The last press release from CanAlaska and some details about their past drilling southeast of McTavish raised some questions for me so I sent an e-mail to Brian last Sunday. The initial location shown on the map posted by CanAlaska didn’t make sense to me so I asked Brian if it was more conceptual than real.

(I took the image from one of Portee's posts)

I also asked about the drilling problems CanAlaska encountered in the high alteration zones and the fact that they didn’t appear to intersect a continuous graphitic zone that we have at McTavish. His reply was:

Thank you for your letter and detailed inquiry. The map shown is conceptual. The margins of the conductors have been fruitful places to explore for uranium deposits in the district. Drilling sequence is also partly determined by logistics, i.e. making the exploration dollar go farther by drilling in the most efficient sequence possible. With regard to the Cree East exploration, the ubiquitous nature of the graphitic pelite in our drill holes gives us confidence in our interpretation of the conductor, regardless of other drill results nearby. Conductors are just that, areas of contrasting electrical properties that can be related to a variety of geologic processes. Drill holes are the only way to provide “ground truth” to deeply buried features. Our drilling contractor has the best track record in terms of core recovery in the district. To date, we have not had the core recovery problems that many others have reported in the district.

I couldn’t get any details about drill locations or sequence but that will only be important later if the program is successful. I’m impressed that he responded Monday morning when they must be very busy with all the drilling programs underway. The issues I raised weren’t that big a deal and I believe we’re in good hands technically.