Thanks for the reminder of BOW,s great post.

I have to point out though that when BOW said we were looking SOUTH, we weren,t. That has changed, we were looking north. Its not BOWS fault, because at the time I thought it was looking SOUTH, but after HOG and I argued for a week or so, he called Lloyd and got the verdict. WE WERE LOOKING NORTH.

This does not change much in BOWS post and it doesnt disturb his math because he uses 5 g/t which could very well be in that anomaly. Where the anomaly that BOW did his numbers on, we have only surface samples there that would put the C-4 vein pretty well in the very spot BOW speaks of, or an extension of the C-1 VEIN.. It is also possible that the anomaly BOW peaks of here is an extension of the C-5 VEIN,remote, but possible. The drill hole will be really exciting, look at the surface grades below. This came from Brophy,s early report.