This presentation addresses the sources and weighting of project risk in coarse gold deposits with relevance to experiences at the Ballarat mine and Castlemaine goldfield. With sample representation and reliability often a source of great error in the resource estimation of coarse gold deposits, it follows that this matter should be of greatest risk to a mining project - but is it? What are the costs and efforts required to best quantify the sampling error due to nuggetty effect? After all, the main problem in Victorian gold mining ventures in the current decade is not the amount of gold available, but defi ning which portion of it can be converted to Ore Reserves or more so profitable gold bars._x000D_
The author postulates that greater risk to the project lies in the geological interpretation and matching resource spatial parameters to mining methods, than the degree of uncertainty related to grade due to nuggetty gold. Recent experience in the Victorian goldfi elds is that the investor market has already severely discounted Mineral Resources reported in accordance with The JORC Code - so if they don't believe in the capacity to upgrade the resource why should we? To this end, Castlemaine Goldfi elds Ltd at its Ballarat gold project does not intend to estimate its gold mineralisation for public release, instead choosing to focus on the geological interpretation and mine planning elements. So with coarse gold deposits, is your Mineral Resource reported with The JORC Code a glass half full or half empty? Our mining forefathers in Victoria had no predictive tools which could define resources to any degree and yet were successful. By over emphasis on the definition of mineral resources and particularly the sampling error, are we ignoring the basics of cost control, solid geological interpretations and maximum mining flexibility._x000D_
This is an ABSTRACT ONLY. No paper was prepared for this presentation.