MRP CLAIM SAMPLING PROGRAM
Total of 411 samples

382 soil samples and 29 rock samples were taken from the MRP Claims on Montezuma Peak, Esmeralda County, Nevada. The locations of the soil samples are marked by pink flagging and inscribed metal tags affixed within about 10 feet of the sample locations.

The excavations have been left open. Most of the samples were taken from the ‘B’ Horizon. A few were taken from bedrock. GPS locations for the soil sample locations were also taken and recorded.
 
The rock samples are either marked individually or referred to nearby soil stations.
 
A Topo Map of Section 15, T 3S, R 41E has been enlarged to a scale of 1 inch equals 200 feet. The existing Patents, originally patented in 1805, have been shown on this map. The patents are delineated on the ground by incised stones and these stones were not found.  The MRP Claim group is also shown on this map. These maps are available if requested if you email me here.
 
The MRP Claims continue into Section 22, south of Section 15. A Sagebrush anomaly was previously found in this area. Reference: Sage Anomaly work at Pinson Mine, Humboldt County, NV
 
A Mylar overlay has been made of the Topo area in which the sampling was done. A Base Line, 20 East, was constructed, and this Base Line falls a bit east of the Ruins shown on the Topo Map. North Lines were constructed crossing this base line commencing with 8 North and extending to 35 North. 20 North passes thru the Ruins. The Maps may be indexed together by matching the Index Points ‘A’ and ‘B’
 
The sample lines are also shown on graph paper at 200 feet to the inch. The Mylar may be used with a light table (or lacking this, a bright window) to visualize the topography with the sample locations with the graph paper as an overlay or an underlay.
 
The samples that were judged anomalous are discussed below. The selection of anomaly was guided by: Refer: LW Ashton, “Geochemical Exploration Guidelines to Disseminated Gold Deposits” 1988, Mining Engineering, A copy of this paper is included. Also referenced: Levinson’s “Intoduction to Exploration Geochemistry.”
 

PLATE 1

 
Plate 1 plots the samples of gold (Au) with an arbitrary cut of 10ppb.
 
10ppb to 30ppb is shown in Yellow
30ppb to 100ppb is shown in Green
Plus 100ppb is shown in Red
 
Arsenic (As) is plotted on this Plate for all values above 20ppm
where the gold values were below 10 ppb
There were no gold values (as shown on the plate) that did not have Arsenic (As) plus 20ppm associated with the gold.
 
Dashed Black Lines show the anomaly’s that are interpolated from these values.
 
 
Ashton’s interpretation of disseminated gold deposits suggests 30 ppb as a low-grade cutoff for gold samples.69 samples 17%
 
Levinson’s interpretation yielded the following:
Gold (Au) Anomalous 1ppb and above. 373 samples 91%
Silver (Ag) Anomalous .1ppm and above. 318 samples 77%
                                          
Ashton’s interpretation for anomalous Arsenic (As), Antimony (Sb) and Mercury (Hg)
Arsenic (As) plus 100ppm 34 samples 8%
Antimony (Sb) Plus 50 ppm 4 samples 1%
Mercury (Hg) Plus 1ppm 3 samples .7%
 
Levinson’s interpretation for anomalous Arsenic (As) Antimony (Sb) and Mercury (Hg)
Arsenic (As) 5 ppm all 411 samples taken 100% above 5 ppm.
Antimony (Sb) 5 ppm 47 samples 12%
Mercury (Hg).03-ppm 405 samples 99%
 
If a cutoff of .5ppm for mercury were used the samples would be 6, or 1.4%
The low Mercury is interesting because there is a known mercury mine near by.
 
Also included in the assay reports are some interpretation for anomalous Arsenic (As) Antimony (Sb) and Mercury (Hg)
Arsenic (As) 5 ppm all 411 samples taken 100% above 5 ppm.
Antimony (Sb) 5 ppm 47 samples 12%
Mercury (Hg).03-ppm 405 samples 99%
 
If a cutoff of .5ppm for mercury were used the samples would be 6, or 1.4%
The low Mercury is interesting because there is a known mercury mine near by.
 
Also included in the assay reports are some copper (Cu), lead (Pb), zinc (Zn), cobalt (Co), nickel (Ni) and rubidium (Rb). The rubidium was in excess of 10 ppm in all the soil samples and generally below this value in the rock samples. These elements are not usually considered pathfinders and the values did not seem to collate with the precious metals. That is; we could not use them as pathfinders and they did not seem to constitute an ore body by themselves.