Letters to the Editor Remote: an inaccurate, confusing word

This is a note concerning the use of the word “remote” which I hope you may publish at least in part but in any event pass on to your writers.

The word conjures up a host of frightening meanings for most people. In fact the word remote in an article often kills the true message and suggests undevelopability.

Used as it was in the article about Dejour and Noble Peak (N.M., July/88) it becomes even more confusing. What actually is meant? Does it mean distant in time or far distant in miles? And if it is either what is it distant from?

It is generally regarded that distance in miles is the meaning. If that is the case, what is the point of reference? If it is Toronto, the distance may seem great. If it is distant in terms of service, the remoteness becomes far less formidable and in fact it is just around the corner when compared with developments in the central part of the Northwest Territories. Echo Bay was remote until somebody made it otherwise. For that matter so was Yellowknife — or closer to home the Porcupine camp in the beginning.

For purposes of perspective let’s look. If one boards an aircraft in Toronto at 9 a.m. arrival at Rankin Inlet will be at 2:30 p.m. on the same day. Via smaller aircraft (fixed wing or helicopter) the properties will be reached by late afternoon of the same day. By this criteria Vancouver can also be regarded as remote both in distance and time.

In the early discovery and development days of Porcupine the properties were reached via rail to North Bay, thence via stage coach, canoe and portages. A journey that took the better part of a week. That was remote, at least by present day conceptions.

The technology that has created instant demand is also making developments possible at a much faster pace than ever thought possible before. Telephone linkage directly with the camp. Computer programs allowing rapid processing of data and a field laboratory allowing sufficient accuracy for direction of exploration make possible achievements in one season that only a few years ago required several seasons to attain.

Remoteness in terms of physical access does not exist. The location of the Turquetil property is sixty miles from tidewater with access via a river system. Manitoba has carried electric power to Churchill and with some persuasion could be convinced of the profitability of carrying it a few miles further to service large, long-term mining developments. Failing this there are hydro sources close by that could be developed and with the now available submersible turbines, relatively inexpensively. Wind power offers another alternative source of energy and is being investigated under the sponsorship of the Northwest Territories’ government.

Your article is correct that a slightly higher grade is desirable, but that same factor is true for any new development whether it is in the Provinces or mid-Canada. It always makes start-up a lot easier. But given the facts of access and developability the properties are not remote. Off the beaten track — yes. But that is where most of Canada’s major mining districts began. It is worth keeping in mind. Norman Ursel, P.Eng. President Noble Peak Resources Ltd.