Exploration Potential of the South Chibougamau Volcano-Sedimentary

Documents complémentaires / Additional files Licence / License

CAMPBELL CHIBOUGAMAU MINES LIMITED

CHIBOUGAMAU EXPLORATION JOINT VENTURE

EXPLORATION POTENTIAL

OF THE

SOUTH CHIBOUGAMAU VOLCANO—SEDIMENTARY BELT

Chibougamau, Que. W. Hamilton, May, 1977. Geologist.

GM 69641t Ressources naturelles ot Faune

Dir information géologique TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

I) SUMMARY 1 II) INTRODUCTION 1 III) EXPLORATION HISTORY 2 IV) GENERAL GEOLOGY OF THE SOUTH CHIBOUGAMAU VOLCANO-SEDIMENTARY BELT 2 V) MINERALIZATION 5 VI) EXPLORATION POTENTIAL 6 VII) PRINCIPAL TARGET AREAS 8 VIII) CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 IX) REFERENCES 11

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I COMPARATIVE STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMNS APPENDIX II - DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL TARGET AREAS AND DIAMOND DRILL HOLE SUMMARY.

MAPS

MAP 1 C.E.J.V. GENERAL PROGRAM, PROGRESS MAP 1" = 4 mi. GE-67 LEMOINE AND RINFRET TOWNSHIPS 1" = 1 mi. GE-69 QUEYLUS AND DOLLIER TOWNSHIPS 1" = z mi. GE-68 BRONGNIART AND HAUY TOWNSHIPS 1" = Z mi. GE-66 SCOTT AND OBALSKI TOWNSHIPS 1" _ 1 mi. GE-74 DAUBREE AND LEVY TOWNSHIPS 1" = 1 mi. I - SUMMARY The south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt represents part of the Chibougamau Exploration Joint Venture's General Pro- gram. The present study involves a general compilation and evaluation of available data on the south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt. The location of the area studied is shown on map 1.

The section of the volcano-sedimentary belt studied is 80 km. long, covering 9 townships and encompasses the southern part of the Joint Venture area. There are presently 2 operating mines within this area; the volcanogenic type Lemoine Mine (zinc-copper) and the vein-type Opemisca Mine (copper-gold). As well there are 3 known volcanogenic deposits located within the area; two of which are potential producers (Selco's Scott zinc-copper deposit and Opemisca's zinc-copper deposit). A third potential producer is Rio Tinto Canadian Exploration Limited's recently discovered vein-type (copper) deposit in Obalski township.

The present exploration potential of the majority of the south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt is low. Most of the favourable ground has been either started or explored by many companies. As well the speculative nature of the interpreted presence of the Waconichi Formation (Lemoine Mine host) in Rinfret, Brongniart, Hauy and Levy townships does little to enhance the potential of the area. However, 5 principal exploration target areas, ranging in exploration potential from moderate to high, have been identified for reconnaissance geological prospecting or geophysical follow-up. These areas, in order of priority, are listed below: ❑ Brongniart township, Area 1 L?;Queylus township, Area 1 O Queylus township, Area 2 O Rinfret-Vimont townships, Area 3 ODollier township, Area 2

II - INTRODUCTION During the period of February to April 1977 a regional compilation of the south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt was undertaken. The compilation was intended to define the stratigraphy of the volcano-sedimentary belt as well as to outline any geologically and/or geophysically favourable target areas within this belt. The area studied comprised the volcano- sedimentary band extending from Rinfret to Levy townships (see map 1). With regard to the compilationoof geophysical and diamond drilling data, only those areas which were not staked as of April 25th, 1977 have been considered. It is intended r NUMÉRIQUE

Page(s) de dimension(s) hors standard numérisée(s) et positionnée(s) -à la suite des présentes pages standard

DIGITAL FORMAT

Non-standard size page(s) scanned and placed after these standard pages that this facet of the compilation should be a continuing process; that is, up-dated every one or two months as more ground becomes open.

Five principal exploration target areas are described in this report. Areas which require the acquisition of additional assessment data in order to better evaluate their potential or exhibit a low exploration potential and a Diamond Drill Hole Summary are referred to in Appendix II.

III - EXPLORATION HISTORY Exploration has been carried out spordically in this region since the early 1950's with fairly intensive programs being launched in 1960 (Campbell), 1969 (Hudson Bay Explora- tion and Development Co. Ltd.) and 1970 (Patino); however, it was after the discovery of the volcanogenic massive sulphide Lemoine orebody that the region assumed major importance.

In 1972 the Quebec Department of Natural Resources (Q.D.N.R.) released an INPUT survey which included the eastern section of this belt. This precipitated a staking rush with the result that considerable exploration was undertaken in the area. The Lemoine discovery was a direct result of follow-up work done on one of the INPUT anomalies and it precipitated a second staking rush. After the dust had settled, vast portions of the eastern section of this volcano-sedimentary belt had been staked. The recent work done by Q.D.N.R. geologists and various companies in this region resulted in a great accumula- tion of data, but so far has done very little to aid our under- standing of the geology.

IV - GENERAL GEOLOGY OF THE SOUTH -CHIBOUGAMAU VOLCANO-SEDIMENTARY BELT The volcano-sedimentary sequence lies at the eastern extremity of the Matagami-Chibougamau Greenstone Belt in the Superior Structural Province of the Canadian Shield. Norman (1941) divided the volcano-sedimentary sequence into the Pre- Opemisca Group (volcanic rocks) and the Opemisca Series (a post- volcanic sedimentary sequence). This stratigraphic division under- went little change until 1970, when Duquette, basing his interpretation primarily on the stratigraphic succession on the north limb of the Chibougamau anticline named the volcano-sedimentary sequence the Roy Group. He divided the group into three formations which are, from bottom to top, the Waconichi, Gilman and Blondeau. Re- cent mapping by Cimon (1976, 1976a, 1977) enabled him to identify a post-volcanic, sedimentary sequence which he labelled the Stella Formation. As well Cimon reinstated the Opemisca Group and con- siderably altered the stratigraphy of the Roy Group. 3

Three synvolcanic, ultramafic to mafic sills intrude the volcanic sequence in its upper levels (ie; within the Blondeau Formation). The Doré Lake Complex and the Chibougamau Pluton represent post-volcanic igneous complexes. Cimon and Gobeil (1976) state, " we established that the Stella Formation lies unconformably over the older rocks and contains detrital elements derived from both .the Doré Lake Complex and the Chib- ougamau Pluton".

Structurally the rocks have been tightly folded along east- west axes and then gently refolded along north-south axes during the Kenoran Orogeny. In general the synvolcanic sills and post- volcanic igneous complexes occupy the cores of regional anti- clines, whereas the volcano-sedimentary rocks lie in the cores of regional synclines. It should be noted that recent mapping by Cimon (1976a, 1977) in eastern Queylus township indicates that the volcanic sequence is a north-facing homoclinal sequence unconformally overlain by the Opemisca Group sedimentary rocks which occupy the core of the Chapais Syncline. Although it appears that Cimon has established fairly good stratigraphic Control, prev- ous mapping by Q.D.N.R. geologists (Holmes, 1959; Imbault, 1959; Neale, 1959) and by Baker (1974 - unpublished) have shown the volcanic belt to be folded along east-west axes.

Numerous NE and NNE striking faults pass through the region. They are probably related to the regional Grenville Front located in the eastern extremity of the area in that they may have been formed and/or reactivated during the Grenville Orogeny.

With the exception of late phase diabase dykes and the unconformably overlying Proterozoic Chibougamau Series sedimentary rocks all other rocks have undergone greenschist facies metamorphism.

There are two basic problems associated with the south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt. The first is its uncertain correlation with the volcanic sequence on the northern limb of the Chibougamau anticline. The second problem involves the placing of the Lemoine Mine within the stratigraphic sequence. As stated by Allard (1976), "The debate between Cimon and myself is more than an academic dispute on stratigraphic placement, a commonplace argument within the geological profession, since the efforts of companies should be directed at two completely different units depending on which version is right". It should be noted that there is complete agreement between Allard and Cimon re- garding the existence of the post-volcanic Stella Formation. The discord arises over petrology and stratigraphic interpretation. Although Allard's interpretation, with some local modifi- cation was used as the basis for this compilation, it should be emphasized that attempts were made to define geological environ- ments favourable for the deposition of volcanogenic massive sulphides similar to the Lémoine Mine regardless of the stratigraphic terminology applied to the rocks.

The simplified stratigraphy of the south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt is as follows: FORMATION LITHOLOGY Stella Basal conglomerate, sandstone and shale. Blondeau Rhyolite, pyroclastics and interbedded graphitic argillite. Intruded by ultramafic to mafic sills. Gilman Andesite, basalt and minor felsic pyroclastics. Gabbro. Waconichi Quartz-feldspar porphyry (porphyritic soda rhyolite), feldspathic tuff and felsic lavas, minor mafic lavas.

According to Allard (1976) the Waconichi. Formation outcrops immediately southeast of the Doré Lake Complex in Lemoine and Rinfret townships. Allard's proposed stratigraphic placement of the Lemoine Mine is within this belt of felsic volcanic rocks slightly below the Waconichi-Gilman contact and specifi- cally at the contact between a rhyolite and a felsic crystal tuff. Allard also recognized a rhyolite dome in Scott township, immediately north of and adjacent to rocks of the Chibougamau Pluton. He believes that this horizon is correlative with the Waconichi Formation on the southeastern side of the intrusive complexes. In 1976, while following-up an airborne INPUT survey, Selco Mining Corp. discovered interesting pyrite-sphalterite- chalcopyrite mineralization associated with this rhyolite dome. Iain Downie of Selco considers this discovery to be the approximate time equivalent of the Lemoine Mine. The stratiform discovery lies at the contact between the Chibougamau Pluton and a quartz-feldspar porphyry (porphyritic rhyolite) immediately below the Lac Sauvage Iron Formation.

An interesting belt of felsic to intermediate pyroclastic rocks with minor rhyolite and andesite lavas was traced by Holmes (1959) across Brongniart and Hauy townships. It occupies the core of an east-west trending anticline and is flanked to the north and south by thick sequences of intermediate to mafic lavas. Unfortunately the structure and stratigraphy are not clearly defined in this area; however, this felsic zone probably represents the Waconichi Formation. (It is also possible that this zone could represent the felsic phase of the upper Gilman Formation; however, the thickness of the volcanic belt in this region argues against this hypothesis. In any case this zone represents a significant felsic marker "horizon".)

A small wedge of rhyolite and agglomerate outcropping in southwestern Levy township is also interpreted to represent the Waconichi Formation.

The Gilman Formation underlies the majority of the area studied. For the most part it has not been mapped in detail and thus the geology is highly simplified and somewhat ambigu- ous. The Gilman Formation is principally composed of mafic to intermediate lavas and minor felsic to intermediate pyroclastic rocks. Numerous gabbro sills intrude the volcanic rocks.

The Blondeau Formation is presently the object of much controversy. Allard (1976) considers it to conformably over- lie the Gilman Formation and to represent the uppermost formation of the Roy Group. The Blondeau Formation is comprised of rhyolite, felsic to intermediate pyroclastic rocks and interbedded graphitic argillite. It underlies only a small portion of the region. It outcrops in central Levy township where it is intruded by the Roberge (peridotite-pyroxenite), Ventures (pyroxenite-gabbro) and Bourbeau (gabbro) Sills. Allard (1976) has tentatively proposed its existence as an upthrown remnant in southeastern Lemoine and southwestern Rinfret townships.

The Stella Formation forms a band extending through the northern to central section of the belt. It is comprised of conglomerate, sandstone and shale and is characterized by linear zones of airborne E.M. anomalies corresponding to graphitic horizons with or without minor concentrations of pyrite and pyrrhotite.

V - MINERALIZATION Mineralized showings are widespread throughout the south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt. Three major types of sulphide mineral deposition are present within the region. 1) Volcanogenic Environment This type is characterized by massive to disseminated pyrite- pyrrhotite-sphalerite-chalcopyrite mineralization enclosed within or closely associated with volcanic rocks. Two subdivisions of this type have been recognized in the volcanic-sedimentary sequence.

a) "Proximal Type" - Massive sphalerite-chalcopyrite-pyrite mineralization is associated with quartz-feldspar porphyry porphyritic rhyolite) and felsic pyrocalstic rocks; that is, spatially associated with a rhyolite dome. Examples are the Lemoine Mine and the Selco Scott Lake discovery. b) "Distal Type" - Disseminated and banded pyrite-pyrrhotite- minor chalcopyrite-sphalerite mineralization is associated with felsic pyroclastic rocks and interbedded graphitic argillite. Much of the diamond drilling following up the Q.D.N.R. INPUT survey intersected this type of mineralization.

2) Epigenetic Environment a) "Shear Zone Type" - Disseminated pyrite-gold mineralization is associated with northeast trending quartz-bearing shear zones. An example is the gold bearing shear zone located on the northern shore of Lac à l'Eau Jaune in Hauy township. b) "Muscocho Lake Type" - Lenses of massive and disseminated pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite-pentlandite are associated with a silicified volcanic breccia in contact with a gabbro sill and in close proximity to a granodiorité plug.

3) Intrusive Environment • Minor concentrations of chalcopyrite are associated with magnetite, tourmaline, quartz and carbonate veinlets in a fracture stockwork in tonalitic rocks. An example occurs in north-central Queylus township.

VI - EXPLORATION POTENTIAL

The exploration potential of the majority of the south Chib- ougamau volcano-sedimentary belt is low at present. Since 1973 many companies have carried out intensive exploration programs in this region; however, with the exception of the Lemoine Mine (1973) and the Selco Scott Lake discovery (1976) very little encouragement, 7

has been forthcoming. At present large blocks of claims are being held in Dollier, Lemoine and Rinfret townships and those anomalies occurring on open ground have generally been adequately tested. In the western section of the belt many claims have recently been allowed to lapse; however, airborne.E.M. data is not available and the quality of the follow-up and diamond drilling programs initiated by various companies bodes ill for worthwhile exploration in this region. As previously mentioned, a continuing evaluation of individual anomalies on claims which have been allowed to expire is probably the best method of target identification.

Concerning the exploration potential of the various formation of the south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt, the order of importance, ranging from high to very low, is as follows: 1) Waconichi; 2) Blondeau; 3) Gilman; and 4) Stella. The upper level of the Waconichi Formation is considered to be most favourable environment for volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits (witness Lemoine Mine and the Selco Scott Lake discovery). Allard (1976) recommends exploring "At the Waconichi-Gilman contact (in- cluding the Lac Sauvage Iron Formation), especially in the vicinity of porphyritic rhyolite domes, for stratiform volcanogenic massive sulphide (copper-zinc) deposits" as well as "In the rocks older than the upper part of the Waconichi for feeder veins and stockwork type deposits (copper and gold)". Factors reducing the present exploration potential of the Waconichi Formation are the relative lack of open ground (no part of the areas in Lemoine or Scott townships underlain by the Waconichi Formation are presently open) and the speculative nature of the interpreted presence of the Waconichi Formation within Rinfret, Brongniart, Hauy, Levy and Daubrée townships.

The Blondeau Formation also represents a favourable geological environment. As stated by Allard (1976) exploration should be undertaken "In the Blondeau Formation, close to rhyolite domes, agglomerate lenses and cherty sulphide-bearing beds for stratiform volcanogenic massive sulphide (copper-zinc) deposits". At present very little ground underlain by the Blondeau Formation is open.

The exploration potential of the Gilman Formation is moderate to poor. The determining factors are the presence of numerous. sulphide showings generally associated with felsic volcanic horizons within the Gilman Formation and the relatively large unstaked areas underlain by these"rocks. However, the numerous airborne surveys conducted over the region and the fact that most of the follow-up programs involved diamond drilling do not enhance the exploration potential of the Gilman Formation. The exploration potential of the Stella Formation is low to very low. The numerous airborne E.M. surveys have so far only delineated a great preponderance of linear graphitic conductors with minor pyrrhotite-pyrite in Dollier and Lemoine townships. As well, the identification of any volcanic rocks intercalated with the sedimentary sequence is strictly subjective insofar as it is dependent on the theories proposed by the different geologists.

VII - PRINCIPAL TARGET AREAS 1) Brongniart Township, Area 1. The eastern half of Brongniart township was covered by the Hudson Bay Exploration and Development Co. Ltd. A.E.M. survey in 1969. As such, the western half of the township represents the only part of the south Chibougamau belt which has not undergone airborne coverage or extensive ground exploration. It would appear to be one of the best target areas in this region with a high exploration potential. The area with the best potential within this region is the belt of felsic volcanic rocks (unit 1) which underlies the west-central section of the township (Area 1). This is the western extension of the felsic unit described in Hauy township. Numerous conductive horizons were outlined in this felsic volcanic unit, south of the Obatagamau River by Hudson Bay Exploration in 1972-73, and these were tested by a total of 12 diamond drill holes. At present the logs of only three of these drill holes (B-6 and 7, C-2) are available and the conductors in all three cases were explained by sections of pyrite-bearing graphitic schist. Three intersections returned low Cu-Zn values. A 5 ft. section in drill hole B-6 (163.5'-168.5') assayed 0.25% Cu and 0.6% Zn. A. second 5 ft. section from 182'-187' assayed 0.25% Cu and 0.4% Zn. .A 5 ft. section in diamond drill hole C-2 assayed 0.1% Cu and 0.1% Zn from 120'-125'. As well seven diamond drill holes were sunk by New Consolidated Canadian Exploration Limited in 1958 in the northwestern section of the area adjacent to the Lac Presqu'ile granitic pluton. Generally felsic to intermediate volcanic rocks were intersected and conductors were explained by slightly graphitic, silicified, sulphide-bearing shear zones in rhyolitic rocks. Assays are available for only two holes of which the best intersections are as follows: drill hole N-1, 0.1% Cu, 0.034% Zn, 0.005 oz. Au/3' from 218'-221'; drill hole N-2, 0.07% Cu, 0.46% Zn, Tr.Au/12' from 145'-157' and 0.17% Cu, 1.02% Zn, Tr.Au/l' from 172'-173'. As well an 8.5' section of graphitic sediment in drill hole N-5 was estimated visually to contain 0.25% Cu and 2% Zn from 267.5'-276'. Unfortunately lack of outcrop between the Hudson Bay Exploration and the New Consolidated Canadian Exploration drill holes makes the geological interpretation somewhat speculative. As well, the presence of graphitic conductors does not enhance the potential of this area; however, coincidence of a favourable geological environment, known sulphide mineralization to the northwest and east and a relative lack of intensive exploration make this an interesting area. It is recommended that some reconnaissance prospecting be undertaken in this area to attempt to gain a better knowledge of the geology and that at least the northern section of this area be staked.

2) Queylus Township, Area 1. Area 1 lies in southern Queylus township approximately 12 miles east of the township center line. It is characterized by a weak (3-channel) INPUT anomaly. According to the Q.D.N.R. INPUT survey map (B-1129-1; GM-27841) the anomaly lies on the contact between a chlorite-rich tuff and agglomerate unit and andesite. A well cut grid at 400 ft. spacing exists in this area and there are no indications of diamond drilling. A few days prospecting and pin-pointing the anomaly with an E.M.-16 would enable a better evaluation of this anomaly whereupon a staking decision could be made.

3) Queylus Township, Area 2. Area 2 lies in the southeastern corner of Queylus township and is also chacterized by a weak (3-channel) INPUT anomaly. A grid exists in this area and it is recommended that prospecting and an E.M.-16 survey be undertaken to evaluate the potential of the conductor. A staking decision could await the results of this work. -

4) Rinfret-Vimont Townships, Area 3. Area 3 characterized by a 3-channel INPUT anomaly occurring on the Boisvert River in Vimont township approximately 2 mile south of the Rinfret-Vimont township boundary. As the possibility exists that the anomaly is not valid bedrock conductor, consideration should be given to allowing John Betz to pronounce final judgement on its merits.

5) Dollier Township, Area 2 Area 2 occurs in west-central township and it is characterized by a single 5 mho DIGHEM conductor. The conductor is isolated, weak, does not have any magnetic response and possibly corresponds - 10 -

to a small swampy lake in the vicinity; however, DIGHEM has not indicated that this is a surface response. As the original DIGHEM data are not available a day could be spent attempting to pin-point the anomaly with respect to topography with an E.M.-16 survey. The exploration potential is considered to be moderate.

VIII - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The present exploration potential of the majority of the south Chibougamau volcano-sedimentary belt is low. The correlation of the south Chibougamau belt with the volcanic sequence on the northern limb of the Chibougamau anticline is uncertain. The placement of 'the Lemoine Mine within the stratigraphic succession of the south belt is presently the object of much controversy; however, its placement at the top of the Waconichi Formation appears valid. The ground exploration following-up the various A.E.M. surveys since 1969 has generally been of a high caliber, and most geophysical anomalies have been adequately tested. It is intended that this compilation should be a continuing process in order to evaluate the potential of any anomalies occurring on claims which are allowed to expire in the future.

The exploration potential ranging from high to low, of the formation of the south Chibougamau belt is as follows: 1) Waconichi Formation 2) Blondeau Formation 3) Gilman Formation 4) Stella Formation

The majority of the areas described within Appendix II either require the acquisition of further assessment data in order to better evaluate their potential or exhibit a low exploration potential. However, 5 principal target areas have been identified for reconnaissance geological or geophysical follow-up. These areas, in order of priority are listed below: Brongniart Township, Area 1 Queylus Township, Area 1 Queylus Township, Area 2 Rinfret-Vimont Townships, Area 3 Dollier Township, Area 3

W, h . Chibougamau, Que. W. Hamilton, May, 1977. Geologist. 11 -

IX - REFERENCES

Allard, G.O. (1967) Geology of Northwest Quarter of Rinfret Township, Abitibi-East and Roberval Counties; Q.D.N.R., P.R. No. 567. Allard, G.O. (1975) Geology of Northeast Quarter of Scott Township; Q.D.N.R., P.R.-609. Allard, G.O. (1976) Doré Lake Complex and Its Importance to Chibougamau Geology and Metallogeny; Q.D.N.R., D.P.-368. Allard, G.O. and Caty, J.L. (1969) Geology of the Northeast Quarter and part of the Southeast Quarter of Lemoine Township, Abitibi-East and Roberval Counties; Q.D.N.R., P.R.-566. Archibald, G.M. (1960) Preliminary Report on the Southwest Quarter of Levy Township, Electoral District of Abitibi- East; Q.D.N.R., P.R.-419. Blecha, M. (1960) Report of Geological Reconnaissance Work of the Area East of Lake Chibougamau; C.C.M. files. Christmann, P. (1974) Rapport Préliminaire sur la Motié Sud du Canton de Scott, Comté d'Abitibi-Est; Q.D.N.R. D.P.-217. Christmann, P. (1975) Rapport Géologique sur la Motié sud du Canton de Scott, Comté d'Abitibi-Est; Q.D.N.R., D.P.-319. Choinière, J. (1977) Géochimie des Sédiments de Ruisseau Partie Nord du Canton de Scott, Q.D.N.R., DPV-451. Cimon, J. (1976) Queylus (NW) and Hauy (NE) Townships; Q.D.N.R., P.R.-613. Cimon, J. (1976a) Géologie du Canton de Queylus (NE), Abitibi- , Est; Q.D.N.R., DPV-439. Cimon, J. (1977) Quart Sud-est du Canton de Queylus, Q.D.N.R., DPV-448. Cimon, J. and Gobeil, A. (1976) The Stella Formation: Its Implication for the Genesis and the Relative Age of the Mineralization in the Chibougamau Mining Camp. (Paper presented at the 78th Annual General Meeting of the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, April, 1976.) DeMontigny, P.A. (1960) Preliminary Report on the Southwest and part of the Southeast Quarter of Lemoine Township, Abitibi-East Electoral District; Q.D.N.R., P.R.-437. Duquette, G. (1970) Archean Stratigraphy and Ore Relationships in the Chibougamau District; Q.D.N.R., Special Paper 8. Duquette, G. (1976) North half of McKenzie and Roy Townships and Northwest Quarter of McCorkill Township; Q.D.N.R., DP-357(V). - 12 -

Feurbach, M., Clark, T. and Moravek, P. (1970) Report and Geological Map of the North-West Quarter Scott Township, Abitibi Chibougamau District; Q.D.N.R., D.P.-32. Holmes, S.W. (1959) Fancamp-Hauy Area, Abitibi-East Electoral District, Que. Dept. of Mines, G.R.-84. Imbault, P.E. (1959) Queylus Area, Abitibi-East and Roberval Electoral Districts; Que. Dept. of Mines, G.R.-83. Kindle, E.D. (1942) Brock River Map Area, Abitibi and Mistassini Territories, Quebec (Summary Report); Can. Dept. of Mines and Resources, Geological Survey Paper 42-4. Krause, C.A. (1961) Summary Report and Project Reports East Side Lake Chibougamau; (C.C.M. Files) Lavoie, J.S. (1972) Geology of Opemiska Mines. (C.C.M. Files) Lyall, H.B. (1959) Brongniart-Lescure Area, Electoral District of Abitibi-East; Québec Dept. of Mines, G.R.-85. Mawdsley, J.B. and Norman, G.W.H. (1935) Chibougamau Lake Map- Area, Quebec; Can. Dept. of Mines, Mem. 185. Neale, E.R.W. (1959) Dollier-Charron Area, Abitibi-East and Roberval Electoral Districts; Quebec Dept. of Mines, G.R.-82. Norman, G.W.H. (1936) Opemisca-Chibougamau Map-Area, Northern Quebec; Can. Dept. of Mines, Paper 36-6. Oliveira, J.A.L. (1973) The Petrology of the Chibougamau Green- stone Belt Volcanics; Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis,' University of Georgia. Wolhuter, L.E. (1960) Preliminary Report on the Southeast Quarter of Levy Township, Abitibi-East Electoral District; Quebec Dept. of Mines, P.R.-434. Wolhuter, L.E. (1970) Geology of thb Northwest Quarter of Levy Township, Abitibi-East Electoral District; Q.D.N.R., P.R.-595. APPENDICES

APPENDIX I COMPARATIVE STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMNS APPENDIX II - DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL TARGET AREAS AND DIAMOJD DRILL HOLE SUMMARY

TOWNSHIP PAGE 1) Brongniart 1 2) Dollier 8 3) Hauy 12 4) Lemoine 16 5) Lévy 18 6) Obalski 25 7) Queylus 26 8) Rinfret-Vimont 28 9) Scott 31

APPENDIX I

COMPARATIVE STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMNS

(After Cimon, 1977)

DUQUETTE NORMAN & BEACH CIMON (1970) (1941) (1976) LITHOLOGY • APPROXIMATE THICKNESS ------- -- - -- Regional Unconformity - Kenoran Orogeny--- Hauy Conglomerate with porphyritic volcanic elements (pyroxene phenocrysts). Opemisca o Formation Agglomerate, tuff and volcaniclastic sediments with pyroxene clasts. Not estimated Series o Massive andesite with pyroxene phenocrysts. a Blondeau emu,, Gaudreault Shale Not estimated Formation E Formation Sandstone Conglomerate with granitic pebbles m. ----__---- - _------Regional Unconformity- -- - -~ . Blondeau Distal facies Proximal facies Formation Sandstone shale, lithic tuff, Shale, sandstone, a. (massive sulphides?) graphitic greywacke, turbidites, 6000' oo schists, tuff, chert, pyroclastic arkoso, laminated tuff, cc o Stella rocks. basal conglomerate. oo Formation cc ______ Local Unconformity Pre-Opemisca Gilman Basalt, basalt with magnetite, andesite, tabbro associated with Group Formation the lavas, minor rhyoli.te, dacite, intermediate to mafic tuff >6000' • and felsic pyroclastic rocks. Gilman Audette Crystal tuff, agglomerate, rhyolitic tuff, rhvolite, carbonate- t 3000' Formation , gabbro sills. } âm For ation quartz-seric.i-te schist U y Obatogamau Pillow basalt with feldspar phenocrysts. Gabbro with feldspar r Formation phenocrysts. ' p6000' ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? W conichi a Formation 1

APPENDIX II: DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL TARGET AREAS AND DIAMOND DRILL HOLE SUMMARY 1) Brongniart Township, Area 1

The eastern half of Brongniart township was covered by the Hudson Bay Exploration and Development Co. Ltd. A.E.M. survey in 1969. As such, the western half of the township represents the only part of the south Chibougamau belt which has not undergone airborne coverage or extensive exploration. It would appear to be one of the best target areas in this region with a high exploration potential. The area with the best potential within this region is the belt of felsic volcanic rocks (unit 1) which underlies the west-central section of the township (Area 1). This is the western extension of the felsic unit described in Hauy township. Num- erous conductive horizons were outlined in this felsic volcanic unit, south of the Obatagamau River by Hudson Bay Explora- tion in 1972-73, and these were tested by a total of 12 diamond drill holes. At present the logs of only three of these drill holes (B-6 and 7, C-2) are available and the conductors in all three cases were explained by sections of pyrite-bearing graphitic schist. Three intersections returned low Cu-Zn values. A 5 ft. section in drill hole B-6 (163.5'-168.5') assayed 0.25% Cu and 0.6% Zn. A second 5 ft. section from 182'-187' assayed 0.25% Cu and 0.4% Zn. A 5 ft. section in diamond drill hole C-2 assayed 0.1% Cu and 0.1% Zn from 120' to 125'. As well seven diamond drill holes were sunk by New Consol- idated Canadian Exploration Limited in 1958 in the northwestern section of the area adjacent to the Lac Presqu'ile granitic pluton. Generally felsic to intermediate volcanic rocks were intersected and conductors were explained by slightly graphitic, silicified, sulphide-bearing shear zones in rhyolitic rocks. Assays are available for only two holes of which the best intersections are as follows: drill hole N-1, 0.1% Cu, 0.034% Zn, 0.005 oz. Au/3' from 218'-221'; drill hole N-2, 0.07% Cu, 0.46% Zn, Tr.Au/12' from 145'-157' and 0.17% Cu, 1.02% Zn, Tr.Au/l' from 172'-173'. As well an 8.5' section of graphitic sediment in drill hole N-5 was estimated visually to contain 0.25% Cu and 2% Zn from 267.5'-276'.

Unfortunately lack of outcrop between the Hudson Bay Exploration and the New Consolidated Canadian Exploration drill holes makes the geological interpretation somewhat speculative. As well, the presence of graphitic conductors does not enhance the potential of this area; however, coincidence of a favourable geological environment, known sulphide mineralization to v 2 _

the northwest and east and a relative lack of intensive exploration make this an interesting area. It is recommended that some reconnaissance prospecting be undertaken in this area to attempt to gain a better knowledge of the geology and that at least the northern section of this area be staked. 3

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS

BRONGNIART TOWNSHIP a) Boma Chibougamau Mining Inc. (1965) — South Center of the Township * T-2-1 160°? 43° 32' Very dubious sampling: Best Assays: 3.13 0.273 0.002 1'?in diabase Showing T-2-1 -A 162° 50° 237' No assays T-2-1-B 162° 36° 193' Very dubious sampling: Best assays 16.7 3.425 0.14 2'?in diabase Showing

T-2-2 1800 55° 10' 3' 10' 7' 1.19 0.267 Tr. Diabase Showing T-2-2A 147° 36° 239' Very dubious sampling: Best assay 12.77 2.46 0.15 2'? in diabase Showing T-2-2—B 147° 44° 159' Very dubious sampling: Best assay 11.02 2.087 0.038 2'? in diabase Showing H-1-1 022° 43° 8' 3' 8' 5' 0.58 0.14 0.017

b) Canadian Nickel:Co. Limited (1956) - South Center of the Township

EH-13254 0° 45° 453' Po, Py, Tr. Cpy, graphite E.M.? BH-13255 305° 45° . 341' Py, graphite E.M.? c) Conwest Exploration Limited (1975) - West Center of the Township S-1 025° 45° 409' • No assays Po, Py in granite and andesite I.P. S-2 00 50° 239' N.S.V. Po, Py in flesic tuff. H.L.E.M.. S-3 0° 50° 379' N.S.V. Po, Py in felsic tuff. H.L.E.M.

* D.D.H. Location may be found by referring to D.D.H. number on township compilation map. NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS d) Dominion Gulf Co. Ltd. (1956) - West Center of the Township 220-56-1X 0° 45° 85' Minor Po in andesite. Showing 220-56-2X 320° 45° 89' Minor Po in tuff. Showing 220-56-3X 035° 45° 98' Showing 220-56-4X 210° 40° 75' Po, Py in rhyolite Showing? e) Hudson Bay Exploration and Development Co. Ltd. (1973) - Center of the Township A-5 045° 45° 251' 239' 240' 1' 0.10 0.1 Po, Py in andesite. H.L.E.M. A-15 038° 45° 248' N.S.V. Po, Py, Tr. Cpy in rhyolite. H.L.E.M. B-6 030° 45° 274' 163.5' 168.5' 5' 0.25 0.6? Graphitic schist. H.L.E.M. B-7 030° 45° 249' N.S.V. Py in graphitic schist. H.L.E.M. C-2 030° 45° 300' 120' 125' 5' 0.1 0.1 Py in graphitic schist. H.L.E.M. f) McIntyre Porcupine Mines Ltd. (1953) - South Center of the Township In 1953 McIntyre reportedly sunk 4 diamond drill holes (totalling + 1000') over a 440' strike length, testing a gold-bearing, quartz shear zone located on the north shore of Lac â l'Eau Jaune. No data from the drill holes is available; however, samples from a trench reportedly assayed: 0.08, 0.53, 0.18, 0.06, 0.72 and up to 26 oz. Au/T. (Data from Almar Mining Corp. 1956).

g) Mokta Canada Ltée. (1966-68) - South West Quarter of the Township MB66-1 145° 45° 253' No assays Po, Py Showing MB66-2 180° 45° 232' No assays Po in tuff? Showing ~ 5

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS g) Mokta Canada Ltée. (1966-68) MB66-3 180° 45° 225' No assays Po, Py Tr.Cpy in diorite and tuff. Showing MB66-4 180° 45° 298' No assays Po, Py Tr.Cpy in diorite Showing MB66-5 270° 45° 253' No assays Po, Tr.Cpy in tuff. E.M. B0M67-2 200° 50° 205' No assays Po, Py, Tr.Cpy, graphite E.M. in tuff and andesite. B0M67-3 180° 45° 597'No assays Po, Py, graphite in inter- E.M. mediate-felsic tuff. B0M67-4 0° 45° 471' No assays Po, Py, Tr.Cpy in felsic tuff. E.M. B0M67-5 No log E.M. B0M67-6 180° 45° 441' . No assays Po, Py, Tr.Cpy in diorite and E.M. gabbro. SW67-1 180° 50° 147' No assays Po, Py in andesite E.M. SW67-2 0° 50° 148' 22? 24' 2' 0.02 0.34 0.043 Diorite, felsic tuff E.M. 36' 38' 2' 0.01 0.54 0.026 SW67-3 020° 50° 148' 48' 50.8' 2.8' 0.10 0.22 0.018 Intermediate to felsic tuff. E.M. SW67-4 180° 50° 148' 'Na assays Po, Py in diorite, intermediate tuff. E.M SW67-5 315° 50° 152' No assays Po, Py in andesite. E.M. SW67-6 205° 50° 150' No assays Po, Py, Gr. in andesite E.M. SW67-7 340° 50o 1491 No assays Intermediate tuff, andesite. E.M. SW67-8 180° 50° 136' No assays Gr., Po, Tr.Cpy E.M. SW67-9 No log. E.M. B0M68-1 3400 45° 350' No assays Andesite, intermediate and felsic tuff. E.M.

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS

g) Mokta Canada Ltée. (1966-68) BM-1 190° 45° 298' N.S.V. Po, Tr.Cpy in rhyolite, Q.F.P. gabbro Showing BM-2 010° 45° 300' N.S.V. Po, Py, Tr.Cpy in gabbro, feldspar porphyry. Showing BM-3 180° 45° 300' N.S.V. Po, Py, Tr.Cpy in tuff, gabbro and Q.F.P. Showing BM-4 0° 45° 302' N.S.V. Po, Py, Tr.Cpy in gabbro and quartzite. Showing BMW-5 270° 45° 148' No assays Gr., Po, Tr.Cpy in tuff Showing BMW-6 270° 45° 150' No assays Minor Po, Py in tuff. Showing BMW-7 270° 45° 149' No assays Po, minor Cpy in tuff, rhyolite. ~ BMW-8 270° 45° 149' No assays Po, Tr.Cpy, Gr. in tuff, Q.F.P., gabbro. Showing BMW-9 No log. Showing BMW-10 135° 45° 39' No assays Po, Tr.Cpy in tuff. Showing

h) New Consolidated Canadian Exploration Ltd. (1958) - NW Quarter of the Township N-1 221° 45° 417' 218' 221' 3' 0.1 0.034 0.005 Graphitic shear zone. E.M. N-2 041° 45° 378' 145' 157' 12' 0.07 0.46 Tr. E.M. 160' 161' 1' 0.12 0.73 0.005 172' 173' 1' 0.17 1.02 Tr. 1801 185' 5' 0'.05 0.63 Tr. 207' 214' 71 0.08 0.78 Tr.

- 7 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS h) New Consolidated Canadian Exploration Ltd. (1958) (Cont'd) N-3 041° 45° 485' No assays Gr. 71 5-10% Po, Py in breccia. E.M. N-4 041° 45° 607' No assays Py, Po, Tr.Cpy, Gr. in andesite. E.M. N-5 222° 45° 399' 267.5' 276' 8.5' 0.25 2.0 Visual estimates. Graphitic sediments. E.M. N-6 222° 45° 399° Andesite, diorite. E.M. N-7 222° 45° 403' Po in andesite and agglomerate. E.M. 8

2) Dollier Township, Areas 1, 2 and 3 Three anomalous areas on open ground are present in Dollier township. Area 1 occurs in north-central Dollier township and is characterized by a linear zone of INPUT anomalies which correspond to the western extension of area 1 in Lemoine township. In'1965 Bruneau Mines Limited under- took an H.L.E.M. survey in this region which outlined 4 conductive horizons. They tested all 4 horizons with a total of 13 diamond drill holes. The conductors were explained by intersections of graphitic schist with minor pyrrhotite. The exploration potential of this area is very low.

Area 2 occurs in west-central Dollier township and it is characterized by a single 5 mho DIGHEM conductor. The conductor is isolated, weak, does not have any magnetic response and possibly corresponds to a small swampy lake in the vicinity; however, DIGHEM has not indicated that this is a surface response. As the original DIGHEM data is not available a day could be spent attempting to pin-point the anomaly with respect to topography with an E.M.-16 survey. The exploration potential is considered to be moderate.

Area 3 lies in the east-central part of the township and is characterized by a linear belt of INPUT anomalies which probably correspond to a graphitic horizon. As most anomalies have a direct magnetic correlation, probably some pyrrhotite is also present. The probable graphitic cause of this conductive zone is not encouraging; however, once the assessment data submitted by the previous owner of these claims (Dundee-Palliser Resources) has been acquired a better evaluation can be made. 9

NUMBER DIRDLTICtQ DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS

ROLLIER TOWNSHIP a) Bischoff-Bengry Prospecting Syndicate (1953) - West Center of the Township X-1 315° 45° 123' No Assays Minor Py in quartz porphyry. Geochem. .X-2 045° 45° 130° No assays Minor Py in quartz porphyry. Geochem..

b) Bruneau Mines Ltd. (1965) - North Center of the Township H-1 210° 45° 363' Graphite and minor Po. H.L.E.M. H.L.E.M. H-2 210° 45° 334.' " H-3 210° 45° 332' " H.L.E.M.. H-4 210° 45° 508' It it H.L.E.M. It II II H-5 030° 45° 285' " H.L.E.M. H-6 015° 43° 585' " " H.L.E.M. II H-7 334° 47° 325' " H.L.E.M. -10 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS b) Bruneau Mines Ltd. (1965) H-8 165° 50° 324' Graphite and minor Po. H.L.E.M. H-9 308° 45° 495' n tt H.L.E.M. H-10 128° 50° 478' H.L.E.M. H-11 310° 4Ô 649' It H.L.E.M. H-12 128° 45° 303' H.L.E.M. n tt It H-13 180° 45° 582' H.L.E.M. c) Chibougamau Mining F& Smelting Co. Inc. (1974) - West Center and Center of the Township DL-1 0° 47° 334' 244.5' 245.5' 1' 0.121 0.009 Tr. 5-10% Po in felsic tuff. H.L.E.M. DL-2 0° 60° 287' N.S.V. 15% Po, 3% Py in sheared lithic tuff. H.L.E.M. DL-3 315° 46° 341' 142' 155' 13' 0.025 0.12 Tr. 10-12% Po, Py in felsic lapilli tuff. H.L.E.M. 202' 210' 8' 0.026 0.137 Tr. 5-7% Po, 1% Py in graphitic tuff. H.L.E.M. DL-4 0° 45° 267' N.S.V. 8-12%Po,2% Py in graphitic tuff. H.L.E.M. DL-5 0° 46° 503' N.S.V. 15% Po, 2% Py in graphitic tuff. H.L.E.M. DL-6 0° 45° 300' N.S.V. 30% Po, 20% Py. H.L.E.M. DL-7 335° 45° 267' 130' 134' 4' 0.011 0.197 Tr. 10-20% Py, Po in graphitic tuff. H.L.E.M. NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS d) Conwest Exploration Ltd. (1974) - North Center of the Township L-12 060° 50° 305' N.S.V. 4% Po, Py in carbonaceous argillite. H.L.E.M. e) Orefield Mining Corp. (1956) - NE Quarter of the Township 0-1 0° 45° 300' No assays Sections up to 30% Po Resistive 0-2 035° 45° 300' No assays Sections uo tp 30% Po, Py 0-3 0° 45° 350' No assays Scattered Po 0-4 0° 45° 325' No assays Scattered Py, Po up to 20% Ft ' 0-5 0° 45° 300' No assays Some Cpy splashes at 200' It 0-6 046° 45° 425' No assays Cpy specks in sections f) Père Marquette Mining Syndicate (1956), - NW Quarter of the Township P-1 330° 50° 350' Tr.Cpy and Sph. in fault zone. Unknown

P-2 330° 50° 300' n n n n it n P-3 Not drilled P-4 330° 50 397' Fe carb. stringers with Cpy and Sph. Un P-5 330° 50° 302' n n It n It n Note: 6 samples assayed, hole no., width and location of sample unknown. Sample #2 0.63 Tr. 1.86 0.03 Sample #3 0.27 6.2 1.92 0.01 Sample #4 4.4 0.28 Tr. Sample #5 0.05 0.10 0.59 Tr. Sample #6 0.03 Tr. 0.27 0.01 Sample #7 Tr. 0.11 0.01 - 12 -

3) Hauy Township, Area 1 Hauy township was completely covered by the Hudson Bay Exploration A.E.M. survey in 1969. As well an INPUT survey was done over the northeastern half of the township for Selco in 1974. Airborne anomaly follow-up appears to have been ad- equate. The area which exhibits the best exploration potential is the belt of felsic volcanic rocks (unit 1) immediately east of the Muscocho Lake granitic pluton (Area 1). This unit is composed of felsic to intermediate pyroclastic rocks with minor rhyolite and andesite flows. Structural relationships are in- adequately known; however, this unit has been interpreted as representing the Waconichi Formation. Unfortunately no geophysical targets are known in this area. A reconnaissance geological survey would be required to define favourable areas within this belt. - 13 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH Fpam TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS

HAUY TOWNSHIP a) Alladin Chibougamau Mines Ltd. (1956) - Center of the Township AC-1 025° 45° 497' No assays Po, minor Cpy in sheared andesite. Unknown AC-2 025° 45° 500° No assays Po, Py, Cpy in sheared andesite. Unknown

b) Burrex Mines Limited (1955) Center of the Township BM-1 210° 50° 42° No assays 10% Po, minor Cpy in tuff and agglomerate. Showing BM-2 210° 45° 47° No assays 10% Po, minor Cpy in tuff and agglomerate. Showing BM-3 210° 45° 37' No assays 10% Po, minor Cpy in tuff and agglomerate. Showing

BM-4 210° 55° 43' ° No assays 10% Po, minor Cpy in tuff and agglomerate. Showing BM-5 200° 50° 29' No assays 10% Po, minor Cpy in tuff and agglomerate. Showing

c) Dominion Gulf Co. Ltd. (1954) - Center of the Township 144-54-1 210° 45° 131' Abandoned in overburden Unknown 144-54-2 210° 550 87' Abandoned in overburden Unknown 144-54-3 330° 50° 1338' 602' 610' 8' 0.18 Agglomerate, feldspar porphyry Unknown and gabbro dykes. - 14 -

NUMBER 'DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS d) Selco Mining Corp. (1975) - West Center of the Township 60-10A-1 035° 50° 250' No assays 5%-10% Py in graphitic siltstones. H.L.E.M 60-10A-2 035° 50° 225° No assays Py in graphitic and intermediate H.L.E.M tuffs. 60-1OB-1 035° 50° 247' No assays Py in graphitic argillite. H.L.E.M 60-10C-1 No log. (Graphitic schist) e) Hudson Rand Mines Ltd. (1957) - North Center of the '1 reship H-3 180° 45° 283° Minor Py in greywacke and arkose. E.M. H-4 180° 45° 295' Minor Py in greywacke, argillite and arkose. E.M. H-5 180° 45° - 300° Minor Py in andesite and greywacke. E.M. H-6 180° 45° 298' Arkose and greywacke. E.M. H-7 180° 45° 69' Grey granite (Q.F.P.?) Unknown H-7A 180° 45° 302' Tr.Py in grey granite (Q.F.P.?) Unknown H-8 180°. 45° 300' Tr.Py in greywacke. Unknown H-9 180° 45° 305' Greywacke, minor conglomerate Unknown H-10 180° 45° 300' Tr.Py in andesite and feldspar porphyry. E.M. (7 f) Noranda Mines Ltd. (1954, 1957-58) - SW Center of the Township

1 170° 45° 298' No assays Po, Py, Cpy in gabbro and lava. E.M. 2 140° 45° 345' No assays Po, Cpy in lava E.M. 3 0° 45° 549' No assays Po, Py, Cpy in lava. E.M. - 15 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS f) Noranda Mines Ltd. (1954, 1957-58) (Cont'd) - SW Center of the Township 4 178° 46° 293' No assays E.M. 5 178° 45° 250' 67.6 74.2 6.6 0.34 0.44 Ni Tr. Po, Cpy, pentlandite in 198.5 200.7 2.2 1.68 1.01 Ni Tr. volcanic breccia. 214.4 229.4 •15 0.74 1.23 Ni Tr. 233 236 3 0.26 1.87 Ni Tr. 6 177.5° 45° 152° 108.8 115.7 6.9 0.53 0.49 Ni Tr. E.M. 7 • 177.5° 45° 150° No assays Po, Py in lava. E.M. 8 180° 47° 503' Po, Py in lava and agglomerate. E.M. 9 180° 45° 387' E.M. 10 180° 45° 501' 185' ? 207.5 ? 22.5 1.49 0.68 Ni Po, Py in gabbro, lava and breccia. E.M. 11 180° 60° 483° Po, Cpy in gabbro E.M. 12 180° 60° 480' E.M.

Note: 8 holes, totalling 1,597° were drilled by Muscocho Exploration Ltd. in this area. The following 5 drill holes were sunk in 1949 by Noranda to test the same showing. Noranda Mines Ltd. (1949) S-1 275° 35° 135' No assays Py, Po, Cpy in lava. Showing M-1 190° 46° 133' No assays Py, Po in lava and diorite. Showing M-2 147° 40° 97' No assays Py, Po in diorite. Showing M-3 157° 45° 52' No assays Py, Po in diorite. Showing M-4 157° 70° 61' No assays Py, Po in diorite. Showing - 16 -

4) Lemoine Township, Areas 1 and 2 Although two anomalous zones (Areas 1 and 2) occur on open ground little encouragement is to be found in Lemoine township. Area 1, located in the south-central section of the township is characterized by a linear zone of INPUT anomalies. To the west of this area on claims held by Conwest an E.M.-17 survey outlined one long and 4 short strike length conductors. Conwest tested the long conductor with diamond drill hole L-13. It intersected a series of felsic tuff and carbonaceous to graphitic argillite. The conductor was explained by a 104 ft. section of graphitic and carbonaceous argillites containing 3-5% pyrite. The graphitic horizons carrying minor pyrite do not represent interesting targets.

An anomaly located in southeastern Lemoine township (Area 2) is partially open. It represents the western extension of a zone which extends into Rinfret township. The claims covering this anomaly are held by Conwest. They identified 4 E.M.-17 conductors on the property and tested 3 of them by diamond drilling. Diamond drill hole L-6 intersected a suite of mafic to felsic pyroclastic rocks, basalt and gabbro. The conductor was explained by 3% pyrrhotite with traces of pyrite, chalcopyrite and sphalerite over a 27.5 ft. section of intermediate agglomerate and felsic tuff. A 5 ft. section assayed 0.09% Cu and 0.125% Zn. Diamond drill hole L-8 intersected a suite of rocks similar to those in L-6 and the conductor was explained by 5% pyrrhotite and pyrite with traces of chalcopyrite in a 19.5 ft. section of felsic tuff. As these conductors have been adequately tested, the exploration potential of Area 2 is low. - 17 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS LEMOINE TOWNSHIP a) Conwest Exploration Ltd. (1974) - SE Quarter of the Township Ir5 146° 40° 376' N.S.V. 15-20% Po in mafic volcanics H.L.E.M. Ir6 314° 50° 305' 173.8' 178.8' 5' 0.09 0.125 12-15% Po in intermediate H.L.E.M. felsic tuff. Ir7. 312° 50° 305° 179.5' 186.5' 7' 0.048 0.356 15% Py in graphitic argillite. " 241' 246' 5' 0.16 0.311 Py in carbonaceous argillite. " Ir8 314° 50° 277° N.S.V. 8% Po, Py in felsic tuff. " Ir9 . 325° 50° 235° N.S.V. 10-20% Po, Py in carbonaceous " argillite. Ir10 330° 50° 257° N.S.V. 40% Po, Py in felsic pyroclastics " Ir11 335° 45° 397' 347.4' 349.4' 2' 0.004 0.14 30% Py in graphitic argillite and '° tuff. L-13 325° 50° 227° N.S.V. 5% Py in graphitic argillite. " b) Yolteau Mines Ltd. (1975) - West Center of the Township Y-7 330° 44° 304' 263.5' 265.5' 2' 1.00 0.014 0.39 Tr. 20-30% Po, 5% Py, 3% Cpy in Q-C H.L.E.M. vein. Y-8 330° 45° 225' 134' 135' 1'0.226 0.05 Tr. 30% Po, 3-5% Py, 1% Cpy in Q-C H.L.E.M. vein. Y-9 330° 45° 275' 136.4' 137.4' 1' 0.138 0.002 0.06 Tr. 10% Po, 2% Cpy in quartz vein. H.L.E.M. Y-10 330° 44° 244' 84' 86' 2' 0.108 Tr. 3% Po, Py in mafic agglomerate. H.L.E.M. 152' 153' l' 0.135 0.007 10-15% Po, 1% Cpy in quartz vein H.L.E.M. - 18 -

5) Levy Township, Area 1 The majority of the volcano-sedimentary belt in southern Levy township is presently open. The overall exploration potential of this township is low, as over the years it has undergone periods of heavy prospecting. As well, the southeastern part of this region was covered by both the Hudson Bay Explora- tion A.E.M. survey (1969) and the 1974 Selco INPUT survey. One area presents low-moderate exploration potential. It lies in the extreme northeastern corner of the township. Unfortunately little is known of the geology; however, it is believed to be underlain by rocks of the Gilman Formation. After publication of the recent Q.D.N.R. mapping in this area a better evaluation can be made. - 19 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS

LEVY TOWNSHIP a) Arno Mines Ltd. (1956) SE Quarter of the Township A-1 'No logs. Unknown A-2 No logs. Unknown A-3 No logs. Unknown A-4 No logs. Unkcnown A-5 0° 500 810° No assays Minor Py, Po in tuff. Unknown 53° 800' No assays Minor Py in dacite and rhyolite. Unknown A-7 0° 500 390' No assays Minor Py in diorite. Unknown b) New Hugh Malartic Mines Ltd. (1954) - SW Quarter of the Township N-1 320° 35° 491' No assays Po, Py, Cpy. in andesite (?) Resist. low, N-2 140° 45° 414° No assays Andesite. Resist. low, N-3 320° 45° 919' No assays Mafic to felsic volcanics. Resist. low, N-4 140° 50°(?) 919' No assays Po, Py in ultramafic. Resist. low, N-5 320° 50°(?) 327' No assays Andesite, felsic fragmental. Resist. low c) Newlund Mines Ltd. (1956) - South Center of the Township NM-1 0° 45° 194' No assays Py in andesite. Resist. low NM-2 0° 45° 301' No assays Py in diorite. Resist. low. }

- 20 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM 'TO WIDTH CU AG AU F2IIKIRKS TARGETS d) New York and Honduras Rosario Mining Co. (1956) CN-6-3 â 20° 365° No assays Py in graphitic schist. E.M. e) Purdex Minerals (1956) - SE Quarter of the Township A-8 0° 45° 501' No assays Minor Po, Py in andesite. Resist. low B-5 0° 45° 501' No assays Heavy Po, Py in graphitic schist, 1° " B-6 0° 30° 251' No assays Heavy Po, Py in graphitic schist. '° " B-7 0° 45° 496' No assays fi n n u n n n C-1 00 45° 751' No assays Minor Py, Po in gabbro, andesite. " " D-2 00 45° 501' No assays °' " '° " " " D-3 0° 45° 500' No assays Py, Po in andesite. " °' E-4 180° 45° 504° No assays Py, Po in gabbro. °s n - 21 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS f) Rio Canadian Exploration Ltd. (1957) - SW Quarter of the Township Rio-1 217° 45° 595' No assays. Mag, Py in gabbro. Unknown g) Tomiska Copper Mines Ltd. - SW Quarter of the Township T-1' 180° 50° 378' No assays Py in dacite and chlorite schist. Resist, low, T-2 No log. It It T-5 025° 55° 728' N.S.V. Py in graphitic schist, andesite. t It 1-N 180° 45° 508' 329.5' 333.3' 3.8' 2.5 Po, Cpy in rhyolite. 2-N 180° 40° 164' N.S.V. Po, Cpy in rhyolite. 3-N 00 45° 254' N.S.V. Po in rhyolite. . 4-N 0° 45° 218' N.S.V. Po in rhyolite. 5-N 180° . 45° 285' No assays Rhyolite. 6-N 032° 50° 750' No assays Minor graphite and sphalerite. 7-N 212° 50° 732' No assays Minor sphalerite in tuff, rhyolite. 8-N 032° ? 678' N.S.V. Py, sphalerite in rhyolite. h) Stratmat Ltd. (1953, 1956) - SE Quarter of the lbwnship Q411 180° 50°(?) 500' No assays Rhyolite, andesite, slate, greywacke. V.L.F.E, Q412 0° , 45° 380'(?) No assays Greywacke and slate. Q413 180° 45° 497'(?) No assays Greywacke and andesite. Q414 0° 45° 350' No assays Py in andesite.

— 22 —

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS

h) Stratmat Ltd. (1953, 1956) - SE Quarter of the Township

Q415 180° 45° 368'(?) No assays Tuff and andesite• V.L.F.E.M. Q416 180° 45° 5011 No assays Py in graphitic slates. 1 Q417 0° 45° 5001 No assays Graphitic slates or tuffs. ~ Q418 135° 45° 3131 31' 48.7' 18.7'. 0.31 Py, Po in graphitic schist. n Q419 180° 45° 300' ? ? ? 0.15 Tr. 0.1 Py, Po in slate. Q4110 180° 45° 225' 1481(?) 152' 41(?) 0.1 0.1 15% Py in graphitic slate. n Q4111 180° 48° 4481 133.7' 134.7' 11 0.1 Py in graphitic sediments. ~ Q4112 225° 47° 3001 N.S.V. Py in graphitic tuff and rhyolite. / Q4113 110° 46° 3111(?) N.S.V. Py in graphitic slates. Q4114 138° 55° 706' . No assays Py in graphitic argillite. n

i) Selco Mining Corp. (1975) - SE Quarter of the Township

60-3A-1 200° 50° 250' No assays Minor Py in graphitic argillite. H.L.E.M. 60-4-1 215° 50° 235' No assays 20% Py in graphitic argillaceous tuff. 60-5-1 0° 50° 270' No assays 3-4% Py in graphitic siltstones.

J) Opemisca Explorers Ltd. (1952 & 1956) - SW Quarter of the Township

P-1 245° 39° 523' 40' 45' 15' 0.07 0.14 45' Py, Po in andesite-diorite. E.M. 651 90' 25' 0.03 0.11 135' 145' 10' Tr. 0.14 - 23 -

NUMBER DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS . TARGETS j) Opemisca Explorers Ltd. (1952 fi 1956) SW Quarter of the Township P-2 230° 45° 612' 103' 115' 12' Low Cu and Zn values 25' Py, Po in andesite-diorite. E.M. P-3 200° 45° 326' Granodiorite.

P-4 235° 45° 925' Graphite schist. " P-5' 90° 52' Po, Py in granodiorite. P-6 170° ? 66' Po, Py in granodiorite. P-7 ? ? 51' Granodiorite. " Note: Logs for D.D.H.'s P-8 to 14 are missing. E-101 058° 45° 790' 231' 232' 1' 0.55 0.32 Tr. Py, Po in andesite-diorite. E-102 058° 70° 675' No assays Py, Po in andesite-diorite. " E-103 058° 65° 956' °N.S.V. Py, Po in andesite-diorite. E-104 062°. 45° 915' No assays Py, Po and graphite in felsite. " E-105 061° 45° 725' No assays Py, Po in andesite-diorite. E-106 049° 45° 602' No assays Py, Po in andesite-diorite. E-107 040° 45° 344' No assays Po in andesite. (Location unknown) " o E-108 90 760' Nd assays Po, Py, low Cpy in andesite-diorite. E.M. E-109 90° 272' No assays Py in diorite. (Location unknown) E-110 061° 50° 830' 150' 151' 1' 0.2 Po, low Cpy in andesite. 829' 830' 1' 0.25 0.32 Tr. E-111 220° 45° 571' No assays Po, low Cpy in andesite. (location unknown) f E-112 053° 45° 863' No assays Py, Po, graphite in andesite-diorite. ~ E-113 040° 45° 739' No assays Po, low Cpy in Andesite. (location unknown)

- 24 -

NUMBER 'DIRDLTICN 'DIP LENGTH FRCM Ta WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMRKS MRGETS

]) C►penisca Explorers Ltd. (1952 & 1956) - (Cont'd) - SW Quarter of the Township E-114 029° 45° 832' No assays Py in granite. E.M. E-115 220° 45° 597° No assays Py, PO, low Cpy in andesite (Location unknown) Er-116 0° 45° 508° No assays Po, low Cpy in andesite. 1 E-117 220° 45° 952° No assays Py, Po, low Cpy in andesite- diorite. E-118 030° 45° 525' No assays Po, Py, low Cpy in andesite. °1 E-119 0° 45° 660' 393' 396' 3' 0.2 0.1 0.01 Po, Cpy in andesite. 10 E-120 225° 45° 898' No assays Po, low Cpy in andesite. n E-121 225° 45° 605° No assays Po, Py, low Cpy in volcanic rock. 01 E-122 225° 45° 629° 77' 78' 1' 0.15 0.1 Tr. Po, Py, low Cpy in volcanic rock. 11 E-123 180° 45° 652° •No assays Py, Po in gabbro and granite. 1 E-124 225° 45° 550° .No assays Py, low Cpy in andesite. 1° E-125 070° 50° 666' 106' 107' 1' 0.45 0.2 Tr. Cpy in volcanic rock. °1 (Location unknown) E-126 180° 45° 536' 245' . 251' 6' 0.2 0.1 Tr. Po, low Cpy in volcanic rock. 11 - 25 -

6) Obalski Township No ground underlain by volcanic rocks is presently open in Obalski township. - 26 -

7) Queylus Township, Areas 1, 2 and 3 Three target areas (Areas 1 to 3) ranging in potential from poor to moderate are present in Queylus township. Area 1 lies in southern Queylus township approximately lZ miles, east, of the township center line. It is characterized by a weak (3-channel) INPUT anomaly. According to the Q.D.N.R.• INPUT Survey Map (B-1129-1; GM-27841) the anomalies lie on the contact between a chlorite-rich tuff and agglomerate unit and andesite. As well cut grid at 400 ft. spacing exists in this area and there are no indications of diamond drilling. A few days prospecting and pin-pointing the anomaly with an E.M.-16 would enable a better evaluation of this anomaly whereupon a staking decision could be made.

Area 2 lies in the southeastern corner of Queylus township and is also characterized by a weak (3-channel) INPUT anomaly. A grid exists in this area and it is recommended that prospecting and an E.M.-16 survey be undertaken to evaluate the potential of the conductor. A staking decision could await the results of this work.

Area 3 corresponds to a belt of felsic volcanic rocks (unit 2a) which runs through the southeastern section of the township. Cimon (1977) has called this belt the Audette Forma- tion; however, for the purposes of this compilation it is shown as representing a felsic phase of the Gilman Formation. A long strike length H.L.E.M. anomaly occurring near the southern contact of this belt was tested by Patino with three diamond drill holes (V4-1, 2 and 3). The drill holes intersected short sections of minor to moderate pyrite, lesser pyrrhotite and minor chalcopyrite mineralization in felsic tuff, flow-top breccia and gabbro. The best intersection was in drill hole V4-1 which assayed 0.43% Cu, 0.01 oz. Au over 7.5 ft. From a geological standpoint this belt represents a favourable target area. Presently, approximately 50% of the belt is staked. Three regional traverses taken through areas where outcrops are frequent would enable more precise de- finition of the stratigraphy and allow the extension of this belt to the east and west with the aim of staking potential target areas based on geologic criteria. The western extension of this belt near the Fancamp fault has not been covered by the 1972 Q.D.N.R. INPUT survey, however, it was surveyed by Hudson Bay Exploration in 1969. Although the entire belt was recently held, its potential is moderate, as the majority of the claims were held by prospectors, who were generally unable financially to adequately explore their claims. -27-

NUMBER D1.KF]Cl'1CN DIP LENGTH .F'RU+I TO WLD7.H CU ZN AG AU REMARKS 'rAI2GETS

QUEYIAS TOWNSHIP a) Patino Mines (Quebec) Ltd. (1974-75) - West Central Part of Township BR-1 0° 45° 347' 182' 187' 5' 0.65 0.55 Tr. 10% Py in lapilli and felsic crystal tuff. H.L.E.M. BR-2 0° 60° 372° N.S.V. 10% Py in andesitic crystal and lappili tuffs. °1 V4-1 015° 352° 229' 236.5' 7.5' 0.43 0.01 Po, Cpy in tuff and gabbro. n V4-2 217° 65° 499° N.S.V. 25% Po, Py in felsic tuff. u V4-3 355° 65° 443' 306' 307.9' 1.9' 0.25 Tr. 0.02 2-3% Py, Po, minor graphite in felsic tuff. 10 V5-1 350° 348° No assays Minor Py, Po in graphitic tuff. AI 180° 45° 847° ° No assays 2% Py in flow-top. n

Talbot, Claude - South Center of the Township T-2 180° 45° 460.5' No assays 10% Py in graphitic schist. E.M.-16 G14-1 0° 45° 313' No assays Po, Py in chloritic tuff. 1 GM-2 180° 45° No assays 10% Py in chloritic tuff. n c) Selco Mining Corp. (1974) - South Boundary of the Township 60-12-1 215° 50° 248' No assays 20% Py in sediments and tuff breccia H.L.E.M. 60-12-2 215° 50° 251' No assays 50% Py, 1% Cpy in dacitic tuff H.L.E.M. 60-13-1 175° 50° 238' No assays 5% Po, Py in andesite. H.L.E.M. - 28 -

8) Rinfret-Vimont Townships, Areas 1, 2 and 3 Presently there are three anomalous areas (labelled 1 to 3) lying in or close to Rinfret township which are not held by other companies. Area 1 occurs in the north-western section of the .township. It is characterized by two weak (2-channel) INPUT anomalies. The compilation map accompanying D.P. 368 by Allard (1976) shows the area to be underlain by rocks of the Waconichi Formation; however, the Q.D.N.R. INPUT survey Map No. B-1129-2 (GM-27841) shows these anomalies occurring in quartz-gabbro and pyroxenite. This latter situation is the most probable, in which case the two anomalies would correlate with a magnetite-ilmenite horizon which defines a broad conductive zone extending to the west. The exploration potential in this area is considered to be low.

Area 2 lies in west-central Rinfret township and it is characterized by 3 DIGHEM and 4 INPUT anomalies. The only anomaly which has not been subjected to some degree of follow- up work is a very weak (one mho) conductor located approximately 3 miles southwest of Laurin Lake. The anomaly has a direct magnetic association of 330 gammas; however, it falls within a broad NE trending zone of high magnetic intensity. The DIGHEM analysis indicates that the anomaly probably represents a surface response

The other airborne E.M. anomalies in Area 2 have undergone some degree of ground follow-up work. In 1975 an E.M.-17 (H.L.E.M.) survey was undertaken by Rio Tinto Canadian Exploration Limited (hereafter referred to as Rio Tinto). Two conductors were located on the ground and recommendations were made to test these targets by diamond drilling. The results of these drill'holes are not available. As these conductors represent potential targets it should be determined if the drilling program was carried out.

The westernmost DIGHEM anomaly in Area 2 probably corresponds to an E.M.-17 conductor outlined during 1974-75 by Conwest Ex- ploration Limited (hereafter referred to as Conwest) on ground held to the west of Rio Tinto. A diamond drill hole (L-1) tested this conductor. It intersected feldspar-quartz-porphyry, mafic to intermediate tuffaceous rocks and gabbro. The conductor was explained by sections containing up to 5% pyrrhotite and pyrite in mafic to intermediate tuff. Until the results of the Rio Tinto drilling are available the exploration potential of this area is considered moderate to poor. m 29 -

Area 3 is characterized by a 3-channel INPUT anomaly occurring on the Boisvert River in Vimont township approximately mile south of the Rinfret-Vimont township boundary. As the possibility exists that the anomaly is not valid bedrock conductor, consideration should be given to allowing John Betz to pronounce final judgement on its merits. - 30 -

DIEBuTION DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU

RINFRET TC1FlNSHIP a) Conwest Exploration Ltd. - West Central Part of the Township Irl 310° 50° 277' N.S.V. 2% Po, Py in intermediate tuff. H.L.E.M. In2 300° 50° 257° N.S.V. 10% PO in mafic volcanics. °A

Ira 318° 50° 207° N.S.V. 10% Po in mafic to felsic tuff. 10 L-4 325° 50° 297° N.S.V. - 31 -

9) Scott Township No area exhibiting a high exploration potential presently exists in Scott township, although almost the entire volcano- sedimentary belt is open. Two zones of predominantly felsic volcanic rocks (unit 10b) have been outlined by Christmann (1974). Unfortunately this area was completely covered by the 1974 Selco INPUT survey and as no claims were staked it is assumed that no valid bedrock conductors were identified.

The area around the Selco Scott Lake discovery is completely staked except for a small area on the northern township boundary underlain by gabbro and basalt. As such, no area can presently be recommended for exploration in Scott township. - 32 -

NUMBER DIRDCTICN DIP LENGTH FROM TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS MARC!5

SCCJIT TOWNSHIP a) Amalgamated Mining Corp. Ltd. (1962) SW Quarter of the Township A-12 180° 46° 753' N.S.V. Gabbro E.M. A-13 0° 45° 616° N.S.V. Andesite, rhyolite. A-14 180° 47° 470' N.S.V. Andesite, rhyolite, gabbro. A-15 180° 45° 558' 130.3' 132.1' 1.8 0.1 Tr. 10% Py in rhyolite. b) Bar Le Duc Chibougamau Mines Ltd. (1953) - NE Quarter of the Township D-1 160° 45° 674' N.S.V. Unknown D-2 158° 45° 743' 231.7' 232.7' 1' 3.85 0.005 ~ 276.3' . 276.8' 0.5' 1.36 Tr. D-3 160° 45° 552° N.S.V. a~ D-4 160° 45° 546' N.S.V. It D-5 160° 45° 409' 65° 66.5' 1.5 0.12 Tr. Unknown D-6 160° 45° 506' 87.2' 88.8' 1.6' 0.36 Tr. ~ D-7 180° 45° 698' N.S.V. D-8 180° 45° 798' N.S.V. ~ D-9 180° 45° 775' 125' 126' 1' Tr. 0.12 D-10 180° 45° 700' N.S.V. ~ D-11 190° 45° 778' N.S.V. ~ Note: D.D.H.'s D-1 to 11 intersected intermediate to felsic volcanics with granitic, dioritic, and anorthositic intrusive rocks. - 33 -

NUMBER ,DIRECTION DIP LENGTH FROt+1 TO WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARKS TARGETS c) Baska Uraniun Mines Ltd. (1956) - West Center of the Township B-1 225° 30° 315° 56.5' 61.8' 5.3' 0.1 Tr. Py in andesite, minor rhyolite. Resist, la

B-2 160° 30° 584° Py in andesite, minor rhyolite. t0 91 B-3 340° 30° 290' Minor Py, Cpy in andesite, Q.F.P. Fault 13-4 160° 30°. 338° Minor Py, Po, Cpy in andesite, Q.F.P. d) Calnorth Oils Ltd. (1956) - Center of the Township CO-5 217° 60° 713° No assays Unknown CO-6 056° 60° 225° No assays CO-8 180° 45° 405° No assays 1° CO-9 0° 45° 806° 'No assays °1 CO-10 0° 60° 70' No assays Note: D.D.H.'s CO-5, 6 and 8 to 10 intersected rhyolite, quartz veins, granite, andesite, and granodiorite. Chalcopyrite is mentioned in quartz veins. e) Chibougamau Capper Corp. Ltd. (1953) - NE Quarter of the Township W-1 023° 39° 598' 251° 267.5' 16.5' 2.85 0.12 0.03 0.003 Unknown W-2 203° 45° 793° 86.6' 87.4' 0.8' 0.39 Nil 1 655.5' 656.5' l' 0.33 0.06 Nil Nil 11 750' 751' l' 0.22 0.07 Nil Nil W-3 203° 45° 598' No assays ~ W-4 203° 45° 605' N.S.V. I No assays 11 W-5 • 203° 45° 597' - 35 -

NUMBER DIRECTICN DIP ENGTL H FROM Ta WIDTH AG AU REMARKS TARGETS

e) Chibougamau Copper Corp. Ltd. (1953) -(Cont'd) - NE Quarter of the Township Note: D.D.H.'s W-1 to 5 intersected andesite with highly schistose and chloritic sections. There were also sane porphyritic sections with scattered chalcopyrite. Sane quartz veins with low mineralization were also present.

f) Consolidated Tungsten Corp. of Canada (1956) - West Center of the Township C-1 150° 45° 456° N.S.V. Unknown O C-2 315° 45 55 ° Stopped in overburden " C-2c 90° 225' N.S.V. e• C-3 70° 125' Diorite "

g) Hudson Rand Mines Ltd. (1957) - SE Quarter of the Township H-1 317° 45° 304° Minor Py, Cpy in greywacke and E.M. rhyolite. H-2 0° 45° 300° Minor Py in andesite and rhyolite. " H-11 180° 45° 305' Py, Tr.Cpy in intermediate-mafic volcanics Showing H-12 180° 45° 304' 5-10% Py in gabbro (?), andesite and basalt. , Showing

•h) Newlund Mines Ltd. (1957) - NW Quarter of the Township N-1 0° 45° 562' N.S.V. Basalt and gabbro with Po. Resist, low. N-2 0° 45° 302' No assays Andesite and siliceous tuffs. N-3 0° 30° 200' No assays Small stringers of Po in andesite. " °~ N-4 0° 450 131' N.S.V. It - 35 -

NUMBER DJJ*i r.CN DIP LENGTH FROM 20 WIDTH CU ZN AG AU REMARES TARGETS i) Phelps Dodge Corporation of Canada Ltd. (1959) - SW Quarter of the Township PD-2 180° 46° 501' 420° 424.6' 4.6' 0.2 Tr. Mag. Cpy in andesite? E.M. 425' 427.7' 2.7' 0.46 Tr. j) Scott Chibougamau Mines Ltd. (1958) - West Center of the Township SC-1 145° 45° 280° N.S.V. Diahase, rhyolite, agglomerate. E.M. SC-2 335° 45° 302' N.S.V. Diorite breccia, rhyolite, Q.F.P. " k) Seloo Exploration Co. Ltd. (1974) - West Center of the Township 60-5-2 030° 50° 179' No assays Py in graphitic siltstone. H.L.E.M.

1) Sturgeon River Mines Ltd. (1956) - Drill holes located N.E. of Selco discovery; however, location and sequence unknown. S-1 0° 45° 596' No assays 1% Py, Tr.Cpy in gabbro Unknown S-2 0° 45° 721° No assays 1% Py in andesite. S-3 180° 46° 558' No assays 1% Py in gabbro. el S-4 180° 45° 730° No assays 5-10% Py, Tr.Cpy in rhyolite ee and diorite. S-5 180° 45° 490' No assays 5-10% Py in rhyolite. S-6 180° 45° 409' No assays 5-10% Py in rhyolite. S-7 171° 45° 500' No assays 5-10% Py, Tr.Cpy in rhyolite. S-8 0° 45° 480' No assays Py, Po in andesite. S-9 0° 45° 467' No assays Minor Py in sediments.