. Whether an EM anomaly with a magnetic correl-
m ation is more likely to be caused by a sulphide
deposit than one without depends on the type of
l mineralization. An apparent coincidence between an
EM and a magnetic anomaly may be caused by a conductor
l which is also magnetic, or by a conductor which lies
m in close proximity to a magnetic body. The majority
of conductors which are also magnetic are sulphides
l containing pyrrhotite and/or magnetite. Conductive
and magnetic bodies in close association can be, and
l often are, graphite and magnetite. It is often very
m difficult to distinguish between these cases. If
the conductor is also magnetic, it will usually
l produce an EM anomaly whose general pattern resembles
that of the magnetics. Depending on the magnetic
l permeability of the conducting body, the amplitude of
m the inphase EM anomaly will be weakened, and if the
conductivity is also weak, the inphase EM anomaly
l may even be reversed in sign.
l
l
l
lB W - 9 - APPENDIX I
l VLF Electromagnetics
l The VLF-EM method employs the radiation from powerful
military radio transmitters as the primary signals.
l The magnetic field associated with the primary field
m is elliptically polarized in the vicinity of electrical
conductors. The Herz Totem uses three coils in the X,
l Y, Z configuration to measure the total field and
vertical quadrature component of the polarization
l ellipse.
l 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
B to produce measurable VLF signals. For the same reason,
poor conductors such as sheared contacts, breccia zones,
l narrow faults, alteration zones and porous flow tops
normally produce VLF anomalies. The method can therefore
B be used effectively for geological mapping. The only
B relative disadvantage of the method lies in its sensitivity
to conductive overburden. In conductive ground the depth
l of exploration is severely limited.
l The effect of strike direction is important in the sense
of the relation of the conductor axis-relative to the
B energizing electromagnetic field. A conductor aligned
mm along a radius drawn from a transmitting station will be
l
l- 10 -
APPENDIX Im
l in a maximum coupled orientation and thereby produce a
stronger response than a similar conductor at a different
l 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
B angle consideration is that conductors favourably oriented
with respect to the transmitter location and also near
l 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
l and position of a conductivity anomaly. The response will
m be a maximum over the conductor, without any special filtering,
and strongly favour the upper edge of the conductor even in
l the case of a relatively shallow dip.
M The vertical quadrature component over steeply dipping sheet
like conductor will be a cross-over type response with the
l cross-over closely associated with the upper edge of the
conductor.
The response is a cross-over type due to the fact that it
l is the vertical rather than total field quadrature component
m that is measured. The response shape is due largely to
geometrical rather than conductivity considerations and
l the distance between the maximum and minimum on either side
of the cross-over is related to target depth. For a given
l target geometry, the larger this distance the greater the
l
lM 9 - 11 - APPENDIX I
l depth.
l The amplitude of the quadrature response, as opposed
to shape is function of target conductance and depth
f 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
M phase shifted in a negative sense. The secondary field
produced by this altered field at the target also has an
J 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
l during return travel to the surface. The net effect of
these 3 phase shifts determine the phase of the secondary
l field sensed at the receiver.
l A relatively poor conductor in resistive ground will yield
a net positive phase shift. A relatively good conductor
l in more conductive ground will yield a net negative phase
m shift. A combination is possible whereby the net phase
shift is zero and the response is purely in-phase with no
l quadrature component.
j A net positive phase shift combined with the geometrical
cross-over shape will lead to a positive quadrature response
g on the side of approach and a negative on the side of
departure. A net negative phase shift would produce the
" reverse. A further sign reversal occurs with a 180 degree
l
- 12 - APPENDIX I
l lM change in instrument orientation as occurs on reciprocal
line headings. During digital processing of the quad-
I rature data for map presentation this is corrected for
by normalizing the sign to one of the flight line headings.
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
APPENDIX II
l l l l l l l l l l l
Anomaly List
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
FLIGHT
ANOMALY Ll ST f ATIKOKAN AREA
LINE ANOMALY CATEGORYFREQUENCY 4510 INPHABE QUAD*
PAGE
CONHUCTOR BIRD GTP DEPTH HEIGHT
MHOS MTRS MTRB
111
11
1111
11111
11ii
ilii
iii
ii
iiiii
101010
2020
31313131
4040404040
SO50SO50
60606060
909090
100100
1101101101.10110
ABC
AB
ABCD
ABcDE
ABCD
ABCD
ABC
AB
ABCDE
000
00
0000
00000
0000
0000
000
00
00000
"l10
32
0244
54200
50
-O
1
1119
16162
1415
1418204
,2.1.2
.8
.4
.0,2,0.8
.5
.9,4.8.6
,3*5.5.3
.8
.2
.3
.4
.2
.8
.8
,1.2
,4*5,7.2,9
61312
3015
11132535
3429161114
467
1015
23101048
585813
6456
5573203
34
2.0.9
.2,0
.8
.8,4.8
,8,4.1*0.8
.8,7,3,4
.4,4*5,7
,5.6*3
,9*3
,1*1.4.5,5
000
00
0000
00000
0000
0000
000
00
00000
.0,0.0
.0
.0
,0,0.0,0
.0,0.0.0,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0,0.0,1
.2,2,0
.1*2
.1
.2
.0
.0
.0
000
00
0000
00000
0000
0000
000
00
00000
293532
3232
39343427
3139343739
23303027
33404328
252534
2529
2625303422
120
130
A 2.9
6.6
'0.7
31 .4
0,0
0,0
31
29
Estimated depth may be unreliable because the stronger part of the conductor may be deeper or to one side of the f l i si h t line* or because of s shallow dip or overburden effects*
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
PAGE
ANOMALY LIST , ATIKOKAN AREA
FLIGHT LINE ANOMALY CATEGORYFREQUENCY 4510 INPHASE
0,0-0,45,5 5.1
3,9 5.5 0,3 0,4
8,7 8. Q-0,3-0.4 4,4 5,5 4,8 7,0
0,1-0,2-0,3
-0,5 l ,0 0,5
1,1 1,1 0,9
,-0,1 2,3 2,8
3, A 1,5 5.8
5,0-0,30,4
Estimated depth may be unreliable because the stronger part of the conductor may be deeper or to one side of the flight line* or because of a shallow dip or overburden effects.
1111
1111
11111111
111
111
1111
11111
111
111
130130130130
140140140140
150150150150150150150150
160160160
170170170
180180180180
190190190190190
200200200
210210210
BCDE
ABCD
ABCDEFGH
ABC
ABC
ABCD
ABCDE
ABC
AF!C
0000
0000
00000000
000
000
0000
00000
000
000
510AD,
17,3E), 7
26,530,7
19,926,218,821.5
46.438,415,319,625,444,330,239.5
8.08.96,6
5.210,211.7
10,812,410.513.5
10,54,8
23,924,118,7
26,413,928,6
36,12,99,1
CONDUCTOR BIRD GTP DEPTH HEIGHT
MHOS MTRS
0,00.00.00,0
0,00.00,00.0
0,00.10,00,00,00,00,00,0
0,00,00,0
0,00,00,0
0,00,00,00.0
0.00.00.00.00,0
0,00.00.0
0.00,00,0
0000
0000
00000000
000
000
0000
00000
000
000
MTRS
30332627
30273029
3033292925252933
323530
283434
34374036
2730323631
293532
313132
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
PAGE 3
ANOMALY LIST* ATIKOKAN AREA
FLIGHT
CONDUCTOR BIRDFREQUENCY 4510 OTP DEPTH HEIGHT
LINE ANOMALY CATEGORY INPHASE QUAD* MHOS MTRS MTRS
1
111
11
111i
l
lil
l
lll
l
l
il
lill
illlill
2 1 0
220220220
231231
240240240240
250
260260260
270
310310310
320
360
370370
380380380380
390390390390390390390
n
ABC
AB
ABC[i
A
ABC
A
ABC
A
A
AB
ABCD
ABCDEFG
0
000
00
0000
0
000
0
000
0
0
00
0000
0000000
4*8
0,33*5
-1,2
3,41 .4
1 ,61,10.80,0
0.6
6,40.00,0
0,2
0,00,20,2
0,0
3,2
2.94,4
8,63,84,10,2
3,31,82.90,40.44,410,0
34,2
6,125*53,3
29,211,1
7,47,0
11 ,36,8
6,0
29,84,65.8
5,5
7,17,99,5
5.9
17,7
21,526,2
21*422.727,34,0
33*511*82 1 , 23.84.5
29.320.9
0,0
0,00*00,0
0,00*0
0,00.00,00*0
0*0
0,00*00.0
0*0
0,00*00.0
0.0
0,0
0*00,0
0*20,00,00,0
0,00.00.00.00.00.00.3
0
000
00
0000
0
000
0
000
0
0
00
3000
000700s
31
423034
2833
40413535
38
273333
32
353129
39
34
3234
30323437
24352733382829
Estimated depth maw be unreliable because the stronger part of the conductor may be deeper or to one side of the flight line* or because of s shallow dip or overburden effects.
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
ANOMALY LI ST , ATIKOKAN AREA
FLIGHT LINE ANOMALY CATEGORYFREQUENCY 4510 INPHASE QUAD*
PAGE
CONDUCTOR BIRD GTP DEPTH HEIGHT
MHOS MTRS MTRS
111
111
11
1111
11
111111
111ii
liill
iiiiii
400400400
410410410
420420
430430430430
440440
4504 SO450450450450
460460460460460
470470470470470
480480480400480480
ABC
ADC
AB
ABCD
AP
ABCDEF
ABCDE
ABCDE
ABCDEF
000
000
00
0000
00
000000
00000
00000
000000
10*43.24*1
0.03.34,7
5.25.2
2.40,5-0.813,8
14,1-0,8
0,1-0,4
0,05,34,8
10.3
8,50,69,1
14,913,7
11,011,29.21,08.1
11 .00,38.2
11.5-0,2--0.6
19,721 ,924,2
14.327.219,5
34,337,3
27,67,25,2
31,0
35,07,0
13,010,74,6
26,0. 20,530.4
25.58.735.050.634.4
45,348,337.08,5
25,7
28,110,943,651,29,59.0
0.40.00,0
0,00,00.0
0,00,0
0,00,00,00,3
0.30.0
0,00,00,00,00,00.2
0.20.00.10.20.3
0.10.10.10,00,1
0.20,00,00,10,00,0
300
004
00
0002
40
000002
10000
00003
300000
332830
322025
2825
25333328
2332
272836373625
2831293135
2829,323625
273427273233
Estimated depth maw be unreliable because the stronger pert of the conductor may be deeper or to one side of the flight liner or because of s shallow dip or overburden effects.
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
F'AGE
ANOMALY LIB V f ATIKOKAN AREA
FLIGHT
CONDUCTOR EUROFREQUENCY 4510 CTP DEPTH HEIGHT
LINE ANOMALY CATEGORY INPHASE QUAD* MHOS MTRS MTRS
1111
11
111
11
i11
l111
222.
222
2
222
222*j
2
2
490490490490
500500
5. tO510S10
530530
540540540
5505505SO550
560560560
570570570
580
600600600
610610610610610
620
ABCD
AB
ABC
AB
ABC
ABCD
ABC
ABC
A
ABC
ABCDE
A
0000
00
000
00
000
0000
000
000
0
000
00000
0
0*00*39,614,2
1.314,9
4,27,01 ,8
2,12,2
2.11 ,80.2
0,91,00,10,1
-0,8 -1.2-1.0
1.1-0,4-0,3
0,9
0,10,36,4
10,110,811,60,10,4
0,2
13,617,034,133,7
8,560.9
30,041 .69,0
20,722,6
17,721,34,5
12,717,48,05.5
6,610,52,7
9,42,47,2
10,5
3,29,4
'17,2
23,535,126,912,14,3
9,8
0,00,00,10,3
0,00.1
0,00,00,0
0,00,0
0,00,00,0
0,00,00,00,0
0,00,00,0
0,00,00,0
0,0
0,00.00.2
0,30,20.30,00,0
0,0
0005
00
000
00
000
0000
000
000
0
000
13000
0
30343423
4028
283.140
3336
333030
32282536
333438
353732
32
352934
3122363037
29
Estimated depth may be unreliable becsufte the stronger pert. of the conductor m s y be deeper or to one side of the f .1 i s? h t line* or because of a shallow dip or overburden effects.
1 1 11111111111111
9FLIGHT
22 2
22222 22
222
222 22
22222
2 222 2
22 2
2 2222
ANOMALY L. I S T f ATIKOKAN AREA
FREQUENCY 4510 LINE ANOMALY CATEGORY INPHASE QUAD*
620620 620
630630630630630 630630
640640640
650650650 650650
660660660660660
670 670670670 670
680680 680
690 690690690690
BC D
ABCDEFG
ABC
AEiC DE
ABCnE
A BCDE
ABC
A BCDE
00 0
00000 00
000
000 00
00000
0 000 0
00 0
0 0000
7,210,7 14,0
14,917,56,81,11.8
--0.3-0,6
0,411,310,0
1.66,84,2
11,410,3
10,112,25,3
10,31 .0
1,011,3
1 ,28,4 8,6
5.03,0 1.7
0,0 0,11.91,94,5
21,727,4 31 .0
40,141 ,329,916,025 , 6 14,720.9
13,232,827,1
21 ,3?0,817,9 33.728,6
32,936,925,125,716,4
13,4 30,98,4
31,4 29,0
IR, Q22,6 21 , 8
10,3 13.019,917,524,8
PAGE 6
CONDUCTOR BIRD GTP DEPTH HEIGHT
MHOS MTRS MTRB
0,10,2 0,4
0,30,40.10.00,0 0,00,0
0,00.20,2
0,00,10,0 0.20,2
0,20,20,00,20,0
0,0 0,20,00,1 0, 1
0,10,0 0,0
0.0 0,00,00,00.0
010
33000 00
000
000 00
000p0
0150 0
00 0
0 0000
322930
2223302926 2625
342731
273132 2932
2527282826
27262827 31
3428 33
26 28323730
l
l
l
700 0,3 10.0 0,0 33
Estimated depth may be unreliable because the stronger part of the conductor rosy be deeper or to one side of the flight line* or because of B shallow dip or overburden effect?.,
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
ANOMALY LIST r ATIKOKAN AREA
FLIGHT LINE ANOMALY CATEGORYFREQUENCY 4510 INPHASE QUAD*
PAGE
CONDUCTOR BIRD CTP DEPTH HEIGHT
MHOS MTRS MTRS
2 jiC.
2
222
22222
2.222
222222
222
22
22222
22
22
700700700
710710710
720720720720720
730730730730
740740740740740740
750750750
760760
770770770770770
7807 BO
790790
BCD
ABC
ABCDE
ABCD
ABCDEF
ABC
AB
ABCnE
AB
AB
000
000
00000
0000
000000
000
00
00000
00
00
0*40,0
-0.2
0,1-A trU * *J
4,2
-0,8
0,07,0
-0,4-0,5
0,512,91 ,31 ,1
-0.1
0,02,93,3
10,4-0,5
0,72,22.5
4,06.3
1 .41.03,23.7
-0.3
3,13,7
1,33,2
14,44,75,8
4,06,5
19,2
15,4IS. 924,15.35.0
4,727,912,014,9
6,99.2
20.922.029.04.6
5*817.724.8
27.739,1
19,120.023,323,22,6
23,733, 1
11,227,8
0.00,00,0
0,00,00.0
0,00.00.10,00,0
0,00,40,00,0
0,00,00,00,00,20,0
0,00.00.0
0,00,0
0,00,00,00,00,0
0.00,0
0,00.0
000
000
00000
0100
000010
000
00
00000
00
00
304229
4:13130
273633353 B
43303838
323131382842
423232
2628
2829303339
2829
3329
800 2.7 24,5 0,0
Estimated depth may be unreliable beceuse the stronger pert o f the c o n d u c t or ni 3 M b e d e e P e r or to one side o f the f l i 3 h t liner or because of B shallow dip or overburden effects.
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
F'A O t: 8
tFLIGHT
2
2222
22222
222
222
2222
2
2222
2
22222
22
2
n i-
LINE ANOMALY
800
810810810810
820820820820820
830830830
840840840
850850850850
870
880880880880
890
900900900900900
910910
920
B
ABCD
ABCDE
AEtC
ABC
AKCD
A
ABCD
A
ABCDE
AB
A
CATEGORY
0
0000
00000
000
000
0000
0
0000
0
00000
00
0
rt r n l 4. iA w i\ n
FREQUENCY INPHASE
7,1
7,1-0,1-0,4-0,9
0,1-0.20,60,04,4
-0,6
0.90,6
0,62.40.2
-0.10.1
-0.20,2
0,2
1,0-1,1-1.5-0.8
-1.5
-0.3-1.62.00.5
-0,7
3,74,3
3,3
M n i A i n
4510 QUAD*
27,2
33,39,72,93.3
5,36,52.9
14.521 t 5
3.311.515.5
16.023.215.2
9.08,615,019.1
18,7
2,68,09,57,6
11,5
1 1 , 212,235,17,86.7
23.530.0
30.3
CONDUCTOR CTP DEPTH H
MHOS MTRS
0.1
0.10,00.00.0
0,00.00.00,00,0
0,00,00,0
0,00,00,0
0,00,00,00,0
0,0
0.00.00,00,0
0,0
0,00,00,00,00,0
0,00,0
0,0
0
0000
00
1200
000
000
0000
0
38000
0
00000
00
0
BIRD EIGHT MTRS
30
23343426
3737422932
393029
272525
30322427
34
30282835
25
3028263233
2930
26
Estimated depth may be unreliable? because the stronger pert of the conductor may be deer-er or to one side of the flight line* or because of 3 shallow dip or overburden effects..
1 1 11111111111111
4FLIGHT
222
2oA'.
22
22
22' )a-
2 22
2.222222
22. 222222
222 222
22
ANOMALY LIST, ATIKOKAN AREA
FREQUENCY 4510 LINE ANOMALY CATEGORY INPHASE QUAD.
920920920
9309309309. JO
940940
950950950950 950950
960960960960960960960
970970 970970970970970970
980980980 9GO980980
990990
DCH
ABCD
AB
ABCDE:F
ABCDE:FG
ABCDEFGH
ABC DEF
AB
000
0000
00
0000 00
0000000
00 000000
000 000
00
4*7-0, 10*7
-0,5
0*32,42*0
5,79*5
7,45*29.22*4 4,4
-0,3
-1,0
1*42,8
-0,4-1,0
0*20*3
-0*7
-1*3 -1.1
-1 ,30.50,1
-1,7-0,9
-0*9--1,2
1,6 2*32*81 ,5
0*1-0*1
31 .722*327*6
14*112*924*028*0
30*644*5
29,431 ,048*622.5 38*84*1
3,323,732.816*918.819*320,2
3,37,5 8,410,712*915,93.22,7
2.82.718,8 20,419*720,6
14*814,3
PAGE: 9
CONDUCTOR BIRD GTP DEPTH HEIGHT
MHOS MTR8 MTRB
0.00,00,0
0.00.00.00,0
0,00*1
0,10,00.10,0 0,00,0
0,00,00.00.00,00,00,0
0.00,0 0,00,00.00*00*00,0
0,00,00*0 0,00,00,0
0,00,0
000
0000
00
zQ00 00
0000000
2090000000
000 000
00
262730
34402728
3030
22273133 3037
36272924272629
-209
29 272631303736
424.1.33 362927
2933
l
l
l
Estimated depth may be unreliable because the stronger pert of the conductor may be deeper or to one side of the flight line* 1 or because of a shallow dip or overburden effects.
111111111
I ^H1
111
111111
———— —— ̂^""1™™
PAGE 10
^ ANOMALY LIST , ATIKOKAN AREA
CONDUCTOR BIRDFREQUENCY 4510 GTP DEPTH HEIGHT
FLIGHT LINE ANOMALY CATEGORY INPHASE QUAD* MHOS MTRS MTRS
2 990 C 0 5*0 26,8 0,0 0 302 990 D 0 12.1 51,5 0,1 0 252 990 E 0 2*0 23*0 0,0 0 292 990 F 0 3*6 37,0 0,0 0 262 990 G 0 -1.5 8,4 0,0 0 31
2 1000 A 0 2,0 23,5 0*0 0 292 1000 B 0 2*1 16*2. 0,0 0 32 2 1000 C 0 5,5 32,9 0.0 0 262 1000 D 0 10*6 57,8 0,1 0 232 1000 E 0 12,3 49,5 0.1 0 26 2 1000 F 0 10.4 41.4 0,1 0 272 1000 (3 0 2,3 20,9 0.0 0 302 1000 H 0 3,0 28.1 0.0 0 20
Estimated depth nisy be unreliable because the stronger partof the conductor mey be deeper or to one side of the flight line? or because of s shallow dip or overburden effects,
Ontario
Ministry of Nat
GEOPHYSICAL - GEOLCM TECHNICAL DAr
52BMNW8870 2.82M SAWBILL BAY/MARMION 900
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) Helicopter-borne magnetometer, VLF-EMTownship or Are* Sawbill Bay, Atikokan ___________Claim HniHCT(s) Falconbridge Limited --——-————
Survey Company Aerodat Ltd. ____________________ Author of Report G. A. BOUStead _______________Address of Author 3883 Nashua Drive, Misslssauga, Ontario Covering Dates of Survey 10/12/84 to 14/1/85
Total Miles of Line Hut nil(linecutting 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.
Geophysical—Electromagnetic.—Magnetometer——Radiometric———Other______
DAYS per claim
Geological.Geochemical.
AIRBORNE CREDITS (Special proviiion credit* do not apply to airborne lurveyi)
Magnetometer Electromagnetic Radiometric(enter days per claim)
Geophysical Certificate requested DATE- /rf s L - fry SIGNATURE:.
Author of Report or Agent
Res. Geol.. .Qualifications.Previous Surveys
File No. Type Date Claim Holder
MINING CLAIMS TRAVERSED List numerically
18819503""""""'(prefix)'TB819504
TB8T9525t'""""""(nunXer)"TB819526
TB81950S
TB819506
.188.19527..,
TB819478
TB819508
TB819511 TB819483
TB819512 TB819484
lB..8J..9^13i................JBi8].9485 i
TB819486
TB819515 TB819487••/••••(••••••••••••••••••••^•••••••••••^•••••••••
TB819517 TB819489*iO*T*lo*T*li'********4**t***************t****f ••••t t O* •••tt*
TB819518 TB8V9490* iO*T*lorT*l*T**f ••••*****kt****t***ttt**i***tti*l*t******t**
TB81S51J9 TB819491*l*Yci*l*'TrT*l4T**********************t*********t**t**t**t****t
TB&1SS22.. TB819523
l
TB819524
TOTAL CLAIMS.
837 (6/79)
GEOPHYSICAL TECHNICAL DATA
GROUND SURVEYS — If more than one survey, specify data for each type of survey
Number of Stations. Station interval —— Profile scale ————
.Number of Readings JLine spacing ————
Contour interval.
C Instrument.Accuracy — Scale constant. Diurnal correction method.Base Station check-in interval (hours). Base Station location and value ___
lsl
Instrument,Coil configuration Coil separation — Accuracy ————— Method:
Parameters measured.
C3 Fixed transmitter D Shoot back Q In line D Parallel line
(specify V.L.F. nation)
O
Instrument.Scale constant.Corrections made.
Base station value and location.
Elevation accuracy.
ZSN
entb O
Instrument ————————— Method O Time Domain Parameters — On time ———
- Off time ——.— Delay time ———— Integration time.
D Frequency Domain _ Frequency ————. _ Range———————
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 SURVEYS~ , , v Electromagnetic Type of survey(s) —————————-————Instrument(s) Aftrnriat. 3-frpqiiPnry systen
(specify for each type of turvey) Accuracy——JLRE!__________
(specify for each type of turvey)Aircraft ..-d Aerospatiale 350D_____________Sensor altitudeNavigation and flight path recovery ™thnH Motorola Mini-Ranger plus Geocam tracking camera
Aircraft altitude.—^!!! __________________________ Line Spacing Miles flown over total area "O __________________ 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
p. p. m. p. p. b.
O D D
Cu, Pb, Zn,
Others ————
Ni, Co, Ag, Mo, As.-(circle)
Field Analysis (.Extraction Method. Analytical Method- Reagents Used——
Field Laboratory Analysis No.(^-——————-
SAMPLE PREPARATION (Includes drying, icreening, crushing, ashing)
Extraction Method. Analytical Method- Reagents Used__
Commercial Laboratory (. Name of Laboratory— Extraction Method—— Analytical Method —— Reagents Used-————
.tests)
.tests)
-tests)
General. General.
Ontario
Ministry of Natural Resources
GEOPHYSICAL - GEOLOGICAL - GEOCHEMICAL TECHNICAL DATA STATEMENT
File.
Type of Survey (s) Township or Area Claim Holder (s)
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.
Helicopter-borne magnetometer, VLF-EMSawbill Bay , AtikokanFalconbridge Limited
Survey Company Author of Report Address of Autho Covering Dates of
Total Miles of Lin
SPECIAL PRO^CREDITS REQ
Aerodat Ltd *G. A. Boustead
r 3883 Nashua Drive, Mississauga* OntarioSnrvPy 10/12/84 to 14/1/85
P r,,,t "H
/IS1ONS UESTED
ENTER 40 days (includes line cutting) for first survey.ENTER 20 days for each additional survey using same grid.
(linecutting to office)
DAYS-, , . . per claim Geophysical
—Mflgn*"t"1rt''t''r
—Radiometric-fitter
Opnlngiral ,
fV^rhTniral
AIRBORNE CREDITS (Special provision credit, do not apply to airborne lurveyi)
Magnetometer F.Wtrnmaornptir A RnHinmptrir
GeophysicalPATR. tlj - 6
Res. Geol.Previous Surveys
(enter days per claim) ^Certificate requested f?/?/? y' #S~ SIGNATURE! /{fo&l- ——— S
Author of Report or Agent
Qualifications
File No. Type Date Claim Holder
RECfcW^o*jfiN 1 T 1W
^ , ivnr^ *S CT\OH•"""••"^^•tWiD*-**'*""""""
MINING CLAIMS TRAVERSED Lilt numerically
TB819503 TB819525limih)
819504
819505
(number)819526
819527Ql QCA4C ' ftl OA7Qo i y*)\jv -" -'O i j?*?/ o
819507 819479: |
819509 i819510• •••••••t*Ai*Tt**l***t********
,,,,8}.?.5J.L..........
,,,,8.].9.5.].2..,.,.,,
819515
819516
819517819518
819481
819482 it************t***t**t***t*t******* '8194,83 . , g
,.sm8i,,,,,,,,,. s ,m?.^...,,,,,,......
819486819487
819488
819489819490
819519
819520
819521
819522
81 9523 ^
819524 STOTAL CLAIMS 38
837 (6/79)
GEOPHYSICAL TECHNICAL DATA
GROUND SURVEYS — If more than one survey, specify data for each type of survey
Number of Stations. Station interval __ Profile scale ————
.Number of Readings
.Line spacing ̂ —.-—
Contour interval.
Instrument.Accuracy — Scale constant. Diurnal correction method.Base Station check-in interval (hours). Base Station location and value ___
ELECTROMAGNETIC
Instrument ,
Coil configuration Coil separation , _Arrnrary
Method: Frequency
D Fixed transmitter D Shoot back D In line Q Parallel line
(specify V.L.F. nation)
Parameters measured.
IO
InstrumentScale constant.Corrections made.
Base station value and location,
ZogNS -t
2Q tt O
Elevation accuracy.
Instrument ———.———— Method D Time DomainParameters — On time .
- Off time— Delay time ———— Integration time.
D Frequency Domain _ Frequency ______ Range ——.——.—
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 SURVEYS~ t , . ElectromagneticType of survey(s)—————————r————Instrument(s) Aerodat 3-frequency system
(specify for each type of lurvey) Accuracy——LM!___________
(specify for each type of survey)Aircraft .I^H Aerospatiale 350D—————^—————Sensor altitude—JQULNavigation and flight path recovery ™ Pthr.H Motorola Mini-Ranger plus fteor.am tracking ramsra
, , . j 60m w . ., . 100mAircraft altitude_______________________________Line Spacing-^—-—^-™u——^—^——, Miles flown over total arpa 250___________________Over claims only——SB_________
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 O
p. p.m, Op. p. b. O
Cu, Pb, Zn, Ni, Co, Ag, Mo, As.-(circle)
Others ———--——--——-————^—...^—.Field Analysis (.
Extraction Method. Analytical Method- Reagents Used——
Field Laboratory AnalysisNo. --—-————
SAMPLE PREPARATION(Includes drying, icreening, 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.
, Ministry of Natural Resources
Ontario
Report of Work(Geophysical, Geological, Geochemical and Expenditures)
Mining Act
Instructions: — Please type or print. /'— If number of mining claims traversed
exceeds space on this form, attach a/tfst.Note: — Only days credits calculated iff the
"Expenditures" section may bs^enteredin the "Expend. Days Cry'columns.
— Do not use shaded areas belrfw.Type of Survey(s)
Helicopter-borne magnetic, VLF-EMClaim Holderis) " ——.
Falconbridge LimitedAddress
Box 40, Commerce Court West, Toronto, Ontario M5L 1B4Survey Company""" " -—- - iDatFbf Survey (from sTto)
AerodatLtd. Ml iU.1% l 1A ,TL
Township or Area ^f
Sawbill Bay, Atikoj^enProspector's Licence No.
A21I
Name and Address of Author (of Geo-Technicat report)
G.A. Boustead, 3883 Nashua Drive, Mississauga, OntarioCredits 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 CreditsAirborne Geophysici
Note: Special provisions credits do not apply to Airborne Surveys.
Geophysical
- Electromagnetic
- Magnetometer
- Radiometric
- Other
Geological
Geochemical
Geophysical
- Electromagnetic
- Magnetometer
- Radiometric
- Other
Geological
Geochemical
il CertificateElectromagnetic
Magnetometer
Radiometric f
Days per Claim
——— ———
—— —— —
Days per Claim
— - ———
{Days/er Cla/n
i
Expenditures (excludes power stripping) j
Mining Claims Traversed (List in nuryfeVical sequence)
Type of Work Performed ZPerformed on Claim{s)
Calculation of Expenditure Days Credits
Total ExpendituresTotal
Days Credits
InstructionsTotal Days Credits may be apportioned at the claim holder's choice. Enter number of day/credits por claim selected in columns at right.
Total number of mining claims covered by this report of work.
For Office Use OnlyTotal Days Cr. Recorded
Date Recorded
Date Approved as Recorded
Mining Recorder
Branch Director
Certification Verifying Report of Workl hereby certify that l 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 Postal Address of Person Certifying
U)Date Certified
~ trrCertifi
1362 (8 f/HI
FALCONBRIDGE NICKEL MINES LIMITED
Suite 100 - 3074 Portage Ave.Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3K OY2Telex 07-57251 Telephone 204/888-9860
June 12, 1985
Mr. S.E. YundtDirector, Land Management BranchWhitney Block, Room 6643Queen's ParkToronto, OntarioM7A 1W3
Dear Mr. Yundt:
Re; Airborne Geophysical Certificate, Sawbill Bay Area, Atikokan
Please find enclosed a report by Aerodat Ltd. covering helicopter-borne surveys flown for Falconbridge Limited in the Sawbill Bay area, Atikokan. The report describes the results of 250 line miles of electromagnetic, magnetic and VLF-EM surveys covering an area approximately 18 square miles.
The electromagnetic survey is applied to a group of 38 claims, covering approximately 2.4 square miles which were staked for Falconbridge Limited after the survey was flown. These claims are listed on the accompanying Report of Work and are shown on the attached map. The magnetometer and VLF-EM surveys will be applied to other Falconbridge Limited claims in a separate Report of Work. These maps are not included in the Aerodat report submitted herewith.
Please issue a Airborne Geophysical Certificate for the 38 claims.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
RECEIVEDR.B. Band ,,,M -j w IQQC Senior Project Geologist -"^ l ' loOJ
RBB/lb MINING LANDS SECTION
cc: RHT
Enclosure
FALCONBRIDGE NICKEL MINES LIMITED
Suite 100 - 3074 Portage Ave.Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3K OY2Telex 07-57251 Telephone 204/888-9860
June 12, 1985
Mr. S.E. YundtDirector, Land Management BranchWhitney Block, Room 6643Queen's ParkToronto, OntarioM7A 1W3
Dear Mr. Yundt:
Re: Airborne Geophysical Certificate, Sawbill Bay Area, Atiko
Please find enclosed a report by\Aerodat Ltd. covering helicopter-borne surveys flown for Falconbridge Limited in\the Sawbill Bay area, Atikokan. The report describes the results of 250 line miles of electromagnetic, magnetic and VLF-EM surveys covering an area approximately 18 square miles.
The electromagnetic survey is applied\to a group/of 38 claims, covering approximately 2.4 square miles which were staked formalconbridge Limited after the survey was
:companying Report of Work and are shown 1 'VLF-EM surveys will be applied to
These maps are
flown. These claims are listed on theon the attached map. The magnetometer arother Falconbridge Limited claims in a separate Report of Work.not included in the Aerodat report submitted herewith.
Please issue a Airborne Geophysica-1 Certificate for the 38 claims.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
R.B. Band Senior Proje,
RBB/lb
cc: RHT
Enclosure
Geologist
1985 01 25 F1lei 2.8214
Mining RecorderMinistry of Natural ResourcesP.O. Box 5000Thunder Bay* OntarioP7C 566
Dear Madam:
REt Airborne Geophysical Certificate on Mining Claims TB 819478, et 41, 1n the Sawbill Bay Area
Enclosed 1s an Airborne Geophysical Certificate Issued under Section 78 of the Mining Act R.S.O. 1980. ,
Please Indicate on your records that the time forpperfor- mlng the first all subsequent periods of work for claims listed shall fall due on year .later than tht times prescri bed In subsection l of Section 76.
Yours sincerely,
S. E. YundtDirectorLand Management BranchWhitney Block, Room 6643 Queen's Park Toronto, Ontario M7A 1U3 Phone:(416)965-4888D. K1nv1g:mc cc:
cc:
Encl
Resident Geologist Thunder Bay, OntarioFalconbridge Nickel Mines
Limited Manitoba
cc t Falconbridge LimitedToronto, Ontario
cciAttention! 6.A. Boustead
Ontario
Ministry ol . 'Mural k sources
AirborneGeophysicalCertificate
The Mining Act
This is to certify that. Falconbridge Limited _____has met the requirements of Section 78 of The Mining Act,
with respect to the following mining claims in the Township {or Area) of _____Sawbill Bay—.-——————-——————-—.,
Mining Claims (Picas* lilt)
TB 819503 to 27 inclusive 819478 to 90 inclusive 819491 - 92
Data Director^Land Management Branch
1332 (82/6)
FALCONBRIDGE NICKEL MINES LIMITED
Suite 100 - 3074 Portage Ave.Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3K OY2Telex 07-57251 Telephone 204/888-9860
June 19, 1985
Mr. Arthur BarrLand Management BranchWhitney Block, Room 6643Queen's ParkToronto, OntarioM7A 1W3
Dear Mr. Barr:
Re: Airborne Geophysical Certificate, Sawbill Bay Area, Atikokan
Since our telephone conversation yesterday I have discovered a further error in my filing of the Aerodat airborne surveys in the Sawbill Bay area. Two claims staked after the survey, TB 819491 and TB 819492, were inadvertently omitted from the application for a Geophysical Certificate.
Enclosed is a revised Technical Data Statement showing a total 40 claims staked after the date of the survey. Please issue the Geophysical Certificate to cover all 40 claims.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Yours truly,
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
R.B. BandSenior Project Geologist
RBB/lb
Enclosures
cc: T. Masciotra
Ministry o( Natural
Ontario
AirborneGeophysicalCertificate
r
The Mining Act
This is to certify that. Falconbrtdoe Limited ———.has met the requirements of Section 78 of The Mining Act,
with respect to the following mining claims in the Township (or Area) of —————Sawbill Bay————————,——————— .
Mining Cltlira
TB 819503 to 27 Inclusive 819478 to 90 Inclusive 819491 - 92 ~
;^^ :i l-:
••'i.- ' :"U : ^V;'C ;; r;:'"j li-j^v'"^-'"^' '''^•'^^fiKB-'':•'•jlj^f^l^|;--t!y'ii-
•h;s #-^iiiii ?'-"Wfc^W' :^.i^*UvfJy|' -:'UK
of'
REG:MINING LANDS
SECTION
JUL O 21986
FALCONBRIDGE
Falconbridge LimitedBox 40, Commerce Court West Toronto, Canada MSL 1B4 Telephone 416/863-7000 Telex 065-24211 Rapif ax 364-8986
June 27, 1986
Mr. S.E. YundtDirector, Land Management BranchWhitney Block, Room 6643Queen's ParkToronto, ONM7A 1W3
Dear Mrs. Yundt:
RE: AIRBORNE GEOPHYSICAL CERTIFICATE ON MINING CLAIMS TB 819478, ET AL, IN THE SAWBILL BAY AREA
PREPARE REPLYD COMMF.NTS PLF.ASE i
T.~cTr,MnH"R. J. l
liIF:-J VL l'fcTTcHARWESKY^
RETURN TO K.
Reference is made to your letter of June 25, 1985 hereunder you forwarded to the Mining Recorder for the Thunder Bay Mining Division an Airborne Geophysical Certificate issued under Section 78 of the Mining Act R.S.O. 1980 requesting that she indicate on the records of the claims concerned that the time for performing the first and all subsequest periods of work for such claims falls due one year later than the times prescribed in subsection l of Section 76.
As you may be aware your letter and the certificates were never received by the Mining Recorder and consequently not recorded on the records for the claims. Therefore the claim lapsed at their anniversary date, January 31, 1986.
On June 26, 1986 the Mining and Lands Commissioner made an order granting relief against forfeiture and extending the time for performance of deficiency of work until July 25, 1986.
We are advised by the Mining Recorder that she require an original copy of Airborne Geophysical Certificate to fulfill the requirements of Section 78(2) of the Act. Therefore would you please forward to us a certified original duplicate of the certificate in order that we may recorded it within the required time.
Yours truly,
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
Property Manager
RHTtbm Encl.
cc: D. KinvigA. Hayes, Mining Recorder, Thunder Bay Mining Division
FL59
- 2 -
FALCONBRIDGE
Falconbridge LimitedBox 40, Commerce Court West Toronto, Canada M5L1B4 Telephone 416/863-7000 Telex065-24211 Rapifax 364-8986
June 26, 1986
COURIER
Mrs. A. M. HayesMining RecorderMinistry of Natural Resources435 South James St.P.O. Box 5000Thunder Bay, ONP7C 5G6
Dear Madam:
RE: RELIEF AGAINST FORFEITURE, EXTENSION OF TIME AND FILING OF AN AIRBORNE GEOPHYSICAL CERTIFICATE ON MINING CLAIMS TB 819478 , ET AL, IN THE SAWBILL BAY AREA,COMMISSIONERS FILE NO. 20922-27
We enclose herewith the original of an order by the Mining and Lands Commissioner granting relief against forfeiture under Section 86 of the Mining Act in respect of the above refered claims and granting an extension of time for performance of deficiency of work.
In connection with the deficiency of work, the forfeiture resulted by the failure of the Director of Land Management Branch's letter of June 25, 1985 and the enclosed original Airborne certificate being received in your office and consequently the certificate not being recorded on title to the said claim. Therefore we enclose a copy of the Director's letter together with a copy of the Airborne Geophysical Certificate issued under Section 78 of the Mining Act R.S.O. 1980.
We are sending a request to the Land Management Branch asking them for a certified duplicate original of the Airborne Geophysical certificate and will forward it to you as soon as it is received.
We would confirm that the fees of $10.00 per claim ^400.00) was sent to you under cover of our letter of June 20, 1986 which you have today verbally confirmed receiving.
We trust that upon your receipt of the enclosed the claims concerned will be placed in good standing.
We would also request that you please indicate on your records that the time for performing the first all subsequent periods of work for claims listed shall fall due on year later than the times prescribed in subsection l of Section 76.
Yours truly,
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
I H. Tays Property Manager
RHT:bm Encl.
cc: S. E. Yundt/D. K^nvig
f!60
- 2 -
—Ontario
^/x).
Mining and Lands Commissioner
416/965-1824 Box 330 24th Floor 700 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z6
REFER OUR FILE #20922-27
June 26, 1986
Falconbridge Limited P.O. Box 40 Commerce Court West Toronto, Ontario MSL 1B4
Attention; Mr. R.H. Tays
Dear Sir:
Re: Mining Claims TB-819478 et al. ___Marmion Lake Area__________
Your application herein has been received.
We hand you herewith an order allowing relief from forfeiture and an extension of time until the 25th day of July, 1986 for performance of deficiency of work on the claims in question.
The order should be filed, at once, with the Mining Recorder at Thunder Bay, Ontario.
It might be pointed out that the order cannot be recorded as required by the Act until the Recorder has received the required recording fees of $10.00 for each claim.
Yours very truly,
JK/dt Enclosure
(Miss) J. Armstrong Acting Mining and Lands Commissioner
rMining Lands Section
Control Sheet
TYPE OF SURVEY
MINING LANDS COMMENTS:
File No
GEOPHYSICAL
GEOLOGICAL
GEOCHEMICAL
EXPENDITURE
MWW
Signature of Assessor
Date
B*•Z V ' ',•^rlr.;, fflsb y l ri)
•*~- -* ^g rtT•TT--J OO tM
2 l S 9
w val w i,-W •~,.^'- "C '
.. x ^
U O S A 6 j U l -j
3H1 WONdlHSNMOl 3H1 JO
t/)UJ
O ZUJ
aL J
U.
UJ
a
a*h- O
gJ)ttLJ
Q
tt U
UJZUJ
1 KUJu.4 J* O
UJ
z a
"SEINE RIVER DIVERSION" ME> OURSE OF THE SEINE RIVER Div
U
UJ
S ?t -1<^ uu. ^
. Ouj 3
< 0j Z•f
ARMION LAKE . THROUGH RAFT AKE.BARR LAKE. REED LAKE.
2 j
. acUJ^
u *UJ bJz zs*
UJ
t- t-
ND INTERMEDIATE TERRITORY 'ITH THE PRESENT COURSE OF
< S
KUJ >dUJZ—
EST OF TRACY RAPIDS
ALL LANDS WITHIN THE SE
i
t-UJUJu.
UJ
(XI t-
O
(VERSION BELOW A CONTOUR
O
2 ttO uI a-
4 UJ
•* U-
* Ot S
BOVE THAT WHICH WILL PERM LOW OF WATER OF 20.OOO CUI
< u.
u-1(0
O
<Zu. O
oUJ(D
ECOND ARE SUBJECT TO THE
ATERS ACT
*n *
*
2OPISPOSI
o
AREAS WITHDRAWN FROM
>--1
M.R.O. -MINING RIGHTS ON
-j^
•*x S.R.O. -SURFACE RIGHTSOI
inRIGHT:
UJO
M.+ S. - MINING AND SURFA
V
*
1
ru
l? *U. '~
; ''.
(1 5
DMcription Onfer No. Data
M.NA Pit 4/3/77
^
Q 0 OJ
J
REFETfJETNCES
SEINE RIVER DIVERSION ACT 1952 I ELIZABETH U CHAP,98,
"SEINE RIVER DIVERSION" MEANS THE WATER COURSE OF THE SEINE RIVER DIVERTED FROM MAflMION LAKE, THROUGH RAFT LAKE, FINLAYSON LAKE,BARR LAKE,REED LAKE,AND MOORED LAKE AND INTERMEDIATE TERRITORY TO CONNECT . WITH THE PRESENT COURSE OF THE SEINE RIVER WEST OF TRACY RAPIDS.
ALL LANDS WITHIN THE SEINE RIVER DIVERSION BELOW A CONTOUR OF THREE ^EET ABOVE THAT WHICH WILL PERMIT A MAXIMUM FLOW OF WATER OF 20,000 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND ARE SUBJECT TO THE BEDS OF NAVIGABLE WATERS ACT.
AREAS WITHDRAWN FROM DISPOSITION
M.R.6. - MINING RIGHTS ONLY
** t.R.O. *- SURFACE RIGHTS ONLY
M.+ S. - MINING AND SURFACE RIGHTS
OMw No.U.NX. Rir
DM*4/3/77 M -f S
F H.Yl6325
52Bl4NWe070 2.8214 SAWBILL BAY/MARMION 21(3
Norway Lake G- 54591 \b
T ^/TTB "" [7™? f™
*a-^**j
.. J ir!!m X iTB
i/ l/i - "W' ^ -i ...J- f
RAMSAY
W R l GUTt a t u 8 refer to Twp.
49 00
CM
If)
lO
03
Q)L-
OECD
CD
48 52 30
91 30 91 15
Sabawi Lake Me Caul Twp. G- 554
f ^ E N '
A F
5 U R V E
^ SHORELINE OF FINLAYSON LAKE AT ELEVATION .39544 ABOVE MEAN SEA L 5 IN RELATION TO THE DRAINAGE AREA AND T Mf l \ OROUN3 CONTROL iURVEr.BY 5 G HANCOCK O L i OF STEEP ROCK IRON MINES LTD. SEPT 30"i PLAN L.23-22 FILE i24in
L O 7017 TO THE CALAND ORE CO. LTD TO THE LAND FOR PURPOSES INCIDENTAL TO DEVELOPMENT OF AN IRON MINE IN PART O EAST ARM OF STEEP ROCK LAKE FILE 1
LAKES AND RIVERS TRAVERSED BY D.J GiLloN OL S 1923SEINE RIVER AND SEINE BAY - PLAN R 4-4 MARMION LAKE - PLAN: N25-27SAWBILL LAKE, LYNX HEAD LAKE , TURTLE LAKE AND HAWK BAY, ON PLAN LI4-26
MERIDIAN LINE BY TB SPEIGHT OLS '697 FIELD' NOTE BOOK NO 2527
LEGENDHIGHWAY AND ROUTf No
OTHER ROADS ,
TRAILS
SURVEYED L iNtSTOWNSHIPS BASE LINES. ETCLOTS MINING Ci AIMS PARCf L S t K
UNSURVf Yf U L INtSLOT L'NtSPARCEL BOUNOAH rMINING CLAIMS f f(
HAILAAT ANN H li ,H T s ' AA'
P t- H ( MS, i A i s r M f A
K f- L L H 'i i\
v 'SlCJN OM ,t)Mf**
Rt SfcP v ATtONS
OH i(ilN AL SMO'U L -Nt
MAWSM ( )P Ml iSK * :
MINf S
THAVi HSE MONUMi N r
DISPOSITION OF CROWN LANDS
. OF DOCUMENT
PATENT, SURFACE ^MINING WIGHTSSuHfACE RIGHTS ON l Y
MtNiNG HIGHTSONL Y
LEASt. SURfACE 81 MINING RIGHTS
.SURFACE RIGHTSONLY
.MINING RIGHTS ONLY
LICfcNCfc OF OCCUPATION ..
ORDER IN COUNCIL
RtbERVATlON
CANl tLLLLj
SAND ft GRAVEL
WOTf M.(M.M(, W.^T '•13 vfSTfD
SYMBOL
ft l
'** OWu'.lfU A^ i 11* i'O
"K H ' M a .B- THl ' H
SCALE 1 INCH 40 CHAINS
O 'OCX' ,'DOO 6OOO
O ^ Mi T Mf s
JOOO
ARffl SAWBILL BAY(MARMION LAKE)
M N M ADMIMSTRATIVE DISTRICT
ATIKOKANMINING DIVISION
THUNDER BAYLAND TlUtS/ REGISTRY DIVISION
RAINY RIVERMinistryof LandNatural Management
Resources Branch
Oilt Nov. 13/01 Numfeti
G-558
O
CONDUCTOR AXES
EM Anomaly A, in-phase amplitude 7 p,p.m. Conductivity thickness range 2 (see code)
HEM possible bedrock conductor axis
Horizontal control........... . ... . MRS m
Average bird height ............... 30 metres
Line spacing............... - -..... 100 metres
V2VLF-EM conductor axis
EM RESPONSE
Conductivity fNctams in mho*
® 60-120
© 90-60
® 15-30
® S-19
(D 4-8
(D 2-4
0 1-2
O o-'
AERODAT HEM SYSTEM RESPONSE VERTICAL HALF-PLANE
f- Frequency(Hi)ir t - Cod due tone* (il*m*m)
9I 0 30'
49 000
IOO IN-PHASE (ppm)
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
AIRBORNE ELECTROMAGNETIC SURVEY INTERPRETATION MAP
ATIKOKAN AREAONTARIO
SCALE 1/15,000 O Kilometre
1/2 O 1/2 Mile
VAERODAt LIMITED
DATE: December, 1984
N.T.S. 52 BMAP NO
J 8451
52B14NW0070 2.8214 SAWBILL BAY/MARMION 220
Falconbridge i td jnpatented claims
Patented claims
p. p.m.30 -j
In-phase
Quadrature
Sensor elevation -30 metres
9I 0 30'
49 000'
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
AIRBORNE ELECTROMAQNETIC SURVEY PROFILES - 932 Hz (coaxial)
ATIKOKAN AREAONTARIO
SCALE 1/15,000 O l Kilometre
1/2 1/2 Mile
VAERODATLIMftED
DATE' December, 1984
N.T.S. No' 52 B
MAP No:
J 8451
. ,.——— ... .....•••(•l Mil l52B14NW0070 2.8214 SAWBILL BAY/MARMION
3
E 1" \] Falconbridge Ltd unpatented claims /LJf " "1 Patented claims
Airborne geophysical certificate requested
p. p. m.
In-phase
^v ^Quadrature
Sensor elevation - 30 metres
9I 030'
49 0 OO'
FALCONBRIDGE LIMITED
AIRBORNE ELECTROMAGNETIC SURVEY PROFILES -932 Hz (coaxial)
ATIKOKAN AREAONTARIO
SCALE 1/15,000 O l Kilometre
1/2 1/2 Mile
f'AERODAT LIMITED
DATE- December, 1984
N.T.S. No-- 52 B
MAP No'
J 8 451
52BI4NW0070 2,8214 SAWBILL BAY/MARMION S40
