AI assistant
ARIKA RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2020
Jan 20, 2020
64420_rns_2020-01-20_f3f48fdc-987e-479c-8fcb-764c0733f074.pdf
Capital/Financing Update
Open in viewerOpens in your device viewer
==> picture [286 x 59] intentionally omitted <==
ASX RELEASE: 21 January 2020
Metalicity Reports Drill Hole Intercepts Up To 80 g/t Au & Additional Tenement Acquisition for Kookynie
DRILLING HIGHLIGHTS
-
Drilling continues to highlight the high-grade nature of mineralisation at the Kookynie Gold Project, highlight intercepts are:
-
McTavish:
- McTRC0005 – 5 metres @ 17.9 g/t Au from 48 metres, inc. 1 metre @ 80.17 g/t Au from 51 metres.
-
Leipold:
- LPRC0003 – 6 metres @ 9.4 g/t Au from 26metres, inc. 2metres @ 19g/t Au from 26metres.
-
Champion:
- CPRC0004 – 2 metres @ 25.2 g/t Au from 28 metres to end of hole, inc. 1 metre @ 42 g/t Au from 28 metres,
-
All drill holes intersected the target structure or mineralisation and demonstrates very shallow and high-grade nature of the gold mineralisation.
TENEMENT ACQUISITION HIGHLIGHT
-
Significant acquisition of an additional 3,300 hectares within the prolific Kookynie-Niagara Trend.
-
Land holding now doubled at the Kookynie Gold Project to over 7,000 hectares.
-
Acquired tenure demonstrates similar geophysical signatures to the prolific Niagara Trend under thin alluvial cover.
-
Historical, turn of the century site produced 40 tonnes at 12 g/t Au with little to no historical exploration in the area.
Metalicity Limited (ASX: MCT) (“ MCT ” or “ Company ”) is pleased to announce the return of significant intercepts from December 2019 drilling programme confirming mineralisation extends past previously developed and drilled areas for the Kookynie Gold Project (please refer to ASX Announcement “ Metalicity Farms Into Prolific Kookynie & Yundamindra Gold Projects, WA” dated 6[th] May 2019 with Nex Metals Explorations Ltd, ASX:NME) in the Eastern Goldfields, Western Australia. Furthermore, through strategic observations of tenement activity in the area, the Company moved to acquire a significant land parcel through pegging approximately 3,300 hectares of available ground within the prolific Kookynie-Niagara Trend.
Commenting on the drilling results and tenement acquisition, Metalicity Managing Director, Jason Livingstone said:
“I am extremely pleased to start 2020 with such spectacular drill hole results, especially receiving assays up to 80 g/t gold. With our three drilling programmes to date, we have managed to intersect the mineralised structure at all prospects, with every drill hole and continue to illustrate that the Kookynie Gold Project has the potential to be a prolific gold Project. These results are also very shallow, which if converted to resources and reserves, could be potentially open pittable.”
“Furthermore, we are very active on the consolidation front at the Kookynie Gold Project. Since entering into the farm-in agreement with our partners, Nex Metals Exploration Ltd, we have increased our land
Metalicity Limited ASX Code: MCT ABN: 92 086 839 992
www.metalicity.com.au Level 3, 30 Richardson Street West Perth WA 6005
holding through further strategic farm in agreements and tenement pegging exercises. Originally, the deal with Nex encompassed just over 2,400 hectares. We acknowledged that one aspect of the Kookynie area that has hampered historical exploration is the fractured ownership of tenure in the region. Since then, we have tripled our land holding with our recent tenement acquisition through tenement pegging to just over 7,000 hectares of exceptionally prospective ground.”
“We, Metalicity and Nex Metals, are making great headway in our land consolidation efforts and coupled with our exploration and development programmes which are well poised to deliver value for our shareholders. We are clearly demonstrating that the Kookynie Gold Project could well be considered a gold province within the Eastern Goldfields of Western Australia.”
Tenement Acquisition
Through our monitoring of competitor activity within the Kookynie area, we identified that this area was due for renewal. This ground was not renewed and therefore we subsequently used the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety tenement application process to acquire this ground. The exploration license is host to a historical production site named “Wandin”, that during 1903, produced 40 tonnes at an average head grade of 12 g/t Au (reference MINEDEX – https://minedex.dmirs.wa.gov.au/Web/sites/details/36B9915A-1818-49C0-AFC0-A04A3DCD52A3)
The setting of this tenement application highlights that it hosts the strike extents of Ardea Resources Mulga Plum Prospect coupled with the structural complexity illustrated by the regional geophysics in the area, please see Figure 1:
==> picture [397 x 397] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 1 – Kookynie Prospect Locality Map with mineralised trends.
==> picture [135 x 28] intentionally omitted <==
2
With the acquisition of this strategic and highly prospective tenure, the Company has significantly increased its presence within the region and now commands a prominent land holding. The regional geophysics illustrate similar signatures to the prolific and well-endowed Niagara Trend which is host to significant gold mineralisation.
To date, all of Metalicity’s acquisitions and tenement pegging activities contribute towards the $5 million required to earn 51% of the original farm-in agreement with Nex Metals (please refer to ASX Announcement “ Metalicity Farms Into Prolific Kookynie & Yundamindra Gold Projects, WA” dated 6[th] May 2019).
Drilling Discussion
The Kookynie Project is host to six, significant prospects; Champion, McTavish, Leipold, Diamantina, Cosmopolitan and Cumberland. The table below summarises the significant intercepts returned from this recent drilling programme at Leipold, McTavish and Champion. The full sample and assay list are available in Appendix Two.
==> picture [574 x 298] intentionally omitted <==
----- Start of picture text -----
MGA94_Zone 51 South
Down
Grade
Hole Collar Collar Mag Final From To Hole
Prospect HoleID Tenement RL Dip (Au Comments
Type Easting Northing Azi Depth (m) (m) Width
g/t)
(m)
CPRC0003 RC 352,158 6,757,586 417 -60 270 48 31 33 2 1.8 2m @ 1.8 g/t Au from 31m
270 30 28 30 2 25.2 2m @ 25.2 g/t Au from 28m to EOH
CPRC0004 RC 352,149 6,757,566 417 -60
including 28 29 1 42.04 inc. 1m @ 42.04 g/t Au from 28m
Champion M40/27
16 17 1 1.3 1m @ 1.3 g/t Au from 16m
CPRC0005 RC 352,167 6,757,631 417 -60 270 42
39 40 1 2.1 1m @ 2.1 g/t Au from 39m
CPRC0006 RC 352,167 6,757,649 417 -60 270 54 Assays Pending
McTRC0003 RC 350,576 6,754,153 423 -60 270 30 14 15 1 1.9 1m @ 1.9 g/t Au from 14m
McTRC0004 RC 350,596 6,754,153 423 -60 270 48 33 35 2 2.2 2m @ 2.2 g/t Au from 33m
McTavish M40/77
270 66 48 53 5 17.9 5m @ 17.9 g/t Au from 48m
McTRC0005 RC 350,618 6,754,083 424 -60
including 51 52 1 80.17 inc. 1m @ 80.17 g/t Au from 51m
250 42 18 22 4 7.1 4m @ 7.1 g/t Au from 18m
LPRC0002 RC 350,760 6,752,040 431 -60 including 19 21 2 10.8 inc. 2m @ 10.8 g/t Au from 19m
250 42 26 29 3 3.4 3m @ 3.4 g/t Au from 26m
Leipold M40/22 250 42 24 30 6 9.4 6m @ 9.4 g/t Au from 24m
LPRC0003 RC 350,766 6,752,030 431 -60
including 26 28 2 19 inc. 2m @ 19 g/t Au from 26m
250 60 38 46 8 3.2 8m @ 3.2 g/t Au from 38m
LPRC0004 RC 350,785 6,752,027 431 -60
including 38 41 3 6.3 inc. 3m @ 6.3 g/t Au from 38m
----- End of picture text -----
Table 1 – Significant Drill Hole Intercepts
This programme tested the shallow mineralisation observed at the McTavish, Leipold and Champion Prospects. Please refer to Figure 1 for Prospect and tenure locations:
Drill Hole Plane of Vein Long Sections
Below are a series of drill hole plane of vein long sections that illustrate the recent and historical drilling pierce points and discussion detailing the significance of the results to date at each of the Prospects:
==> picture [135 x 28] intentionally omitted <==
3
The Leipold Prospect
==> picture [483 x 323] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 2 – Leipold Plane of Vein Section with recent drilling.
The Company completed three Reverse Circulation (RC) drill holes at the Leipold Prospect for a total of 144 metres in an area that is below the known historical workings and significantly up dip and along strike from historical drilling. We are pleased that each of the drill holes intersected the structure, demonstrating the up dip and strike continuance of mineralisation beyond the previously defined limits.
This is incredibly exciting and demonstrates very shallow mineralisation exists at the Leipold Prospect. Below is the full list of the December 2019 drilling programme results for Leipold:
-
LPRC0002 – 4 metres @ 7.1 g/t Au from 18 metres inc. 2m @ 10.8 g/t Au from 19 metres & 3 metres @ 3.4 g/t Au from 26metres,
-
LPRC0003 – 6 metres @ 9.4 g/t Au from 26metres, inc. 2metres @ 19g/t Au from 26metres, &
-
LPRC0004 – 8 metres @ 3.2 g/t Au from 38 metres inc. 3 metres @ 6.3 g/t Au from 38 metres.
==> picture [135 x 28] intentionally omitted <==
4
The McTavish Prospect
==> picture [497 x 316] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 3 – McTavish Plane of Vein Section with recent drilling.
The Company completed three Reverse Circulation (RC) drill holes at the McTavish Prospect for a total of 144 metres in an area that is below the known historical workings and significantly down dip and along strike from historical drilling. We are pleased that each of the drill holes intersected the structure, demonstrating the down dip and strike continuance of mineralisation beyond the previously defined limits of drilling. To return intercepts of 5 metres @ 17.9 g/t Au from 48 metres, which includes a spectacular 1 metre @ 80.17 g/t Au from 51 metres, demonstrates the continuity and confidence in the tenor of mineralisation at this Prospect.
Below is the full list of the December 2019 drilling programme results for McTavish:
-
McTRC0003 – 1 metres @ 1.9 g/t Au from 14 metres,
-
McTRC0004 – 2 metres @ 2.2 g/t Au from 33 metres, &
-
McTRC0005 – 5 metres @ 17.9 g/t Au from 48 metres inc. 1 metre @ 80.17 g/t Au from 51 metres.
==> picture [135 x 28] intentionally omitted <==
5
The Champion Prospect
==> picture [497 x 349] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 4 – Champion Plane of Vein Section with recent drilling.
Finally, the Champion Prospect is not only characterised by significant drill hole intercepts, but historical production from a very shallow (<8 metre depth) open pit. Whilst the grade control data from the open pit operation is not available, there is a gap in the historical exploration drilling and the base of this pit that spans approximately 25 metres. This area represents an opportunity to infill and define the mineralisation from the top of historical drilling to the base of the pit. Therefore, the Company completed four Reverse Circulation (RC) drill holes at the Champion Prospect for a total of 174 metres to test this section of mineralisation and to confirm its continuance to the base of the pit. We are pleased that each of the drill holes intersected the mineralised structure, demonstrating the up dip and strike continuance of mineralisation beyond the previously defined limits of drilling.
Below is the full list of the December 2019 drilling programme results for Champion:
-
CPRC0003 – 2 metres @ 1.8 g/t Au from 31 metres,
-
CPRC0004 – 2 metres @ 25.2 g/t Au from 28 metres to EOH inc. 1 metre @ 42.04 g/t Au from 28 metres,
-
CPRC0005 – 1 metre @ 1.3 g/t Au from 16 metres & 1 metre @ 2.1 g/t Au from 39 metres, &
-
CPRC0006 – results pending.
To return these incredibly high tenor grades and widths is very prospective and exciting across these three Prospects at the Kookynie Gold Project.
Plan Moving Forward
We are in discussions with our farm in partner Nex Metals Exploration Ltd to decide the work programme for 2020. Given the significance, high grade and shallow nature of these
==> picture [135 x 28] intentionally omitted <==
6
intercepts, let alone our results to date since June 2019, we look forward to updating the market with our Exploration and Development plan for 2020.
Quality Control
The Company, as is normal during a drilling programme, implemented a quality assurance and control process (QAQC) whereby reconciliations with the drilled metre, the representative sample, and the actual sample bag that was submitted to the laboratory was rigorously controlled. Sampling was also based on geology. The original cone split samples from the rig mounted cone splitter were submitted to the laboratory for analytical and QAQC investigations.
Furthermore, usual Industry Practice is to insert a standard (referred to as a CRM – Certified Reference Material that has a known grade within a specified confidence interval), a duplicate or a blank (whereby it is devoid of any mineralisation whatsoever) into the sampling regime to ensure, and on top of the laboratories own QAQC measures of 1 sample in every 20 is to represent one of these samples to ensure quality control. The Company decided, due to the lack of historical QAQC measures, and to ensure the laboratory performed within specification, we implemented a 1 in 10 process.
The results returned by the laboratory where within the CRM stated acceptable standard deviation limits and the duplicity of the samples, given the nature of the mineralisation, were within acceptable limits.
Geology
The Kookynie Project area is in the Keith-Kilkenny Tectonic Zone within the north-northwest trending Archean-aged Malcolm greenstone belt. The Keith-Kilkenny Tectonic Zone is a triangular shaped area hosting a succession of Archean mafic-ultramafic igneous and meta-sedimentary rocks. Regional magnetic data indicates the Kookynie region is bounded to the west by the north-trending Mt George Shear, the Keith-Kilkenny Shear Zone to the east and the Mulliberry Granitoid Complex to the south.
There are several styles of gold mineralisation identified in the Kookynie region. The largest system discovered to date is the high-grade mineralisation mined at the Admiral/Butterfly area, Desdemona area and Kookynie (Niagara) areas. The gold mineralisation is associated with pyritic quartz veins hosted within north to northeast dipping structures cross-cutting 'favourable' lithologies which can also extend into shears along geological contacts. Gold mineralisation at Kookynie tends to be preferentially concentrated in magnetite dominated granitic fractions of the overall granite plutons observed within the Kookynie area.
ENQUIRIES
Investors
Jason Livingstone Managing Director & CEO +61 8 9324 1053 [email protected]
Competent Person Statement
Information in this report that relates to Exploration results and targets is based on, and fairly reflects, information compiled by Mr. Jason Livingstone, a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr. Livingstone is an employee of Metalicity Limited. Mr. Livingstone has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined by the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr. Livingstone consents to the inclusion of the data in the form and context in which it appears.
Note
This Announcement is designed to also supplement for Nex Metals Exploration as it relates to our farm-in agreement as announced on the 6[th] May 2019 titled “ Metalicity Farms Into Prolific Kookynie & Yundamindra Gold Projects, WA ”.
Forward Looking Statements
This announcement may contain certain “forward-looking statements” which may not have been based solely on historical facts, but rather may be based on the Company’s current expectations about future events and results. Where the Company expresses or implies an expectation or
==> picture [135 x 28] intentionally omitted <==
7
belief as to future events or results, such expectation or belief is expressed in good faith and believed to have reasonable basis. However, forwardlooking statements:
(a) are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by the Company, are inherently subject to significant technical, business, economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties and contingencies;
(b) involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from estimated or anticipated events or results reflected in such forward-looking statements. Such risks include, without limitation, resource risk, metals price volatility, currency fluctuations, increased production costs and variances in ore grade or recovery rates from those assumed in mining plans, as well as political and operational risks in the countries and states in which the Company operates or supplies or sells product to, and governmental regulation and judicial outcomes; and
(c) may include, among other things, statements regarding estimates and assumptions in respect of prices, costs, results and capital expenditure, and are or may be based on assumptions and estimates related to future technical, economic, market, political, social and other conditions. The words “believe”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “indicate”, “contemplate”, “target”, “plan”, “intends”, “continue”, “budget”, “estimate”, “may”, “will”, “schedule” and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements.
All forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are qualified by the foregoing cautionary statements. Recipients are cautioned that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and accordingly recipients are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements due to the inherent uncertainty therein.
The Company disclaims any intent or obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or results or otherwise.
==> picture [135 x 28] intentionally omitted <==
8
Appendix One – JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1
Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
|---|---|---|
| Sampling techniques |
● Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. ● Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. ● Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. ● In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. |
● Reverse circulation (RC) sampling was conducted by the offsiders on the drill rig and checked at the end of each rod (6 metres) to ensure that the sample ID’s matched the interval that was intended to be represented by that sample ID. No issues were seen or noted by the Competent person during the entire drilling campaign. These samples are kept onsite in a secure location available for further analysis if required. ● All RC samples were sieved and washed to ensure samples were taken from the appropriate intervals and to determine composites. ● Composites in interpreted non mineralised zones were taken on 2 metre intervals using the spear methodology: ● The quality of the sampling is industry standard and was completed with the utmost care to ensure that the material being sampled, can be traced back to the interval taken from the drill hole for both RC and diamond core. ● OREAS standards of 60 gram charges of OREAS 22F (Au grade range of <1ppb Au – this is a blank), OREAS 251 (Au grade range of 0.498ppm Au to 0.510ppm Au), OREAS 219 (Au grade range of 0.753ppm Au to 0.768ppm Au) and OREAS 229b (Au grade range of 11.86ppm Au to 12.04ppm Au) were used in alternating and sporadic patterns at a ratio of 1 QAQC sample in 10 samples submitted. The material used to make these standards was sourced from a West Australian, Eastern Goldfields orogenic gold deposit. |
| Drilling techniques |
● Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). |
● RC drilling used a bit size of 5 ¼ inch. |
| Drill sample recovery |
● Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. ● Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. ● Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material. |
● RC drilling sample recovery was excellent. Noteworthy is that of the 462 metres drilled, no samples were moist or wet. ● No relationship was displayed between recovery and grade nor loss/gain of fine/course material. |
==> picture [135 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
9
| Logging | ● Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. ● Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. ● The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. |
● All recovered sample from RC has been geologically logged by the Competent Person to a level where it would support an appropriate Mineral Resource Estimate, mining studies and metallurgical test work. ● Logging was qualitative, sampling with the diamond core was based on geological boundaries, and as practical, on the metre in which a geological boundary was intersected in the RC drilling. |
|---|---|---|
| Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation |
● If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. ● If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. ● For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. ● Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. ● Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second- half sampling. ● Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. |
● RC samples were cone split from the rig. ● All RC samples were dry. All recoveries were >90%. ● Duplicates were taken every 20 samples, however, given the lack of QAQC data in historical drilling, the Competent Person performed a 1 in 10 standard or blank or duplicate QAQC protocol across both the RC and diamond core sampling. ● The Competent Person is of the opinion the sampling method described above is appropriate as far as practical, and anomalous assays will be tested further by submission of the original cone split sample. |
| Quality of assay data and laboratory tests |
● The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. ● For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. ● Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. |
● Fire assay and screen fire assay was used for selected RC samples. The methodologies employed at Intertek Genalysis in these analytical procedures are industry standard with appropriate checks and balances throughout their own processes. ● The analytical method employed is appropriate for the style of mineralisation and target commodity present. ● No geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments were used. ● A 1 in 10 standard or duplicate or blank was employed during this programme. QAQC analysis shows that the lab performed within the specifications of the QAQC protocols. The standards used were from OREAS and based on material sourced from with the Eastern Goldfields. Blanks were also sourced from OREAS as well. |
| Verification of sampling and assaying |
● The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. ● The use of twinned holes. ● Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. |
● No umpire analysis has been performed. ● No twinned holes have been completed. ● Data was collected on to standardised templates in the field and data entered at night. Cross checks were performed verifying field data ● No adjustment to the available assay data has been made. |
==> picture [135 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
10
| ● Discuss any adjustment to assay data. | ||
|---|---|---|
| ● Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down- hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. ● Specification of the grid system used. ● Quality and adequacy of topographic control. |
● Drill hole collars will be surveyed using a DGPS. ● The RC holes were downhole surveyed using a “Champ Gyro multi-shot down hole survey camera”. ● GDA94 Zone 51S was used, collars will be picked up by a qualified surveyor using a DGPS (Trimble S7). ● The surveyed collar coordinates appear to be sufficient, however, better definition is required of the topography to allow for a JORC 2012 compliant estimation. ● Below is a table of the collar coordinates as drilled: |
|
| Location of data points |
● Location of data points: | |
| Data spacing and distribution |
● Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. ● Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. ● Whether sample compositing has been applied. |
● The data spacing is sufficient to establish a relatively high confidence in geological and grade continuity, however, peripheral data to support the drill holes requires further work to ensure compliance with JORC 2012 guidelines. ● No sample compositing was applied beyond the calculation of down hole significant intercepts. |
| ● Discuss any adjustment to assay data. | ||
|---|---|---|
| ● Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down- hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. ● Specification of the grid system used. ● Quality and adequacy of topographic control. |
● Drill hole collars will be surveyed using a DGPS. ● The RC holes were downhole surveyed using a “Champ Gyro multi-shot down hole survey camera”. ● GDA94 Zone 51S was used, collars will be picked up by a qualified surveyor using a DGPS (Trimble S7). ● The surveyed collar coordinates appear to be sufficient, however, better definition is required of the topography to allow for a JORC 2012 compliant estimation. ● Below is a table of the collar coordinates as drilled: |
|
| Location of data points |
● Location of data points: | |
| Data spacing and distribution |
● Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. ● Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. ● Whether sample compositing has been applied. |
● The data spacing is sufficient to establish a relatively high confidence in geological and grade continuity, however, peripheral data to support the drill holes requires further work to ensure compliance with JORC 2012 guidelines. ● No sample compositing was applied beyond the calculation of down hole significant intercepts. |
==> picture [135 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
11
| Orientation of data in relation to geological structure |
● Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. ● If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. |
● All drilling was perpendicular to the main structure that hosts mineralisation. Secondary structures oblique to the main structure may have influence hanging and foot wall intercepts. ● The author believes that the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures has not introduced a bias. |
|---|---|---|
| Sample security |
● The measures taken to ensure sample security. | ● The chain of supply from rig to the laboratory was overseen by the Competent Person. At no stage has any person or entity outside of the Competent Person, the drilling contractors, the courier contractors and the assay laboratory came into contact with the samples. ● Samples dispatched to Intertek Genalysis in Kalgoorlie were delivered to the laboratory by the Competent Person, no third-party courier used. |
| Audits or reviews |
● The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. | ● No external audit of the results, beyond the laboratory internal QAQC measures, has taken place. |
==> picture [135 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
12
Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
|---|---|---|
| Mineral tenement and land tenure status |
● Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. ● The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. |
● Please refer to the tenement schedule below to where the drill holes were completed: ● Nex Metals Explorations Ltd hold the tenure in question. Metalicity is currently performing an earn in option as part of our farm in agreement (please refer to ASX Announcement “Metalicity Farms Into Prolific Kookynie & Yundamindra Gold Projects, WA” dated 6thMay 2019) ● No impediments exist to obtaining a license to operate over the listed tenure above. |
| Exploration done by other parties |
● Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. | ● Nex Metals Explorations Ltd have done a great job of collating the historical drilling completed over the previous 30 years. ● The historical work completed requires further field verification via re-down hole surveying (if possible) of drill holes beyond 60 metres depth – it appears below this depth; hole deviation becomes a factor in establishing the location of mineralisation in 3D. Furthermore, collar pickups require verification. All laboratory certificates for the assays on file are collated, only recommendation is possibly more duplicate information in mineralised zones. |
| Geology | ● Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. | ● Kookynie: ● The project area is in the Keith-Kilkenny Tectonic Zone within the north-northwest trending Archean-aged Malcolm greenstone belt. The Keith-Kilkenny Tectonic Zone is a triangular shaped area hosting a succession of Archean mafic-ultramafic igneous and meta-sedimentary rocks. Regional magnetic data indicates the Kookynie region is bounded to the west by the north-trending Mt George Shear, the Keith-Kilkenny Shear Zone to the east and the Mulliberry Granitoid Complex to the south. ● There are several styles of gold mineralisation identified in the Kookynie region. The largest system discovered to date is the high- grade mineralisation mined at the Admiral/Butterfly area, Desdemona area and Niagara area. The gold mineralisation is associated with pyritic quartz veins hosted within north to northeast dipping structures cross-cutting'favourable' lithologies which can also extend into shears |
==> picture [135 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
13
| along geological contacts. Gold mineralisation tends to be preferentially concentrated in differentiated dolerite sills associated with pyrite/carbonate/silica/sericite wall rock alteration. ● Below is an example of the mineralisation returned from CDRCDD0001, full assays for the selected intervals are available in Appendix Two: |
||
|---|---|---|
| Drill hole Information |
● A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collaro elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) ofthe drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the holeo down hole length and interception deptho hole length.● If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case. |
● For Kookynie (and Yundramindra), please refer to the Company’s announcement dated 6th May 2019, “Metalicity Farms Into Prolific Kookynie & Yundamindra Gold Projects, WA”, for all historical drill collar information, and selected significant intercepts. ● For the drilling performed and subject to this announcement, please see the table in the section titled “Location of data points” Table 1, Section 1 of this announcement. |
| Data aggregation methods |
● In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. ● Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. ● The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. |
● All intercepts have been calculated using the weighted average method. Specific intervals within a weighted average interval have been described as part of the overall intercept statement. All results are presented in Appendix 2 for the reader to reconcile the Competent Persons’ calculations. ● Intervals were based on geology and no specific cut off was applied. ● No metal equivalents are discussed or reported. |
| Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths |
● These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. ● If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. ● If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’). |
● Given the shallow dipping nature (approximately -45° on average) of the mineralisation observed at Kookynie, the nominal drilling inclination of -60° lends to close to truth width intercepts. ● However, cross cutting structures within the hanging wall and footwall are noted and may influence the results. |
==> picture [135 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
14
| Diagrams | ● Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. |
● Please see main body of the announcement for the relevant figures. |
|---|---|---|
| Balanced reporting |
● Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results. |
● All results have been presented. Please refer to Appendix 2. |
| Other substantive exploration data |
● Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances. |
● The area has had significant historical production recorded and is accessible via the MINEDEX database. ● All stated mineral resources for the Kookynie (and Yundramindra) Projects are pre-JORC 2012. Considerable work around bulk density, QAQC, down hole surveys and metallurgy, coupled with the planned drilling will be required to ensure compliance with JORC 2012 guidelines. |
| Further work | ● The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). ● Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive. |
● Metalicity intends to drill the known and extend the mineralised occurrences within the Kookynie and Yundramindra Projects. The Yundramindra Project is currently under the plaint process, however Metalicity believes that Nex Metals is well advanced in defending those claims. The drilling will be designed to validate historical drilling with a view to making maiden JORC 2012 Mineral Resource Estimate statements. Metalicity has made the aspirational statement of developing “significant resource and reserve base on which to commence a sustainable mining operation focusing on grade and margin”. ● Diagrams pertinent to the area’s in question are supplied in the body of this announcement. |
==> picture [135 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
15
Appendix Two – Drilling sample and Assay Information
Reverse Circulation Sampling and Assay Information:
Note, only intervals with observed mineralisation were sampled with a determined length also sampled into the hanging and footwall.
| Prospect | Hole_ID | From | To | Drill Type | AssayType | Aug/t |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 11 | 12 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.021 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 12 | 13 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.02 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 13 | 14 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.023 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 14 | 15 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.024 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 15 | 16 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.025 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 16 | 17 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.056 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 17 | 18 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.384 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 18 | 19 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 4.348 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 19 | 20 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 10.41 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 20 | 21 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 11.179 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 21 | 22 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 2.59 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 22 | 23 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.303 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 23 | 24 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.265 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 24 | 25 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 1.37 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 25 | 26 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.57 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 26 | 27 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 3.58 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 27 | 28 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 2.08 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 28 | 29 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 4.57 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.36 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 30 | 31 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.49 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 31 | 32 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.189 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 32 | 33 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.042 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 33 | 34 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.008 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 34 | 35 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.007 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 35 | 36 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.013 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 36 | 37 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.296 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 37 | 38 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.025 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 38 | 39 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.065 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 39 | 40 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.032 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 40 | 41 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.06 |
| Leipold | LPRC0002 | 41 | 42 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 10 | 11 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.047 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 11 | 12 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.689 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 12 | 13 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.017 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 13 | 14 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.099 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 14 | 15 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.068 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 15 | 16 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.094 |
==> picture [136 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
16
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 16 | 17 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.065 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 17 | 18 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.02 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 18 | 19 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.139 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 19 | 20 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.39 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 20 | 21 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.1 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 21 | 22 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.09 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 22 | 23 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.06 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 23 | 24 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.69 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 24 | 25 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 7.04 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 25 | 26 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.376 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 26 | 27 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 25.568 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 27 | 28 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 12.368 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 28 | 29 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 8.747 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 2.315 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 30 | 31 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.56 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 31 | 32 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.235 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 32 | 33 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.409 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 33 | 34 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.061 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 34 | 35 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.041 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 35 | 36 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.014 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 36 | 37 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.018 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 37 | 38 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.048 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 38 | 39 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.047 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 39 | 40 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.045 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 40 | 41 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.005 |
| Leipold | LPRC0003 | 41 | 42 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 22 | 23 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 23 | 24 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 24 | 25 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.011 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 25 | 26 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 26 | 27 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 27 | 28 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 28 | 29 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.042 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.03 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 30 | 31 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 31 | 32 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 32 | 33 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 33 | 34 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.005 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 34 | 35 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.036 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 35 | 36 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 36 | 37 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.046 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 37 | 38 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.272 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 38 | 39 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 4.44 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 39 | 40 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 9.14 |
==> picture [136 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
17
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 40 | 41 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 5.44 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 41 | 42 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.22 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 42 | 43 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.17 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 43 | 44 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 2.97 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 44 | 45 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 2.02 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 45 | 46 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 1.36 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 46 | 47 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.46 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 47 | 48 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.4 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 48 | 49 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 1.6 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 49 | 50 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.09 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 50 | 51 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.03 |
| Leipold | LPRC0004 | 51 | 52 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.03 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 2 | 3 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.072 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 3 | 4 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.01 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 4 | 5 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.015 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 5 | 6 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.017 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 6 | 7 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.02 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 7 | 8 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.021 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 8 | 9 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.06 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 9 | 10 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.23 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 10 | 11 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.237 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 11 | 12 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.228 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 12 | 13 | RC Split Sample | Void N/S | |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 13 | 14 | RC Split Sample | Void N/S | |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 14 | 15 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 1.846 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 15 | 16 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.475 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 16 | 17 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.23 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 17 | 18 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.07 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 18 | 19 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.08 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 19 | 20 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.03 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 20 | 21 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.03 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 21 | 22 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.01 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 22 | 23 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.04 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 23 | 24 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.03 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 24 | 25 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.02 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 25 | 26 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.01 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 26 | 27 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.01 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 27 | 28 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.055 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 28 | 29 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.028 |
| McTavish | McTRC0003 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.077 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 28 | 29 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.011 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 30 | 31 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.008 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 31 | 32 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.269 |
==> picture [136 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
18
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 32 | 33 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.044 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 33 | 34 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 1.395 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 34 | 35 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 2.843 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 35 | 36 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.789 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 36 | 37 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.106 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 37 | 38 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.053 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 38 | 39 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.029 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 39 | 40 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.062 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 40 | 41 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 41 | 42 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.064 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 42 | 43 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.02 |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 43 | 44 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 44 | 45 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 45 | 46 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 46 | 47 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0004 | 47 | 48 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.02 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 35 | 36 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.007 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 36 | 37 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 37 | 38 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 38 | 39 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.044 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 39 | 40 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 40 | 41 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.071 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 41 | 42 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.021 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 42 | 43 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.016 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 43 | 44 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.772 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 44 | 45 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.06 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 45 | 46 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.07 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 46 | 47 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.05 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 47 | 48 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.03 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 48 | 49 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 3.32 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 49 | 50 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.06 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 50 | 51 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 4.86 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 51 | 52 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 80.17 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 52 | 53 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 1.127 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 53 | 54 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.178 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 54 | 55 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.121 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 55 | 56 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.023 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 56 | 57 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.019 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 57 | 58 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 58 | 59 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.011 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 59 | 60 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.012 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 60 | 61 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.285 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 61 | 62 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.041 |
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 62 | 63 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.015 |
==> picture [136 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
19
| McTavish | McTRC0005 | 63 | 64 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 12 | 13 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.024 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 13 | 14 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.128 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 14 | 15 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.025 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 15 | 16 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.063 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 16 | 17 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.067 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 17 | 18 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.072 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 18 | 19 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.127 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 19 | 20 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.019 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 20 | 21 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.036 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 21 | 22 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.057 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 22 | 23 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.193 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 23 | 24 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.308 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 24 | 25 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 25 | 26 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.005 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 26 | 27 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 27 | 28 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 28 | 29 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 30 | 31 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.26 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 31 | 32 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 2.35 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 32 | 33 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 1.21 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 33 | 34 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.08 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 34 | 35 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.06 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 35 | 36 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.33 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 36 | 37 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.054 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 37 | 38 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.175 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 38 | 39 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.071 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 39 | 40 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.015 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 40 | 41 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.011 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 41 | 42 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 42 | 43 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.026 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 43 | 44 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.035 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 44 | 45 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.009 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 45 | 46 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.055 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 46 | 47 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.009 |
| Champion | CPRC0003 | 47 | 48 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.006 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 12 | 13 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.028 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 13 | 14 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.027 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 14 | 15 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.017 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 15 | 16 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.02 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 16 | 17 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.007 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 17 | 18 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.014 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 18 | 19 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.038 |
==> picture [136 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
20
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 19 | 20 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 20 | 21 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.017 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 21 | 22 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.249 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 22 | 23 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.02 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 23 | 24 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.039 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 24 | 25 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.035 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 25 | 26 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.18 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 26 | 27 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.06 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 27 | 28 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.43 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 28 | 29 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 42.04 |
| Champion | CPRC0004 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 8.32 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 13 | 14 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.133 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 14 | 15 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.237 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 15 | 16 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.232 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 16 | 17 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 1.295 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 17 | 18 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.138 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 18 | 19 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.163 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 19 | 20 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.021 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 20 | 21 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.016 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 21 | 22 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.111 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 22 | 23 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.224 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 23 | 24 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.021 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 24 | 25 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.078 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 25 | 26 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.107 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 26 | 27 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.04 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 27 | 28 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.018 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 28 | 29 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.014 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.031 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 30 | 31 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.039 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 31 | 32 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.008 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 32 | 33 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.008 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 33 | 34 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.008 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 34 | 35 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.032 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 35 | 36 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Below Detection |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 36 | 37 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | 0.021 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 37 | 38 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.09 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 38 | 39 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.28 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 39 | 40 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 2.11 |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 40 | 41 | RC Split Sample | Void N/S | |
| Champion | CPRC0005 | 41 | 42 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.24 |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 29 | 30 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 30 | 31 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 31 | 32 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 32 | 33 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
==> picture [136 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
21
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 33 | 34 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 34 | 35 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 35 | 36 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 36 | 37 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.81 |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 37 | 38 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.12 |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 38 | 39 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.15 |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 39 | 40 | RC Split Sample | Screen Fire Assay | 0.06 |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 40 | 41 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 41 | 42 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 42 | 43 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 43 | 44 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 44 | 45 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
| Champion | CPRC0006 | 45 | 46 | RC Split Sample | Fire Assay | Assays Pending |
==> picture [136 x 29] intentionally omitted <==
22