Gunsynd reveals widespread untested soil anomalism and historic high grade zinc intercepts at Bear-Twit
Several targets fall under the purview of Bear-Twit, including Esau, Waterfall, Big Cirque, REV showing, and the Bear-Twit deposit itself.
North of the Bear-Twit deposit, several showings were investigated in 1975 and 1976 on multiple sides of a peak spanning over three kilometres east-west.
Surface channel sampling, bulk sampling and very limited confirmatory drilling was undertaken.
The REV target was discovered in 1975 and was the subject of a limited sampling and drill confirmation program. Located just 10 kilometres north-east of the Bear-Twit deposit the REV showing target hosts high grade, zinc dominated mineralisation in a structurally controlled breccia body cropping out at surface.
The showing is exposed over an area more than 91 metre horizontal by 137 metre vertical thickness. Mineralisation is fault and fracture controlled. Veining, disseminations to massive sulphides, replacement of fossils and breccia/crackle zone cements are observed with sphalerite and galena as the main sulphides with lesser pyrite and note of tetrahedrite, although no copper or antimony assays were completed.
Among the highlights of chip sampling were returns of 10.04% zinc, 5.65% zinc, 2% zinc and 11.6% zinc.
Drilling adjacent to the surface showing returned 21.34 metres grading 9.27% zinc from 1.52 metres depth, ending in 0.23% zinc, which indicates the zone is open to depth.
At Waterfall there is an underexplored breccia zone, which is up to 20 feet wide on surface, trending northwest through the dolomite host rocks. Sphalerite and galena are observed as disseminations, infilling vugs and forming veins along a brecciated/crackle zone exposed in a stream cut associated with a fault.
A brief historic channel sampling program returned assays as high as 7.40% zinc with 3.26% lead. The unweighted average of all samples was 2.77% zinc and 0.71% lead.
At Big Cirque mineralisation can be traced in outcrop and float for several thousand feet along strike to the northwest from a major fault. Mineralisation consists of crackle breccia zones, veins and disseminations of dolomite. Panel samples returned highlights of 5.88% zinc and 1.12% lead, 2.40% zinc and 0.05% lead, and 1.44% zinc and 2.84% lead.
At Esau's Fault mineralisation is lower grade, with 1975 bulk sampling averaging 0.65% zinc. However, the showing is further proof of zinc fertility within the broader Bear-Twit project.
Additionally, a detailed soil geochemistry program was conducted in 1973 in the immediate vicinity of the Bear-Twit lead-zinc deposit prior to the historic drilling efforts. A total of 900 samples were taken and analysed for copper, lead, zinc and silver, and a clear anomaly of copper-lead-zinc is observed overlapping and immediately downslope of the known Bear-Twit deposit.
Further anomalies are presented in the data, which have not received follow up ground-truthing. Of note is the anomaly directly upslope of the known deposit, indicating a possible extension to the drill tested mineralisation at Bear-Twit.
Across the river to the southeast there are further anomalies, which present wider zones of copper anomalism and combined lead-zinc. These areas require ground truthing and will feed into the target pipeline for field activities.
View from Vox
All this presents opportunities for an exciting period of upcoming work for Gunsynd. The company will continue to integrate and digitise its historic data, and will now get down to the serious business of planning its 2025 exploration program. There’s already a historic resource at Bear-Twit of over seven million tonnes of ore, and drillhole RM-1 returned grades of over 9% zinc over more than 21 metres. There’s clearly mineralisation all over the place. The task in hand now is to make sense of it all, and to determine whether any of it will be economic to mine. So far, so good.
Disclaimer & Declaration of Interest
The information, investment views and recommendations in this article are provided for general information purposes only. Nothing in this article should be construed as a solicitation to buy or sell any financial product relating to any companies under discussion or to engage in or refrain from doing so or engaging in any other transaction. Any opinions or comments are made to the best of the knowledge and belief of the writer but no responsibility is accepted for actions based on such opinions or comments. Vox Markets may receive payment from companies mentioned for enhanced profiling or publication presence. The writer may or may not hold investments in the companies under discussion.