LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (September 02, 1991)

Further to the article “Temagami claims’ status uncertain following court decision,” by Virginia Heffernan (T.N.M., Aug. 26/91), I would like to make the following points.

— The Sudbury anomaly is 60 km long. The Wanapitei anomaly is 90 km long. There are two magnetic peaks in the Wanapitei anomaly — the magnetic peak in the eastern sector of the anomaly (which is still under land caution) is considered to be of iron formation in Falconbridge Ltd.’s opinion. — The western magnetic peak, according to geophysical interpretation, may be ultra-mafic rock. Therefore, it is unlikely that anyone will be interested or concerned about the portion of the anomaly still under caution (on the eastern sector).

— The western magnetic peak of the Wanapitei anomaly is held by Flag Resources.

After Falconbridge completed its airborne survey, it staked every square foot of Mackelcan twp. surrounding Flag’s boundaries. In effect, it staked an additional 358 claims on top of its original 1,500 claims, which gave it nearly 1,900 claims.

The media has not yet made it clear that exploration of the Wanapitei anomaly does not involve probing the source. The source of both the Sudbury and Wanapitei anomalies are below five kilometres. The target of exploration in the Wanapitei anomaly is a basic intrusive, the same as or similar to, the Sudbury Igneous Complex.

Heffernan correctly and appropriately stated that the target of exploration is “an exploration program designed to find another Sudbury within the depths of the Wanapitei anomaly.” The Wanapitei anomaly could have a great deal of economic significance for the country.

Murdo McLeod

president

Flag Resources