Groundswel makes some good points but I don't agree with his view that Management have shown that they have run both mines competently and that if it fails due to low grades it is beyond management's control.
[ A little paraphrasing there]

As I have said in a previous post I believe that mining at Union Hill should not have started when it did, if at all. Valuable resources in manpower, cash reserves, machinery and management focus were diverted from the A1 mine to Union Hill. From what limited information I have seen there was little or no recent exploration drilling done. I'm talking a comprehensively and competently planned long hole drilling exploration program. Had this been done and the results made public we would all know if it is feasible to continue mining at Union Hill. Its basic stuff, you drill before you dig. Instead again from the limited information I have seen there has been limited drilling and only in the 20 to 30m range .Pitifull stuff . To me this is exploration by digging/digging blindly.

In short if Union Hill mine failes because of low grades then this is management's fault.

If Union Hill mine isn't paying its own way then it should be mothballed until a proper exploration program can be afforded. That's assuming CTL is still around.

Money spent on the tailings dam and the crushing and process plant was well spent. These are valuable assets.

If by some chance we come out of this current management generated financial near death experience then I believe we should focus on production from the A1 mine, try and clear our debts and build up a sizable cash reserve and maybe even some credibility.

I either read somewhere or was told by someone that a previous company that owned Union Hill mine sometime before CTL had spent $20 million on the decline and stuff at Union Hill. I don't know how true this is but that decline would have cost many millions to put in. Was any exploration drilling done before the decline was dug or was it a case of I hope there is gold down there? Or did some clown like the idea of digging a long deep hole?

Ozapp[/QUOTE]

Good points Ozapp and fair call on the union hill decision. It does look like it’s underperformed on grade, which is what brought its previous operators undone so it’s valid to question the decision to mine it in the first place. I think they would need to be achieving above 3.5 g/t on long hole stoping for it to be really viable and it doesn’t look like it’s been performing at that level.