Heron Resources Limited (
Heron) is pleased to
advise that its Board has committed to restructuring its
non-Woodlawn asset portfolio in New South Wales (NSW) and Western
Australia (WA), with a focus on gold and nickel, through the
proposed listing of its wholly owned subsidiary,
Ardea
Resources Limited (
Ardea) (the
Proposed Transaction).
Ardea’s development focus will be the Lewis Ponds Gold-Zinc
project in central NSW, and its exploration focus will be the Mt
Zephyr and the Bardoc Tectonic Zone gold projects in the Eastern
Goldfields of WA. The Proposed Transaction is subject to
various conditions, including approval by Heron’s shareholders.
Following the positive Woodlawn Project Feasibility Study
released on 29 June 2016, Heron’s primary focus is to bring
Woodlawn to development. Accordingly, in this corporate
environment, the Board considers that the value of the non-Woodlawn
assets is not properly reflected within Heron, and are unlikely to
attract the focus and budgets which they warrant and require for
advancement.
The Board is cognisant of the need to unlock the significant
value in these non-Woodlawn assets, and believes that this can be
best achieved through the ASX listing of a focused, standalone gold
and nickel exploration and development company, with a dedicated
board and management team.
The Proposed Transaction would allow for the
creation of two distinct companies:
- Heron, with its existing Board and senior executive team, as a
project developer solely focused on fast tracking the Woodlawn
Zinc-Copper Project towards production; and
- Ardea as a gold and nickel exploration/development company with
a 100% interest in the Lewis Ponds Gold-Zinc Project (JORC 2004
Indicated Mineral Resource), several high quality gold exploration
plays with advanced drill targets and, importantly, ownership of
the substantial Kalgoorlie Nickel Project.[1]
Heron will be issued new fully paid ordinary shares in Ardea for
the non-Woodlawn assets and, subject to jurisdictional compliance,
these Ardea shares will then be distributed at nil cost to Heron
shareholders on an entitlements basis at a record date to be
determined. Ardea will simultaneously undertake a public
offer concurrent with ASX listing.
This model is similar to past corporate initiatives undertaken
by Heron, notably the successful Avoca Resources Limited “spin-out”
in 2002. Further details of the Proposed Transaction
will be set out in a notice of meeting and accompanying prospectus
which will be sent to Heron shareholders in due course.
Euroz Securities Limited and Azure Capital Limited have been
mandated to manage the listing of Ardea as lead manager and
corporate adviser, respectively. Independent experts have
been appointed, documentation preparation commenced, and a search
underway to appoint a suitably qualified board and managing
director for Ardea.
Process and Timetable
The broad process for effecting the “spin-out” is:
- Heron shareholders vote on approving the Proposed Transaction
at an EGM, at which time the record date for eligibility for Ardea
in-specie shares is set.
- Ardea will undertake a public offer, with Heron shareholders
having a priority entitlement.
- Upon satisfying the conditions of admission to the ASX, the
in-specie distribution will become effective and Heron shareholders
and those subscribing for shares under public offer being able to
trade their Ardea shares on ASX.
- Foreign shareholders unable to participate in the in-specie
distribution will have their in-specie shares sold and the net
proceeds paid to them.
Persons wishing to acquire Ardea shares will receive a
prospectus, and complete the application form that will accompany
the prospectus to subscribe for shares under Ardea’s public
offer.
The target date for the EGM is October 2016 with the Proposed
Transaction completing in Q4 2016. Further updates will be
provided as appropriate.
Heron Managing Director Mr Wayne Taylor noted; “We understand
that different investors in Heron have preferences for different
asset exposure and with the Ardea “spin-out”, we can clearly
separate the Woodlawn production opportunity from the gold and
nickel exploration assets while seeking to drive superior value for
shareholders in both entities. The commissioning of Woodlawn
is best expedited with the non-Woodlawn assets in a separate
vehicle which will allow them to be valued and advanced through a
more focused market offering”.
The total value of the Proposed Transaction and the size and
terms of the concurrent financing are under review and will be
announced as soon as these matters are determined.
Ardea Key Projects
Lachlan Fold Belt, New South Wales
Lewis Ponds is located 15km east of Orange in
central NSW in a region of excellent mining infrastructure (Cadia,
Northparkes). The Regis Resources McPhillamy’s gold project
is located some 20km south along strike from the southern tenement
boundary, with the hosting-structure and soil gold anomalism
trending into the Ardea tenure (Figure 1).
Lewis Ponds has a drilled Mineral Resource of 6.62Mt at 1.5g/t
Au, 69g/t Ag, 2.4% Zn, 0.2% Cu, 1.4% Pb (compliant with JORC 2004
Code, mainly in Indicated category)[2]. Ardea has an
aggressive drilling and metallurgical program planned.
Mt Zephyr, Eastern Goldfields of Western
Australia
The Mt Zephyr prospects are located 60km NNE of
Leonora in WA. The tenure covers the north western strike
extension of the Dacian Mt Morgans tenure in association with the
Celia Lineament. Gold camps are located from 30km SE and are
mainly hosted by granitoid (Jupiter, Granny Smith) and BIF (Mt
Morgans, Lancefield).
Mt Zephyr has major historic underground gold workings
associated with the northern strike extension of the Dacian Mt
Morgans Banded Iron Formation. Limited drilling in the 1980s
by Nord Resources was restricted to the BIF lodes, with assaying
stopping in ore grade:
- MZP4 33-34m 1m at 2.45g/t
Au
BIF at a porphyry contact
Significantly, RAB drilling regional soil gold anomalies at the
Mt Zephyr Gale prospect in the 1990s by Aurora Gold intersected 0.5
to 3.12g/t Au which were considered sub-economic at prevailing low
gold prices (Gale has comparable grades to material now included in
the Dacian Jupiter resource model).
Historic Gale prospect RAB drill intercepts in granite
include:
- MZR4 0-18m 18m at 0.51g/t
Au
weathered sericite altered granitoid
- MZR19 0-18m 18m at 0.48g/t Au
weathered sericite altered granitoid
- MZR49 0-6m 6m at
1.26g/t Au
weathered sericite altered granitoid
Limited RC drill follow up by Newcrest Mining in 2008 in
returned consistent 0.1-0.7g/t Au assays in granitoid. There
has been no further testing of granitoid gold targets since
2008.
This level of surface gold anomalism in shallow drilling,
combined with the demonstrated syenite intrusive association at Mt
Zephyr North, confirms a high priority “Jupiter-style” exploration
target. In particular, the “donut”-shaped magnetic low
anomaly between Paul’s Find and Mt Zephyr North is a high priority
drill target (refer Figure 3, 4). No significant previous
exploration is apparent on the “donut” magnetic target.
Bardoc Tectonic Zone, Eastern Goldfields of Western
Australia
The Bardoc Tectonic Zone (BTZ) Big Four to
Ghost Rocks prospects are located from Bardoc 60km
N of Kalgoorlie to Ghost Rocks 150km N of Kalgoorlie in the Eastern
Goldfields of WA. The project straddles the Kalgoorlie to
Menzies Highway and is based upon the Kalgoorlie Nickel Project
(KNP) with JORC 2012 resource 785Mt at 0.7% Ni and 0.05% Co (Figure
2).
The tenure covers the Walter Williams Formation komatiite (host
of the KNP nickel laterite) at its eastern contact with the Siberia
Formation basalt. This contact has exceptional gold
endowment, with the main gold mining centres from south to north
including Paddington, Broad Arrow, Bardoc, Big Four/Aphrodites,
Goongarrie and Lady Shenton/Menzies. Heron acquired its KNP
nickel laterite tenure within the BTZ tenements in1997, from which
time gold exploration effectively ceased (resulting in a large
strategic parcel of ground which simply has never been subject to
the modern gold exploration “boom” which has discovered so many
mines on the BTZ since the 2000s).
Big Four-Goongarrie is a line of sporadic historic gold shafts
occurring over a 5km strike. Heron did very limited drilling
at Big Four in 2012, with drill hole BFRC028 intersecting 6m at
8.6g/t Au from 125m within a north plunging shoot in porphyry
intruding ultramafic (BFRC0028 was the deepest lode hole of the
program, 140m deep).
[1] See Compliance Statement for JORC 2004, 2012 below.
[2] See Compliance Statement for JORC 2004, 2012 below.
Fig 1: Ardea Resources Limited, project Locations, Lachlan
Fold Belt of NSW
Fig 2: Ardea Resources Limited, project Locations, Eastern
Goldfields of WA
Fig 3: Mt Zephyr magnetic image showing the BIF which is
associated with old shaft workings, and subtle low order response
associated with the Gale granitoid system.
Note in particular the “donut” shaped circular magnetic low
anomaly immediately south of the Mt Zephyr North skarn and west of
the extensive Pauls Find alluvial gold nugget occurrences.
The overall NW trending zone of magnetic activity along the
northeast granite contact is the regionally significant Celia Shear
Zone, hosting mining centres from 30km SE at Mt Morgans-Jupiter,
Wallaby, Sunrise and Red October (refer Dacian ASX:DCN).
Fig 4: Mt Zephyr skarn showing intense “red rock” potassic
alteration. This red-pink color is particularly diagnostic of
“syenite” granitoid intrusives (prime host rock for Celia
Lineament-hosted granitoid gold systems such as Jupiter, Wallaby
and Sunrise Dam to the southeast along strike).
Compliance Statement (JORC 2012 and
NI43-101)
A competent person’s statement for the purposes of Listing Rule
5.22 has previously been announced by the Company for:
- Lewis Ponds on 27 August 2015, 2015 Heron Annual Report;
- Kalgoorlie Nickel Project on 21 October 2013 and 31 June 2014,
27 August 2015, 2015 Heron Annual Report;
- Big Four-Goongarrie on 13 March 2012, 26 June 2012 and 24 July
2012.
The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information
or data that materially affects information included in previous
announcements, and all material assumptions and technical
parameters underpinning the estimates continue to apply and have
not materially changed. All projects will be subject to new
work programs following the listing of Ardea, notably drilling,
metallurgy and JORC Code 2012 resource estimation as
applicable.
The Mineral Resource for Lewis Ponds was prepared and first
disclosed under the JORC Code 2004. It has not been updated since
to comply with the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information
has not materially changed since it was last reported.
The exploration results are based on information reviewed by Mr.
David von Perger, who is a Member of the Australian Institute of
Mining and Metallurgy (Chartered Professional – Geology). Mr. von
Perger is a full time employee of Heron Resources Limited and has
sufficient experience, which 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 in the 2004 edition of the “Australasian Code for
Reporting of Exploration Results and “qualified person” as this
term is defined in Canadian National Instrument 43-101 (“NI
43-101”). Mr. von Perger has reviewed this press release and
consents to the inclusion in this report of the information in the
form and context in which it appears.
The exploration results for Mt Zephyr (including table 1) are
based on information reviewed by Mr. Ian Buchhorn, who is a Member
of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr.
Buchhorn is a full time employee of Heron Resources Limited and has
sufficient experience, which 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 in the 2004 edition of the “Australasian Code for
Reporting of Exploration Results and “qualified person” as this
term is defined in Canadian National Instrument 43-101 (“NI
43-101”). Mr. Buchhorn has reviewed this press release and
consents to the inclusion in this report of the information in the
form and context in which it appears.
CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING
INFORMATION This news release contains forward-looking
statements and forward-looking information within the meaning of
applicable Australian and Canadian securities laws, which are based
on expectations, estimates and projections as of the date of this
news release. This forward-looking information includes, or may be
based upon, without limitation, estimates, forecasts and statements
as to management’s expectations with respect to, among other
things, the timing and ability to complete the Ardea spin-out, the
timing and amount of funding required to execute the Company’s
exploration, development and business plans, capital and
exploration expenditures, the effect on the Company of any changes
to existing legislation or policy, government regulation of mining
operations, the length of time required to obtain permits,
certifications and approvals, the success of exploration,
development and mining activities, the geology of the Company’s
properties, environmental risks, the availability of labour, the
focus of the Company in the future, demand and market outlook for
precious metals and the prices thereof, progress in development of
mineral properties, the Company’s ability to raise funding
privately or on a public market in the future, the Company’s future
growth, results of operations, performance, and business prospects
and opportunities. Wherever possible, words such as “anticipate”,
“believe”, “expect”, “intend”, “may” and similar expressions have
been used to identify such forward-looking information.
Forward-looking information is based on the opinions and estimates
of management at the date the information is given, and on
information available to management at such time. Forward-looking
information involves significant risks, uncertainties, assumptions
and other factors that could cause actual results, performance or
achievements to differ materially from the results discussed or
implied in the forward-looking information. These factors,
including, but not limited to, the ability to complete the Ardea
spin-out on the basis of the proposed terms and timing or at all,
the ability to complete the Woodlawn Zinc-Copper Project
Feasibility Study on time or at all, and whether the feasibility
study is positive and otherwise consistent with the business plans
of the Company, fluctuations in currency markets, fluctuations in
commodity prices, the ability of the Company to access sufficient
capital on favourable terms or at all, changes in national and
local government legislation, taxation, controls, regulations,
political or economic developments in Canada, Australia or other
countries in which the Company does business or may carry on
business in the future, operational or technical difficulties in
connection with exploration or development activities, employee
relations, the speculative nature of mineral exploration and
development, obtaining necessary licenses and permits, diminishing
quantities and grades of mineral reserves, contests over title to
properties, especially title to undeveloped properties, the
inherent risks involved in the exploration and development of
mineral properties, the uncertainties involved in interpreting
drill results and other geological data, environmental hazards,
industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, pressures,
cave-ins and flooding, limitations of insurance coverage and the
possibility of project cost overruns or unanticipated costs and
expenses, and should be considered carefully. Many of these
uncertainties and contingencies can affect the Company’s actual
results and could cause actual results to differ materially from
those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made
by, or on behalf of, the Company. Prospective investors should not
place undue reliance on any forward-looking information.
Although the forward-looking information contained in this news
release is based upon what management believes, or believed at the
time, to be reasonable assumptions, the Company cannot assure
prospective purchasers that actual results will be consistent with
such forward-looking information, as there may be other factors
that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended,
and neither the Company nor any other person assumes responsibility
for the accuracy and completeness of any such forward-looking
information. The Company does not undertake, and assumes no
obligation, to update or revise any such forward-looking statements
or forward-looking information contained herein to reflect new
events or circumstances, except as may be required by law.
No stock exchange, regulation services provider,
securities commission or other regulatory authority has approved or
disapproved the information contained in this news
release.
JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 (Mt Zephyr
Project)
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding
sections.)
| 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. |
· Nord Resources (Pacific) Pty Ltd, 1982,
open hole percussion drilling, decline 60 degrees west, only sample
BIF, panned to detect gold, and if gold noted, submitted to
Analabs, accordingly very poor assay coverage, assay technique not
known· Aurora Gold Limited, 1993, RAB drilling, decline 60
degrees west, 6m composites (two rod lengths), assay by AMDEL,
0.01g/t Au detection limit, QAQC replicate assay for each sample,
acceptable precision· Newcrest Mining Limited, 2008, assay by
Genalysis, 50gm FA with AAS finish, 0.01g/t Au detection limit,
presume QAQC but not detailed in available report, 1m RC chips |
| 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). |
· Refer above, insufficient detail in
historic GSWA-held reports, reputable international explorer using
standard industry practice of the time |
| 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. |
· Not known |
| 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. |
· Refer above, insufficient detail in
historic reports, reputable international explorer using standard
industry practice of the time· Geotechnical logging most
unlikely |
| 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. |
· Refer above, insufficient detail in
historic reports, reputable international explorer using standard
industry practice of the time· Subsampling most unlikely |
| 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. |
· Refer above, insufficient detail in
historic reports, reputable international explorer using standard
industry practice of the time· QAQC likely for Newcrest phase
of exploration, but not known |
| 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.•Discuss any adjustment to assay data. |
· Refer above, insufficient detail in
historic reports, reputable international explorer using standard
industry practice of the time· Verification likely for
Newcrest phase of exploration, but not known |
| Location of data points |
• 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. |
· Refer above, insufficient detail in
historic reports, reputable international explorer using standard
industry practice of the time· Local grids used, require
field validation but minimal drill hole artefacts remain·
Georeferenced using surveyed gold mining lease corner
pegs |
| 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. |
· Refer above, insufficient detail in
historic reports, reputable international explorer using standard
industry practice of the time· Insufficient sample points in
previous work to establish continuity, Nord and Aurora work not
appropriate for Mineral Resource estimates· Essentially
“wildcat” exploration holes, not suited to resource
estimation |
| 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. |
· Not known |
| Sample security |
•The measures taken to ensure sample
security. |
· Not known |
| Audits or reviews |
•The results of any audits or reviews of sampling
techniques and data. |
· Not known |
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results - (Criteria
listed in the preceding section also apply to this
section.)
| 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. |
· Heron granted Exploration Licence tenure
and Ardea EL applications |
| •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. |
· No known impediments |
| Exploration done by other parties |
•Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by
other parties. |
· Refer above, insufficient detail in
historic reports, reputable international explorer using standard
industry practice of the time· Desk top appraisal, requires
re-drill by Ardea |
| Geology |
•Deposit type, geological setting and style of
mineralisation. |
· Syenite hosted gold associated with Celia
Lineament, northwest continuation of Red October-Sunrise
Dam-Wallaby-Jupiter trend, granitoid intrusives defined by circular
magnetic anomalies (as per Mt Zephyr magnetic feature) |
| 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:·
easting and northing of the drill hole collar· elevation or
RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the
drill hole collar· dip and azimuth of the hole· down
hole length and interception depth· 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. |
· Refer above, local grids used, GIS
registered but accuracy not quantified, insufficient detail in
historic reports, reputable international explorer using standard
industry practice of the time |
| 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. |
· Not done in historic data |
| 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’). |
· Not applicable |
| 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. |
· Not available |
| 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. |
· Not available |
| 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. |
· Not available |
| 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. |
· Ground magnetics to define syenite
intrusives and contacts, gravity survey to define structures,
aircore drill to quantify host geology, then RC sections for
mineralization continuity (200x40m initial pattern) |
For further information, please visit www.heronresources.com.au or contact:
Australia:
Mr Wayne Taylor
Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer
Tel: +61 2 9119 8111 or +61 8 6500 9200
Email: heron@heronresources.com.au
Jon Snowball, FTI Consulting
+61 2 8298 6100
jon.snowball@fticonsulting.com
Canada:
Tel: +1 647-862-1157 (Toronto)