RAMELIUS RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2017

Sep 10, 2017

11 September 2017 For Immediate Release

Shannon Resource & Exploration Update

Ramelius Resources Limited (ASX:RMS) is pleased to announce a major increase to the Shannon Mineral Resource as a result of recent drill programmes conducted in April and July 2017 (see ASX Releases, "June 2017 Quarterly Activities Report", 28/07/2017 & "Exploration & Resource Development Drilling Update", 4/09/2017). The Shannon deposit forms part of the Cosmos mining area at Mt Magnet in Western Australia and is located 600m south-west of the recently commenced Milky Way open pit (refer Figure 1).

11 September 2017

ISSUED CAPITAL

Ordinary Shares: 526M

DIRECTORS

NON-EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN: Robert Kennedy NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS: Kevin Lines Michael Bohm MANAGING DIRECTOR: Mark Zeptner

www.rameliusresources.com.au info@rameliusresources.com.au

RAMELIUS RESOURCES LIMITED

Registered Office

Suite 4, 148 Greenhill Road Parkside, Adelaide South Australia 5063 Tel +61 8 8271 1999 Fax +61 8 8271 1988

Operations Office Level 1, 130 Royal Street East Perth WA 6004 Tel +61 8 9202 1127

The total Mineral Resource is now estimated at 581,000t @ 4.6g/t for 86,000oz, representing an increase over the February 2017 resource of 76% tonnes, 31% grade and 132% ounces.

Additionally, exploration drilling carried out in late August 2017, along strike to the immediate south of Shannon, has returned very encouraging results with intercepts of:

• 13m at 3.02g/t Au from 92m in GXRC1690, and
• 5m at 11.43g/t Au from 109m in GXRC1690, incl. 1m at 50.0g/t Au from 113m.

This drill hole has potentially extended the strike of the resource by 100m, with the deposit remaining open at depth as well as further along strike.

The mineralisation at Shannon is hosted by a moderately dipping, quartz vein/lode with good strike and dip continuity. Following re-evaluation of the Shannon open pit cutback, an underground mine evaluation and design will be undertaken.

For further information contact:

Mark Zeptner Duncan Gordon Managing Director Executive Director Ramelius Resources Limited Adelaide Equity Partners Ph: +61 8 9202 1127 Ph: +61 404 006 444

ABOUT RAMELIUS

Ramelius owns 100% of the Mt Magnet gold mine and associated processing plant located in the Murchison region of Western Australia. The Company is mining underground at the high-grade Vivien gold mine near Leinster as well as underground at Water Tank Hill and open pit mining at Mt Magnet, with several pit cut-backs and new pits underway that form part of the new Cosmos Mine Area (refer Figure 1).

Figure 1: Mt Magnet key mining and exploration target areas

Shannon Deposit (Mt Magnet)

Shannon was previously mined as a 60m deep open pit in 2001-2003. Recorded production is 151,000t @ 2.4g/t for 11,600oz. The Shannon mineralised lode is typically 2-8m thick and strikes north at around 015°. It dips east at an average of 40 to 50° (refer Figure 2).

The lode is broadly lenticular and narrows to the south. A quartz, +/- tourmaline vein, or veins, occur in the core zone, with the vein zone generally between 1-4m thick. Wallrock alteration comprises of silica-sericite and disseminated pyrite. Lower grade strike extents appear to be more of a shear with 10-20% quartz veining present.

The Shannon lode is hosted within a variably porphyritic dacite unit. At the north end, it appears to terminate at the (possibly faulted) contact with an ultramafic unit. Fresh rock occurs between 40-65m below surface.

Figure 2: Cross section 6895890N +/-10m – Shannon lode model and drilling

Mineral Resource

Table 1: Shannon Mineral Resource

Category	Tonnes	Grade	Ounces
Indicated	448,000	5.0	72,000
Inferred	133,000	3.3	14,000
Total	581,000	4.6	86,000

Note: Figures rounded to nearest 1,000 tonnes, 0.1g/t and 1,000 ounces. Rounding errors may occur.

Mineral Resource Commentary

The resource was generated using historic drilling within, and immediately below the previously mined Shannon open pit, combined with new drilling. Since October 2016, Ramelius has completed 38 RC holes for 7,191m, 2 HQ diamond holes for 366.4m and 1 RC-NQ diamond tail for 311.6m. These holes test the down dip continuation of the lode zone and have an approximate pattern of 20m x 30m (refer Figure 3).

Interpretation was carried out on 10m spaced sections utilising the geological interpretation described above and a nominal 1g/t lower cut-off. A minimum 3m downhole intercept was used and some sub-grade material was included on to maintain lode width & shape continuity. A high-grade quartz vein sub-domain was generated for the northern half of the deposit. RC sub-samples and half core were assayed by Fire Assay at a Perth commercial laboratory. Appropriate QAQC samples accompanied primary sample batches.

Samples were grouped by domain, composited to 1m intervals, top-cut and gold was estimated using Ordinary Kriging and anisotropic searches. Resource classification was applied based on drillhole density and interpreted mineralisation continuity. All resources within the lode domain were reported. Resources have been generated for evaluation by open-pit mining near surface and underground mining below 100m. Resource dimensions are currently around 150m strike length and 280m down dip. A previous model was used for an open pit evaluation and design and this pit has received Mining Approval.

Detailed information is given in JORC Table 1 attached below.

Figure 3: Oblique view to NW - Resource model by Au grade and drilling

Shannon Extension Exploration

RC drilling targeting the southern strike extension of the Shannon lode is in progress, with one drill hole completed in late August 2017 that returned highly encouraging intercepts of:

• 13m at 3.02g/t Au from 92m in GXRC1690, and
• 5m at 11.43g/t Au from 109m in GXRC1690, including 1m at 50.0g/t Au from 113m.

Drill hole GXRC1690 lies directly along strike to the south-west of the Shannon lode and 100m to the south of the nearest resource drill hole (refer Figure 4). Mineralisation in the drill hole is associated with quartz veining and sulphides. Drilling along strike and down dip is continuing.

Figure 4: Plan view showing Shannon resource model, resource drill holes and recent exploration drill hole

Attachment 1: Shannon Extension RC Drilling Result - Mt Magnet, WA

Hole Id	Easting	Northing	Az/Dip	RL	F/Depth (m)	From (m)	To (m)	Interval (m)	g/t Au
GXRC1690Shannon Extension	576945	6895691	290/-60	437	190Incl.	92109113	105114114	1351	3.0211.4350.00

Intercepts generally > 0.5g/t, with up to 2m of internal dilution. NSR denotes no significant results. True width generally 70-90% of interval width. Coordinates are MGA94-Z50.

FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

This report contains forward looking statements. The forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, assumptions, forecasts and projections and the industry in which it operates as well as other factors that management believes to be relevant and reasonable in the circumstances at the date such statements are made, but which may prove to be incorrect. The forward-looking statements relate to future matters and are subject to various inherent risks and uncertainties. Many known and unknown factors could cause actual events or results to differ materially from the estimated or anticipated events or results expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among others, changes in market conditions, future prices of gold and exchange rate movements, the actual results of production, development and/or exploration activities, variations in grade or recovery rates, plant and/or equipment failure and the possibility of cost overruns. Neither Ramelius, its related bodies corporate nor any of their directors, officers, employees, agents or contractors makes any representation or warranty (either express or implied) as to the accuracy, correctness, completeness, adequacy, reliability or likelihood of fulfilment of any forward-looking statement, or any events or results expressed or implied in any forward-looking statement, except to the extent required by law.

COMPETENT PERSONS

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results and Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Volker Gartz (Exploration Results) and Rob Hutchison (Mineral Resources), who are Competent Persons and Members of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Volker Gartz and Rob Hutchison are full-time employees of the company. Volker Gartz and Rob Hutchison have sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves". Volker Gartz and Rob Hutchison consent to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on their information in the form and context in which it appears.

JORC Table 1 Report – Shannon Deposit

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Samplingtechniques	Nature and quality of sampling (e.g.cut channels, random chips, or specificspecialised industry standardmeasurement tools appropriate to theminerals under investigation, such asdown hole gamma sondes, or handheldXRF instruments, etc.). These examplesshould not be taken as limiting the broadmeaning of sampling.Include reference to measures takento ensure sample representivity and theappropriate calibration of anymeasurement tools or systems used.Aspects of the determination ofmineralisation that are Material to thePublic Report.In cases where 'industry standard'work has been done this would berelatively simple (e.g. 'reverse circulationdrilling was used to obtain 1 m samplesfrom which 3 kg was pulverised toproduce a 30g charge for fire assay'). Inother cases more explanation may berequired, such as where there is coarsegold that has inherent samplingproblems. Unusual commodities ormineralisation types (e.g. submarinenodules) may warrant disclosure ofdetailed information.	Sampled by RC drilling with samples collected as 1msamples and sub‐sampled using a riffle or conesplitter to produce ≈3kg sub‐samples. Drillholelocations were designed to cover the spatial extentsof the interpreted mineralisation.1m intervals or geologically selected 0.3‐1.3mintervals were sampled for diamond drilling whichwas sawn into half core for samplingDrill hole locations were designed to allow for spatialspread across the interpreted mineralised zone.Standard fire assaying was employed using a 50gmcharge with an AAS finish.The majority of drilling at Shannon is new andhistoric drilling is only within and just below themined pit.
Drillingtechniques	Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation,open‐hole hammer, rotary air blast,auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details(e.g. core diameter, triple or standardtube, depth of diamond tails, face‐sampling bit or other type, whether coreis oriented and if so, by what method,etc.).	RC Drilling was completed using best practice 5 ¾"face sampling RC drilling hammers, 3" Aircore bits.Diamond drilling engaged HQ or NQ core sizesMinor historical RAB & Aircore drilling may beincluded in upper zones, otherwise only RC ordiamond drill hole data is utilized
Drill samplerecovery	Method of recording and assessing coreand chip sample recoveries and resultsassessed.Measures taken to maximise samplerecovery and ensure representativenature of the samples.Whether a relationship exists betweensample recovery and grade and whethersample bias may have occurred due topreferential loss/gain of fine/coarsematerial.	RC drillholes samples were visually inspected by thesupervising geologist to ensure adequate cleansample recoveries were achieved.Zones of poor sample return are recorded in thedatabase and cross checked once assay results arereceived from the laboratory to ensure nomisrepresentation of sampling intervals hasoccurred. Excellent RC and diamond drill recovery isreported from all RC and diamond holes.No indication of sample bias is evident or has beenestablished
Logging	Whether core and chip samples havebeen geologically and geotechnicallylogged to a level of detail to support	All drill samples are geologically logged on site byRMS geologists. Details on the host lithologies,deformation, dominant minerals including sulphide

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	appropriate Mineral Resource estimation,mining studies and metallurgical studies.Whether logging is qualitative orquantitative in nature. Core (or costean,channel, etc.) photography.The total length and percentage of therelevant intersections logged.	species and alteration minerals plus veining arerecorded relationally (separately).Drillhole logging of chips or core is qualitative onvisual recordings of rock forming minerals andestimates of mineral abundance.The entire length of drillholes are geologically logged
Sub‐samplingtechniquesand samplepreparation	If core, whether cut or sawn and whetherquarter, half or all core taken.If non‐core, whether riffled, tubesampled, rotary split, etc. and whethersampled wet or dry.For all sample types, the nature, qualityand appropriateness of the samplepreparation technique.Quality control procedures adopted for allsub‐sampling stages to maximiserepresentivity of samples.Measures taken to ensure that thesampling is representative of the in situmaterial collected, including for instanceresults for field duplicate/second‐halfsampling.Whether sample sizes are appropriate tothe grain size of the material beingsampled.	Duplicate samples are collected every 25th samplefrom the drill chips or core samples.Dry RC 1m samples are riffle split to 3kg as drilledand dispatched to the laboratory. Any wet samplesare recorded in the database as such and allowed todry before splitting and dispatching to thelaboratory. Diamond core was half core sawn beforesampling.All samples are pulverized prior to splitting in thelaboratory to ensure homogenous samples with 85%passing 75um. 200gm is extracted by spatula that isused for the 50gm charge on standard fire assays.All samples submitted to the laboratory are sortedand reconciled against the submission documents.In addition to duplicates a high grade or low gradestandard is included every 25th sample, a controlledblank is inserted every 100th sample.The sample size is considered appropriate for thetype, style, thickness and consistency of
Quality ofassay data andlaboratorytests	The nature, quality and appropriatenessof the assaying and laboratoryprocedures used and whether thetechnique is considered partial or total.For geophysical tools, spectrometers,handheld XRF instruments, etc., theparameters used in determining theanalysis including instrument make andmodel, reading times, calibrations factorsapplied and their derivation, etc.Nature of quality control proceduresadopted (e.g. standards, blanks,duplicates, external laboratory checks)and whether acceptable levels ofaccuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precisionhave been established.	mineralization.The fire assay method is designed to measure thetotal gold in the sample. A standard 50g charge isfired followed by acid digestion and measurementby AAS.No field analyses of gold grades are completed.Quantitative analysis of the gold content and traceelements is undertaken in a controlled laboratoryenvironment.Industry best practice is employed with the inclusionof duplicates and standards as discussed above, andused by Ramelius as well as the laboratory. AllRamelius standards and blanks are interrogated toensure they lie within acceptable tolerances.Additionally, sample size, grind size and fieldduplicates are examined to ensure no bias to goldgrades exists.
Verification ofsampling andassaying	The verification of significantintersections by either independent oralternative company personnel.The use of twinned holes.Documentation of primary data, dataentry procedures, data verification, datastorage (physical and electronic)protocols.Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	Alternative Ramelius personnel have inspected thechips and diamond core in the field to verify thecorrelation of mineralised zones between assayresults and lithology, alteration and mineralization.All holes are digitally logged in the field and allprimary data is forwarded to Ramelius' DatabaseAdministrator (DBA) in Perth where it is importedinto Datashed. Assay data is electronically mergedwhen received from the laboratory. The responsibleproject geologist reviews the data in the database toensure that it is correct and has merged properlyand that all the drill data collected in the field hasbeen captured and entered in to the database

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		correctly.The responsible geologist makes the DBA aware ofany errors and/or omissions to the database and thecorrections (if required) are corrected in thedatabase immediately.No adjustments or calibrations are made to anyassay data
Location ofdata points	Accuracy and quality of surveys used tolocate drill holes (collar and down‐holesurveys), trenches, mine workings andother locations used in Mineral Resourceestimation.Specification of the grid system used.Quality and adequacy of topographiccontrol.	Hole collars are picked up using accurate DGPSsurvey control. All down hole surveys are collectedusing downhole electronic single shot or gyrosurveying techniques provided by the drillingcontractors.All holes are picked up in MGA94 – Zone 50 gridcoordinates.Topographic control is established from DTM surveycontrol bases
Data spacinganddistribution	Data spacing for reporting of ExplorationResults.Whether the data spacing anddistribution is sufficient to establish thedegree of geological and grade continuityappropriate for the Mineral Resource andOre Reserve estimation procedure(s) andclassifications applied.Whether sample compositing has beenapplied.	Resource definition drillholes were generallyplanned on a minimum 20m x 25m spacing.This resource spacing is considered adequate todefine the geological and grade continuity ofmineralisationNo sample compositing has been applied within keymineralised intervals.
Orientation ofdata inrelation togeologicalstructure	Whether the orientation of samplingachieves unbiased sampling of possiblestructures and the extent to which this isknown, considering the deposit type.If the relationship between the drillingorientation and the orientation of keymineralised structures is considered tohave introduced a sampling bias, thisshould be assessed and reported ifmaterial.	The drilling is drilled orthogonal to the interpretedstrike of the target horizon.No significant bias has been recognised
Samplesecurity	The measures taken to ensure samplesecurity.	All bagged drill samples are delivered directly fromthe field to the assay laboratory in Perth, whereuponthe laboratory checks the physically receivedsamples against Ramelius' samplesubmission/dispatch notes.
Audits orreviews	The results of any audits or reviews ofsampling techniques and data.	No external audits have been completed to date.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineraltenement andland tenurestatus	Type, reference name/number, locationand ownership including agreements ormaterial issues with third parties such asjoint ventures, partnerships, overridingroyalties, native title interests, historicalsites, wilderness or national park andenvironmental settings.The security of the tenure held at the timeof reporting along with any knownimpediments to obtaining a licence tooperate in the area.	The results reported in this report are on grantedMining Leases throughout Mount Magnet Gold PtyLimited, all owned 100% by Ramelius ResourcesLimited.At this time all the tenements are in good standing.There are no known impediments to obtaining alicence to operate in the area.
Explorationdone by otherparties	Acknowledgment and appraisal ofexploration by other parties.	Previous work consists of RAB/AC and RC drillingdrilled by previous owners including WMC, Hill 50Gold NL and Harmony Gold
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and styleof mineralisation.	All drill targets are orogenic structurally controlledArchean gold depositsShannon is hosted in porphyritic felsic intrusive unitsof the Boogardie Formation. Mineralisation isconfined to 40‐50° east dipping, 2‐8m thickvein/shear zone. Gold mineralisation is related toquartz veins, disseminated sulphides and silica‐sericite alteration.
Drill holeInformation	A summary of all information material tothe understanding of the explorationresults including a tabulation of thefollowing information for all Material drillholes:oeasting and northing of the drill holecollaroelevation or RL (Reduced Level –elevation above sea level in metres) ofthe drill hole collarodip and azimuth of the holeodown hole length and interceptiondepthohole length.If the exclusion of this information isjustified on the basis that the informationis not Material and this exclusion does notdetract from the understanding of thereport, the Competent Person shouldclearly explain why this is the case.	All the drill holes reported in this report have thefollowing parameters applied. All drill holescompleted, including holes with no significant results(as defined in the Attachments) are reported in thisannouncement.Hole collars are picked up using accurate DGPSsurvey control. All down hole surveys are collectedusing gyro surveying techniques provided by thedrilling contractor.Easting and northing are given in MGA94coordinates (Zone 50) as defined in theAttachments.RL is AHDDip is the inclination of the hole from the horizontal.Azimuth is reported in magnetic degrees as thedirection the hole is drilled. MGA94 and magneticdegrees vary by <10in the project area.Down hole length is the distance measured along thedrill hole trace. Intersection length is the thicknessof an anomalous gold intersection measured alongthe drill hole trace.Hole length is the distance from the surface to theend of the hole measured along the drill hole trace.Gold grades greater than 0.5 g/t Au are highlightedwhere good continuity of higher grademineralization is observed.
Dataaggregationmethods	In reporting Exploration Results,weighting averaging techniques,maximum and/or minimum gradetruncations (e.g. cutting of high grades)and cut‐off grades are usually Material	The first gold assay result received from each samplereported by the laboratory is tabled in the list ofsignificant assays. Subsequent repeat analyses whenperformed by the laboratory are checked against theoriginal to ensure repeatability of the assay results.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	and should be stated.Where aggregate intercepts incorporateshort lengths of high grade results andlonger lengths of low grade results, theprocedure used for such aggregationshould be stated and some typicalexamples of such aggregations should beshown in detail.The assumptions used for any reporting ofmetal equivalent values should be clearlystated.	Weighted average techniques are applied todetermine the grade of the anomalous interval whengeological intervals less than 1m have been sampled.Exploration drilling results are generally reportedusing a 0.5 g/t Au lower cut‐off (as described aboveand reported in the Attachments) and may includeup to 2m of internal dilutionNo metal equivalent reporting is used or applied
Relationshipbetweenmineralisationwidths andinterceptlengths	These relationships are particularlyimportant in the reporting of ExplorationResults.If the geometry of the mineralisation withrespect to the drill hole angle is known, itsnature should be reported.If it is not known and only the down holelengths are reported, there should be aclear statement to this effect (e.g. 'downhole length, true width not known').	The intersection length is measured down the lengthof the hole and is not usually the true width.True widths are noted within the intercept tables
Diagrams	Appropriate maps and sections (withscales) and tabulations of interceptsshould be included for any significantdiscovery being reported These shouldinclude, but not be limited to a plan viewof drill hole collar locations andappropriate sectional views.	Representative example maps and sections areincluded in the text.
Balancedreporting	Where comprehensive reporting of allExploration Results is not practicable,representative reporting of both low andhigh grades and/or widths should bepracticed to avoid misleading reporting ofExploration Results.	All drillhole intercepts completed by RMS arereported. Only new holes are reported in thisrelease. All other drilling has been releasedpreviously.
Othersubstantiveexplorationdata	Other exploration data, if meaningful andmaterial, should be reported including(but not limited to): geologicalobservations; geophysical survey results;geochemical survey results; bulk samples– size and method of treatment;metallurgical test results; bulk density,groundwater, geotechnical and rockcharacteristics; potential deleterious orcontaminating substances.	No other exploration data that has been collected isconsidered meaningful and material to this report.
Further work	The nature and scale of planned furtherwork (e.g. tests for lateral extensions ordepth extensions or large‐scale step‐outdrilling).Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas ofpossible extensions, including the maingeological interpretations and futuredrilling areas, provided this information isnot commercially sensitive.	Future exploration includes further drilling alongstrike and down dip

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Databaseintegrity	Measures taken to ensure that data hasnot been corrupted by, for example,transcription or keying errors, betweenits initial collection and its use forMineral Resource estimation purposes.Data validation procedures used.	Data has been sourced from the RMS drillholedatabase using the Datashed systemValidation checks were conducted for overlappingintervals, duplicate assays, EOH depth and negativeor zero assay values
Site visits	Comment on any site visits undertakenby the Competent Person and theoutcome of those visits.If no site visits have been undertakenindicate why this is the case.	The Competent Person has visited the site andconfirmed observations available in drill cuttingsand surface features.
Geologicalinterpretation	Confidence in (or conversely, theuncertainty of) the geologicalinterpretation of the mineral deposit.Nature of the data used and of anyassumptions made.The effect, if any, of alternativeinterpretations on Mineral Resourceestimation.The use of geology in guiding andcontrolling Mineral Resource estimation.The factors affecting continuity both ofgrade and geology.	Confidence in the geological interpretation isreasonable. The geometry and nature ofmineralisation is similar to neighbouring depositsData used include drilling assay and geologicallogging and minor historic surface workingsNo alternate interpretation envisaged
Dimensions	The extent and variability of the MineralResource expressed as length (alongstrike or otherwise), plan width, anddepth below surface to the upper andlower limits of the Mineral Resource.	Shannon 130 ‐ 150m N‐S strike, 2‐8m thick lodezone dipping east around 45°
Estimation andmodellingtechniques	The nature and appropriateness of theestimation technique(s) applied and keyassumptions, including treatment ofextreme grade values, domaining,interpolation parameters and maximumdistance of extrapolation from datapoints. If a computer assisted estimationmethod was chosen include a descriptionof computer software and parametersused.The availability of check estimates,previous estimates and/or mineproduction records and whether theMineral Resource estimate takesappropriate account of such data.The assumptions made regardingrecovery of by‐products.Estimation of deleterious elements orother non‐grade variables of economicsignificance (e.g. sulphur for acid minedrainage characterisation).In the case of block model interpolation,the block size in relation to the averagesample spacing and the searchemployed.Any assumptions behind modelling of	Deposit was estimated using geological softwareusing ID or OK methods inside constrainedmineralisation domains. The estimation method isappropriate for the deposit type.Previous models existed for all depositsOnly gold is estimatedNo deleterious elements presentParent cell of 5mN x 10mE x 5mRL or similar used.Subcelling to 25% are used at topographic andmineralisation boundaries. Parent cell estimationonly.No selective mining unit assumptions applied.Domains were statistically analysed and assignedappropriate search directions, top‐cuts andestimation parametersConstrained grade interpretation for each resource.Samples were composited within ore domains to1m lengthsTop cuts were applied to domains after review ofgrade population characteristics. 70g/t was used forthe HG vein domain and 30g/t for the lode domain.Validation included visual comparison againstdrillhole grades

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

	selective mining units.Any assumptions about correlationbetween variables.Description of how the geologicalinterpretation was used to control theresource estimates.Discussion of basis for using or not usinggrade cutting or capping.The process of validation, the checkingprocess used, the comparison of modeldata to drill hole data, and use ofreconciliation data if available.
Moisture	Whether te tonnages are esƟmated on adry basis or with natural moisture, andthe method of determinaƟon of themoisture content.	Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis
Cut‐offparameters	The basis of the adopted cut‐off grade(s)or quality parameters applied.	All material within the interpreted lode (0.5‐2g/tore boundary) is reported
Mining factorsor assumptions	Assumptions made regarding possiblemining methods, minimum miningdimensions and internal (or, if applicable,external) mining dilution. It is alwaysnecessary as part of the process ofdetermining reasonable prospects foreventual economic extraction to considerpotential mining methods, but theassumptions made regarding miningmethods and parameters whenestimating Mineral Resources may notalways be rigorous. Where this is thecase, this should be reported with anexplanation of the basis of the miningassumptions made.	Resources are reported on the assumption ofmining by conventional open pit grade control andmining methods to around 100m depth then by UGmethods. Parent block size is regarded as smallerthan SMU equivalent and appropriate dilutionsrequired.
Metallurgicalfactors orassumptions	The basis for assumptions or predictionsregarding metallurgical amenability. It isalways necessary as part of the processof determining reasonable prospects foreventual economic extraction to considerpotential metallurgical methods, but theassumptions regarding metallurgicaltreatment processes and parametersmade when reporting Mineral Resourcesmay not always be rigorous. Where thisis the case, this should be reported withan explanation of the basis of themetallurgical assumptions made.	A 92% recovery factor is used and is based ontestwork and well established Mt Magnet recoverydata.
Environmentalfactors orassumptions	Assumptions made regarding possiblewaste and process residue disposaloptions. It is always necessary as part ofthe process of determining reasonableprospects for eventual economicextraction to consider the potentialenvironmental impacts of the mining andprocessing operation. While at this stagethe determination of potentialenvironmental impacts, particularly for agreenfields project, may not always be	The Shannon version 1 pit has been approvedwithin the recent Cosmos Mining ApprovalNo significant issues with waste rock or tailingsOre treatment and tailings generation would occurat the current Mt Magnet Checkers mill site.

	well advanced, the status of earlyconsideration of these potentialenvironmental impacts should bereported. Where these aspects have notbeen considered this should be reportedwith an explanation of the environmentalassumptions made.
Bulk density	Whether assumed or determined. Ifassumed, the basis for the assumptions.If determined, the method used, whetherwet or dry, the frequency of themeasurements, the nature, size andrepresentativeness of the samples.The bulk density for bulk material musthave been measured by methods thatadequately account for void spaces(vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture anddifferences between rock and alterationzones within the deposit.Discuss assumptions for bulk densityestimates used in the evaluation processof the different materials.	Density values are adopted from recent testworkon the nearby Milky Way deposit and establishedMt Magnet valuesDensity measurements were completed on thegeotechnical diamond core holes using the weightin air/weight in water method.They have been assigned by geological andweathering domains
Classification	The basis for the classification of theMineral Resources into varyingconfidence categories.Whether appropriate account has beentaken of all relevant factors (i.e. relativeconfidence in tonnage/gradeestimations, reliability of input data,confidence in continuity of geology andmetal values, quality, quantity anddistribution of the data).Whether the result appropriately reflectsthe Competent Person's view of thedeposit.	The resources have been classified as Indicated orInferred category's based on geological and gradecontinuity and drill hole spacing.The resource classification accounts for all relevantfactorsThe classification reflects the Competent Person'sview
Audits orreviews	The results of any audits or reviews ofMineral Resource estimates.	No audits or reviews conducted.
Discussion ofrelativeaccuracy/confidence	Where appropriate a statement of therelative accuracy and confidence level inthe Mineral Resource estimate using anapproach or procedure deemedappropriate by the Competent Person.For example, the application of statisticalor geostatistical procedures to quantifythe relative accuracy of the resourcewithin stated confidence limits, or, if suchan approach is not deemed appropriate,a qualitative discussion of the factorsthat could affect the relative accuracyand confidence of the estimate.The statement should specify whether itrelates to global or local estimates, and,if local, state the relevant tonnages,which should be relevant to technical andeconomic evaluation. Documentationshould include assumptions made andthe procedures used.	Confidence in the relative accuracy of the estimatesis reflected by the classifications assignedThe estimate is a global estimateHistoric production data and from comparablenearly pits is available for comparison

These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.