Heron Resources Limited (ASX: HRR TSX: HER,
"Heron" or the "Company") is pleased to provide an update on
Ardea Resources Limited (Ardea) and its project
activities, as disclosed in the prospectus (Prospectus) lodged with
the Australian Securities and Investments Commission on 9 November
2016 and Supplementary Prospectus lodged 18 November 2016.
Recent technical advancements have been realised within
Ardea’s projects:
- Kalgoorlie Nickel Project (KNP)
- Cobalt development focus in light of surging demand from tech
industry
- KNP Cobalt Zone has a JORC 2012-compliant resource of 7Mt at
0.12% cobalt and 0.86% nickel
- Cobalt-enriched zones are contained within and are a subset of
the broader KNP resource of 805Mt at 0.05% cobalt and 0.7%
nickel[1], being Australia and the developed world’s largest cobalt
resource
- KNP Chrysoprase (semi-precious gemstone) mechanised bulk
production opportunity identified
- Lewis Ponds
- Bulk tonnage Exploration Target defined
- Significant base metal-gold open-pit potential, with orogenic
gold and base metal mineralisation defined which is very similar to
other large deposits in the region
- Lewis Ponds Main Zone and Tom’s Zone main shaft mullock
sampling by Ardea returned assays of 9.9–12.1g/t gold and
272–539g/t silver, possible epithermal mineralised affinity
- New tenement applications complementing existing Ardea
projects
- Lewis Ponds, NSW – several licence applications secured and
already recommended for grant
- Bedonia West and Perrinvale, WA – high quality Ni-Cu-PGM
targets acquired
Ardea’s management team has completed preparatory field programs
including rock chip sampling ahead of the 2017 listing and project
drilling. The recent focus has been on resource estimation
and preparation of drilling approvals at Goongarrie South, Black
Range and Kalpini (KNP Cobalt Zones) and at Lewis Ponds, and
scoping of metallurgical and feasibility work for the KNP Cobalt
Zone deposits and the Lewis Ponds stringer mineralisation.
1. Cobalt focus for the
Kalgoorlie Nickel Project
1.1. High-grade cobalt resource
The global KNP resource of 805Mt at 0.05% cobalt and 0.7% nickel
contains within it high-grade concentrations of cobalt-rich
mineralisation at Goongarrie South, Big Four, Scotia Dam, Aubils
and Black Range (refer Ardea Prospectus pages 84-87 for global
resource details).
An upgraded cobalt-focused global resource for the KNP was
defined as 49.7Mt at 0.12% Co and 0.86% Ni (refer
Heron ASX announcement 6 January 2017 for global resource details).
This resource comprises a recalculation of
cobalt resources at Goongarrie South, Big Four, Scotia Dam and
Aubils combined with the historic resource calculated for the Black
Range area as defined in the Prospectus.
This new KNP Cobalt Zone resource is comprised as follows:
Table 1 – KNP Cobalt Zone – Resource Statement from
independent consultancy Ridley Mineral Resource Consulting Pty
Ltd
Area |
Prospect |
Resource
category |
Cutoff
(% Co) |
Size
(Mt) |
Co
(%) |
Ni
% |
MgO*
% |
FeO*
% |
Al2O3*
% |
SiO2*
% |
CaO*
% |
Mn*
% |
Cr*
% |
Goongarrie |
Goongarrie
South |
Measured |
0.08 |
3.4 |
0.14 |
1.19 |
1.6 |
47 |
6.3 |
17 |
0.16 |
1.02 |
1.27 |
|
Indicated |
0.08 |
11.2 |
0.11 |
0.92 |
1.8 |
43 |
6.2 |
23 |
0.78 |
0.71 |
1.20 |
|
Inferred |
0.08 |
1.4 |
0.11 |
0.76 |
1.8 |
39 |
5.9 |
30 |
0.32 |
0.74 |
1.20 |
|
Big Four |
Indicated |
0.08 |
4.5 |
0.11 |
0.89 |
1.6 |
40 |
5.3 |
32 |
0.68 |
0.76 |
1.07 |
|
|
Inferred |
0.08 |
0.2 |
0.11 |
0.95 |
1.6 |
38 |
4.2 |
36 |
0.25 |
0.73 |
1.09 |
|
Scotia Dam |
Inferred |
0.08 |
2.9 |
0.14 |
0.88 |
3.2 |
34 |
4.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Goongarrie
subtotal |
|
23.6 |
0.12 |
0.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Siberia |
Black Range |
Inferred |
0.50(Ni) |
20.1 |
0.10 |
0.75 |
7.9 |
28 |
6.7 |
|
|
|
|
Yerilla |
Aubils |
Inferred |
0.08 |
6.0 |
0.15 |
0.90 |
6.4 |
33 |
4.7 |
31 |
4.57 |
0.91 |
|
KNP
TOTAL |
|
|
49.7 |
0.12 |
0.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*Estimates
for MgO, FeO, Al2O3, SiO2, CaO, Mn and Cr are provided for
reference only and do not constitute Mineral Resources |
Figure 1 - KNP pyrolusitic ore. This drill sample from
2001 assayed approximately 1% Co and 2% Ni. The cobalt-rich
material occurs within the upper part of the cobalt-nickel laterite
profile.
Figure 2 – Run-of-mine KNP siliceous ore. This mine face
includes green chrysoprase veining. Chrysoprase material
tends to occur within the lower part of the cobalt-nickel laterite
profile.
Figure 3 – Ardea WA projects, showing the Goongarrie South, Big
Four, Scotia Dam, Black Range and Aubils Cobalt Zones.
Figure 4 - Goongarrie South – work currently underway, showing
0.08% Co trimmed block model grade shell
1.1.1. Goongarrie South
The resource estimation reviewed existing KNP 0.5% Ni cut-off
grade blocks which coincidentally exceed 0.08% Co and where they
define coherent mining shapes. These grade shells were
subsequently trimmed on an individual wireframe basis, excluding
wireframe pods with less than three mineralised drillhole
intersections, except where nearby adjacent drillhole intersections
demonstrate continuity of the mineralisation above the 0.08% Co
cut-off grade.1.1.1. Goongarrie South
The cobalt review included the Goongarrie South–Big Four–Scotia
Dam resource belt. This area will clearly will be the focus
of Ardea’s future cobalt program.
The current working concept is a Goongarrie South to Scotia Dam
production rate of 2Mtpa at 0.12% Co and 0.94% Ni for approximately
2ktpa cobalt in intermediate product (a cobalt- and nickel-bearing
manganese oxide) with in addition some 16ktpa nickel (distributed
between battery feedstock and conventional nickel refinery
feed). Plant site location would be at Goongarrie South at
the northern end of the cobalt belt, with initial mine scheduling
being a zone at Goongarrie South termed the “Pamela Jean
Deeps”.
1.1.2. KNP, Australia’s largest cobalt resource
Containing 386,400 tonnes of contained cobalt metal, the KNP is
Australia’s largest cobalt deposit. By this measure, it is
more than three times larger than Australia’s second largest cobalt
deposit. The newly-reported cobalt resource from the
high-grade KNP Cobalt Zone is a subset of the larger KNP resource,
and this subset is by itself Australia’s fourth largest cobalt
resource, containing 59,600 tonnes of cobalt metal. The KNP
Cobalt Zone also has one of the highest cobalt grades in
Australia.
The updated resource reporting for cobalt-rich zones provides an
insight into the potential to define further cobalt-rich zones in
the KNP on the basis of remodeling work planned by Ardea that is
focused on cobalt. Updated resource reporting on the
cobalt-rich mineralisation at the KNP marks the first part of a
refocusing for the KNP onto the cobalt component of the
deposit.
Forthcoming drilling and metallurgical studies will move the KNP
towards a PFS focusing on feedstocks for the lithium ion battery
industry (Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide - LiNiMnCoO2 or
NMC).
The drilling focus in ranking will be the contiguous cobalt
zones in the Goongarrie South belt and at Black Range and
Kalpini. The drilling will secure material for bench-scale
metallurgical assessment.
1.2. Semi-precious gemstones within
the KNP – Chrysoprase (“Australian Jade”)
The Kalgoorlie Nickel Project is characterised by widespread
occurrences of the semi-precious gemstone chrysoprase.
Chrysoprase is a rare, highly valued, nickel-bearing variety
of chalcedony. Colour varies from apple green to deep green,
and the highest quality material is translucent. Chrysoprase
is commonly known by gemologists as “Australian jade” and is often
used in jewellery as a substitute for jade due to its harder
wearing characteristics. Chrysoprase is highly valued in east
Asia notably China.
The occurrence of chrysoprase in shallow strongly weathered
horizons throughout the KNP is directly analogous to the occurrence
of opal in the opal fields of Coober Pedy (SA) and Lightning Ridge
(NSW). As in the opal fields, chrysoprase has developed in
veins within cracks and crevices in the clay-rich host rocks.
In the KNP, the highest quality, deepest green chrysoprase shows a
direct spatial relationship to the cobalt- and nickel-rich parts of
the orebodies. Ardea has defined five advanced stage
chrysoprase pit opportunities within the KNP.
Figure 5 - As mined chrysoprase, KNP. Indicative value
$8-20 per kilogram. Forecasts of chrysoprase values are very
difficult due to a lack of open markets, and confirm the
desirability of securing a partnership with a downstream gemstone
processor
Ardea estimates open-pit mining costs of approximately $6/t with
run-of-mine chrysoprase valued at approximately $8-20/kg, and gem
quality in excess of $20/kg (break-even grade 1kg/t of lower
quality chrysoprase). Kalgoorlie chrysoprase mining has
traditionally been labour-intensive and conducted by small scale
tributers. Ardea has scoped a mechanised production model
using ore sorting technology.
Ardea believes an east Asia jewellery producer would be a
preferred chrysoprase development partner.
2. Lewis Ponds zinc-gold
project – Updates
2.1. Bulk tonnage model for exploration and
development
At Lewis Ponds, “the mineralisation is accepted as Volcanogenic
Massive Sulphide (VMS) type” (Prospectus, page 46). The
mineralisation as described is multiple lenses (1, 2 and 3) of
massive stratabound base metal sulphides hosted within the Anson
Formation pyritic siltstones. Exploration has historically
been on the basis of a narrow high grade underground mining model,
and has generated a mineral resource totaling 6.6Mt at 1.5g/t gold
and 2.4% zinc[2] estimated at a 3% ZnEq cut-off grade (refer
Prospectus Table 3.2 for full description of resource status).
As noted in the Prospectus (page 44), Lewis Ponds “occurs on the
Lewis Ponds Fault; a subsidiary fault to the Godolphin Fault.
The region is well known for being prospective for a variety of
deposit types, especially VMS deposits and orogenic gold
deposits.”
Having now completed regional geological orientation programs in
the Lewis Ponds area, it is clear that Lewis Ponds has a
significant potential for orogenic gold deposits of the style of
Regis Resources’ McPhillamys deposit, located “15km south along the
Godolphin Fault” from Lewis Ponds (Prospectus page 44).
As well as the traditional zinc-dominant VMS model, there is now
a requirement to additionally evaluate Lewis Ponds as a bulk
tonnage orogenic gold-base metal system, with the clear mining
model being McPhillamys (resource 73Mt at 0.93g/t Au at 0.4g/t Au
cut-off grade, Regis Resources, 31 March 2015).
Figure 6 – Ardea NSW Projects showing Lewis Ponds, the recent
applications of Yeoval-Mt Aubury immediately northwest of Copper
Hill and Wisemans Creek immediately southeast of Lewis Ponds.
The McPhillamys gold discovery is shown 20km SE from Lewis
Ponds.
There are very clear geo-metallurgical associations at Lewis
Ponds, possibly representing separate mineralising events, in order
of abundance:
- Dominant Zn-Pb-Ag-Au (stringer dominant but significant massive
sulphide interbands).
- Au-Ag only (which is poorly sampled, thus difficult to quantify
as an orogenic gold system).
- Minor Zn-Pb only.
- Rare Cu only, always in the footwall.
Lewis Ponds mineralisation is dominantly a 20-50 metre wide
stringer (shear vein) system with 2-10 metre thick bands of massive
Zn-Pb-Ag-Au mineralisation able to carry sub-grade stringers, with
typically 2-5 m internal waste bands.
The mining implications for Lewis Ponds are:
- Drill intercepts are required to be bulked into broad lower
grade intervals of the McPhillamys style, using a 1% ZnEq cut-off
(approximately 0.5g/t AuEq)
- Open-pit bulk mining is more likely to be feasible, given the
favourable Lewis Ponds strip ratios and consistent shallow
high-grade mineralised
At Lewis Ponds, the bulk tonnage potential is confirmed in
Prospectus Figure 3.3 (refer gold-equivalent calculation), with the
following gold-equivalent intercepts on Section 940mN
representative of the overall Lewis Ponds mineralised
system.
- Western Lode
- TLPRC-02 90m at 1.02g/t AuEq from 18m
- SLP-7 27m at 1.59g/t AuEq from 62m
- TLPD-02W 30m at 2.44g/t AuEq from 271m
- Central Lode
- LPRC-32 54m at 1.72g/t AuEq from 26m
- TLPD-40 37m at 0.92g/t AuEq from 199m
- Eastern Lode
- TLPD-40
68m at 0.97g/t AuEq from 57m
Having now completed field reconnaissance, it is felt that Lewis
Ponds is better evaluated as a base metal-gold stringer system.
Table 2 summarises the more significant “bulk-tonnage”
intercepts at Lewis Ponds. More detailed drill intercept data
has been previously published by TriAusMin Limited in ASX
announcements between 2002 to 2014 (Prospectus page 71) and these
reports may be obtained from Ardea.
From reviewing available drill core at site and archived core
photographs, it is clear that extensive zones of sericite-pyrite
alteration (potential gold mineralised host) have not been
sampled. There is thus a requirement to cut and sample this
core (assuming the individual core is still available), with the
potential to establish “McPhillamy-style” mineralised systems.
The Ardea intention is to drill a single orientated core hole on
Sections 1000mN, 800mN, 600mN and 400mN, and all available core on
these 200 metre spaced sections will be re-logged, re-photographed
and assayed.
This program will act as a control to allow a resource update
based on bulk-tonnage parameters. The known high grade zone
extends from Section 300mN to Section 1500mN and ultimately all
historic drill holes within this zone will require re-logging and
assay. This requirement was not anticipated within the
Prospectus work program and has arisen through field studies
subsequent to November 2016 Prospectus lodgment.
2.2. Field exploration results
Whilst siting drill collars for the initial proposed Ardea drill
program, a suite of samples was collected as a first pass in
defining Lewis Ponds geo-metallurgical types (GeoMet study).
At the old Lewis Ponds Main Zone and Tom’s Zone main shafts, the
main producers in the field, it was apparent that the dominant
shaft mullock at both locations (600m apart along strike) is a
distinctive white vuggy quartz-pyrite “sinter” (which appeared to
have the appearance of epithermal style mineralization).
Table 3 – Lewis Ponds Rock chip sampling
Location |
Sample
No |
Au
(g/t) |
Ag
(g/t) |
Zn
(%) |
Pb
(%) |
Cu
(%) |
As
(ppm) |
Sb
(ppm) |
Lewis Ponds Main Zone
shaft |
LP01300 |
9.9 |
539 |
0.05 |
1.6 |
0.30 |
1030 |
2650 |
Tom’s Zone
shaft |
LP01301 |
12.1 |
272 |
0.09 |
2.7 |
0.01 |
90 |
74 |
The high-grade Au-Ag with anomalous As-Sb is consistent with
epithermal style mineralisation, and the low base metal values are
not indicative of a VMS setting at the shaft areas.
Base metal and gold production is unknown for the Lewis Ponds
shaft. Toms produced 30,000 tonnes of pyrite ore for
sulphuric acid production. It is puzzling that such high
grade precious metal mineralisation remains at both locations as
shaft mullock and was not treated in the historic operation.
This mineralisation style was not predicted within the
Prospectus and is of significant economic potential. In
particular, “Gold Stringer” is a geo-metallurgical type recognized
in Ardea’s work but not described in historic Lewis Ponds
records.
Drill approval environmental submissions are being prepared,
with Department of Resources and Energy approvals anticipated in
time for February 2017 drilling.
Figure 7 - Lewis Ponds, tenement and key prospects map
Table 2 Lewis Ponds – Polymetallic-Gold
Stringer Zones, Significant Intercepts
Hole
ID |
East
(local) |
North
(local) |
From
(m) |
To
(m) |
Width
(m) |
Au
(g/t) |
Ag
(g/t) |
Cu
(%) |
Pb
(%) |
Zn
(%) |
ZnEq1 |
AuEq2 |
m.ZnEq3 |
Geo
Met |
LPRC-6 |
-82 |
906 |
31 |
73 |
42 |
0.48 |
34 |
0.13 |
0.65 |
1.78 |
3.6 |
2.8 |
150.4 |
PS |
LPRC-17 |
-68 |
830 |
5 |
68 |
63 |
0.70 |
18 |
|
|
1.04 |
2.2 |
1.7 |
138.8 |
PS |
LPRC-21 |
-88 |
876 |
26 |
60 |
34 |
0.71 |
50 |
|
|
2.17 |
3.9 |
3.0 |
131.2 |
PS |
LPRC-32 |
-105 |
940 |
26 |
80 |
54 |
0.49 |
34 |
|
|
1.54 |
2.7 |
2.1 |
145.2 |
PS |
TLPD-03 |
-47 |
1146 |
163 |
250 |
87 |
0.44 |
23 |
0.06 |
0.47 |
1.08 |
2.4 |
1.9 |
210.1 |
PS |
TLPD-04 |
-61 |
1316 |
178 |
203 |
25 |
3.12 |
105 |
0.26 |
2.14 |
3.59 |
11.0 |
8.8 |
275.9 |
PS |
TLPD-06A |
21 |
1235 |
290 |
395 |
105 |
0.94 |
50 |
0.14 |
0.85 |
1.89 |
4.7 |
3.7 |
489.9 |
PS |
TLPD-08 |
-51 |
1456 |
161 |
408 |
247 |
0.08 |
8 |
0.02 |
0.11 |
0.27 |
0.6 |
0.5 |
151.1 |
PS |
TLPD-09A |
17 |
1205 |
248 |
370 |
122 |
0.37 |
9 |
0.04 |
0.22 |
0.47 |
1.3 |
1.0 |
157.1 |
PS |
TLPD-12 |
103 |
1312 |
419 |
559 |
140 |
1.53 |
52 |
0.10 |
1.45 |
2.20 |
6.1 |
4.8 |
850.4 |
PS |
TLPD-12W |
103 |
1312 |
405 |
453 |
48 |
0.80 |
29 |
0.06 |
0.47 |
0.92 |
2.8 |
2.2 |
134.3 |
PS |
TLPD-12W3 |
103 |
1312 |
398 |
506 |
108 |
0.29 |
13 |
0.05 |
0.28 |
0.64 |
1.5 |
1.2 |
159.3 |
PS |
TLPD-15 |
74 |
1361 |
433 |
528 |
95 |
0.77 |
27 |
0.04 |
0.40 |
0.69 |
2.4 |
2.0 |
230.6 |
PS |
TLPD-18 |
80 |
1240 |
333 |
436 |
103 |
0.28 |
11 |
0.03 |
0.35 |
0.51 |
1.3 |
1.1 |
137.4 |
PS |
TLPD-19 |
97 |
1117 |
236 |
349 |
113 |
0.14 |
14 |
0.02 |
0.30 |
0.58 |
1.2 |
1.0 |
138.8 |
PS |
TLPD-20 |
72 |
1362 |
347 |
420 |
73 |
1.33 |
38 |
0.08 |
0.64 |
1.15 |
4.0 |
3.2 |
290.7 |
PS |
TLPD-21W |
74 |
1361 |
409 |
510 |
101 |
1.03 |
38 |
0.07 |
0.60 |
1.01 |
3.4 |
2.7 |
345.3 |
PS |
TLPD-30 |
69 |
1491 |
569 |
760 |
191 |
0.15 |
9 |
0.02 |
0.14 |
0.22 |
0.7 |
0.6 |
131.6 |
PS |
TLPD-32 |
196 |
1386 |
484 |
558 |
74 |
0.37 |
24 |
0.06 |
0.49 |
0.87 |
2.1 |
1.7 |
158.9 |
PS |
TLPD-34 |
3 |
1231 |
232 |
298 |
66 |
0.40 |
23 |
0.08 |
0.35 |
0.81 |
2.0 |
1.6 |
134.4 |
PS |
TLPD-36 |
-68 |
1311 |
194 |
220 |
26 |
2.35 |
162 |
0.17 |
2.07 |
3.20 |
10.4 |
8.4 |
270.3 |
PS |
TLPD-37 |
-108 |
1213 |
147 |
184 |
37 |
1.24 |
35 |
0.10 |
0.68 |
1.33 |
4.1 |
3.2 |
150.4 |
PS |
TLPD-40 |
-4 |
938 |
56 |
245 |
189 |
0.05 |
5 |
0.05 |
0.21 |
0.54 |
0.9 |
0.7 |
172.5 |
PS |
TLPD-41 |
86 |
759 |
165 |
262 |
97 |
0.30 |
10 |
0.06 |
0.38 |
0.78 |
1.7 |
1.3 |
162.5 |
PS |
TLPD-46A |
103 |
476 |
107 |
131 |
24 |
0.65 |
33 |
0.10 |
1.63 |
2.70 |
5.3 |
4.2 |
127.2 |
PS |
TLPD-51A |
152 |
421 |
474 |
510 |
36 |
1.24 |
179 |
0.28 |
3.62 |
4.49 |
11.8 |
9.5 |
423.7 |
PM |
TLPD-51AW1 |
152 |
421 |
474 |
503 |
29 |
1.15 |
100 |
0.12 |
1.53 |
2.30 |
6.6 |
5.3 |
190.1 |
PM |
TLPD51AW2 |
152 |
421 |
321 |
399 |
78 |
0.22 |
22 |
0.05 |
0.89 |
1.44 |
2.7 |
2.2 |
213.2 |
PS |
TLPD-51AW3 |
152 |
421 |
388 |
402 |
14 |
1.10 |
95 |
0.14 |
4.33 |
5.87 |
11.9 |
9.4 |
166.2 |
PM |
TLPD-53 |
106 |
463 |
221 |
321 |
100 |
0.25 |
27 |
0.06 |
1.16 |
1.90 |
3.5 |
2.8 |
351.4 |
PS |
TLPD-62 |
145 |
353 |
287 |
394 |
107 |
0.16 |
14 |
0.03 |
0.32 |
0.68 |
1.4 |
1.1 |
145.5 |
PS |
TLPDD04002 |
-13 |
1268 |
238 |
309 |
71 |
0.64 |
27 |
0.07 |
0.52 |
1.11 |
2.8 |
2.2 |
198.8 |
PS |
TLPRC04010 |
-68 |
999 |
82 |
174 |
92 |
0.20 |
25 |
0.10 |
0.54 |
1.38 |
2.6 |
2.0 |
236.1 |
PS |
TLPRC-02 |
-124 |
968 |
18 |
129 |
111 |
0.26 |
14 |
0.06 |
0.24 |
0.56 |
1.4 |
1.1 |
151.4 |
PS |
TLPRC-04 |
-90 |
877 |
19 |
68 |
49 |
0.46 |
44 |
0.10 |
0.52 |
0.77 |
2.6 |
2.1 |
126.0 |
PS |
Geo-Metallurgy (GeoMet) – PS Polymetallic
Stringer, PM Polymetallic Massive, CS Copper Stringer (no
intercepts are significant), GS Gold Stringer (no intercepts are
significant)
|
Zn |
Cu |
Pb |
Au |
Ag |
Metal prices US$ (21
Dec 2016) |
2617 |
|
5488 |
|
2177 |
|
1133 |
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1Zinc Equivalent Estimate |
|
|
|
|
|
Recovery for ZnEq
calc |
100 |
% |
80 |
% |
80 |
% |
90 |
% |
80 |
% |
ZnEq recov multiply
factor |
1.000 |
|
1.678 |
|
0.665 |
|
1.253 |
|
0.016 |
|
2Gold
Equivalent Estimate |
|
|
|
|
|
Recovery for AuEq
calc |
80 |
% |
80 |
% |
80 |
% |
100 |
% |
80 |
% |
AuEq recov multiply
factor |
0.575 |
|
1.205 |
|
0.478 |
|
1.000 |
|
0.011 |
|
3 m.ZnEq = intercept width x ZnEq value
Scoping study level financial model for a 1.5Mtpa open-pit with
base metal float circuit indicates 1.6% ZnEq is a suitable
break-even cut-off grade.
2.3. Exploration target
In consideration of the broad mineralised intercepts over a
strike length of 1.15km between Section 350mN and Section1500mN,
the initial Lewis Ponds Exploration Target is estimated at
15 - 25Mt at 2.2 - 3.7% ZnEq (1.2 -2.0g/t AuEq)[3]
(see Table 2 for values used in defining zinc and gold
equivalents). The estimated breakeven mining grade is 1.6%
ZnEq.
The potential quantity and grade is conceptual in nature, and
there has been insufficient exploration based on the “bulk-tonnage”
concept to estimate a mineral resource and it is uncertain if
further exploration will result in the estimation of a “bulk
tonnage” mineral resource.
The system is open north and south along strike within areas of
historic workings and soil geochemical anomalism.
Significantly, there are extensive runs of historic drill core with
no assays at all or only base metal assays (i.e. no gold
assays).
Commonly within the Lewis Ponds lode envelopes, the runs of
non-assayed material correspond to core photography which clearly
shows the core is altered and likely mineralised. These
intervals are ascribed nil grade within intercept calculations,
meaning the Exploration Target grade is likely under-estimated.
Funds raised under Ardea’s initial public offer will be used,
amongst other things, to test the exploration target through
diamond drilling on 100 metre spaced sections over the next 12
months.
3. Exploration update
3.1. Western Australian projects
As exploration ramps up, Ardea intends to consolidate its
substantial portfolio of exploration tenements in the Eastern
Goldfields of Western Australia that are prospective for
Archean-style nickel sulphide and gold mineralisation. The
consolidation process has commenced.
3.1.1. Mt Zephyr Gold-Nickel Project - Ardea 100%
Mt Zephyr is a section of greenstone belt localised on the Celia
Lineament and located 60km NNE of Leonora.
Referring to section 2(a) of the Supplementary Prospectus dated
18 November 2016, the objection to the grant of the main tenement
has been withdrawn and accordingly the tenement has been
recommended for grant. An archaeologist for assessing
proposed Gale and Dunns New Find drill sites has been retained.
Gale gold prospect
Gale is a 273ppb Au soil anomaly which Aurora Gold[4] RAB
drilled in the 1990s and intersected consistent >0.25g/t Au from
surface to RAB refusal with intercepts of 6-18m at 0.5g/t Au and
peak 6m at 1.3g/t Au. The anomaly is clearly a sub-horizontal
geometry and not the narrow sub-vertical interpretation of previous
explorers.
The Gale RAB gold anomaly at a 0.25g/t Au cut-off grade defines
an open sub-horizontal sheet with 700m N-S strike, 100m E-W width
with up to 18m thick (corresponding to RAB refusal depths).
A site visit confirmed the anomaly has not been followed up with
previous RC drilling, apart from a very limited program at the
extreme northwest corner of the soil anomaly. Old RAB chips
mixed with aeolian sand located at the old RAB collars returned
consistent 0.1-0.4g/t Au. RAB chips included
silica-pyrite-sericite alteration, which have the appearance of a
“late stage mineraliser”. The geological expression of Gale
is felt to be closely analogous to the Dacian Gold Jupiter
syenite-hosted gold discovery, located 50km southeast along strike
on the Celia Lineament.
The RAB chip anomalism is supported by up to 1.4 g/t Au in an
“unaltered” granite float composite south of the RAB-drilled area,
and 1.2-1.5g/t Au in gossanous limonite-white quartz vein float to
the east of the RAB-drilled area.
The observed sub-horizontal RAB litho-geochemistry is a primary
protolith attribute, since very clear-cut sharp barren RAB assays
occur at the east and west contacts (if solely a supergene blanket
enrichment, diffuse contacts with wider and more gradual dispersion
would be expected).
Ardea plans to follow up the Gale RAB anomaly with systematic RC
drill traverses.
Figure 8 – Mt Zephyr, tenement and key prospects map
Dunns Line of gold prospects
The model for gold mineralisation has been refined with the
recognition that historic workings are closely associated with NE
trending cross-faults within the N-S trending main BIF
horizon. Ardea’s exploration model has evolved to be closely
analogous to the Hill 50 “Boogardie Breaks” at Mt Magnet in Western
Australia.
Rock chip and historic percussion drill chips along the target
zone were sampled. It is planned to complete systematic soil
auger geochemistry along the 4km of exposures along Dunns Line and
extending into soil covered (altered) areas along strike of the
main BIF.
Jones Area A and B nickel sulphide prospects
Olivine adcumulate komatiite channel facies have been identified
by Ardea within a stratigraphic horizon which is felt to correlate
with the Mt Windarra nickel sulphide mine stratigraphy. A
sulphide facies BIF underlies the komatiite channel at Jones A,
which is an excellent setting for “Silver Swan-style” nickel
sulphide occurrences. Ironstone assays by Ardea at Jones Area
B returned 0.3% Ni, confirming a prospective nickel sulphide
setting.
Soil auger geochemistry is planned ahead of ground EM
surveys.
There has been no previous RC drill testing of the Jones
targets.
The Mt Zephyr E39/1854 application containing the Gale, Dunns
and Jones prospects has been recommended for grant and consultant
retained for a heritage survey.
3.1.2. Bardoc Tectonic Zone Gold Project - Ardea
100%
Ghost Rocks gold prospect
The Lady Isobel group of workings trend NNW over an area of 170m
x 70m. The workings include a substantial underlay shaft
dipping approximately 450 towards 1200 (discordant to the overall
trend of workings), with smaller subsidiary workings distributed
over the full area on multiple structural orientations.
Mullock consists of white quartz vein stockworks within an
amphibolite host.
Random mullock sampling by Ardea on the main shaft assayed up to
5.3 g/t Au. There appears to be a deficiency of mullock when
considering the depth of shafts, suggesting part of the excavated
material has been milled.
Big Four gold prospect
The Big Four gold prospect is being evaluated as a potential
open-pit. The main lode has excellent visual expression,
being a subvertical quartz lode within clay-limonite altered
dioritic porphyry. Visual grade control should be possible in
any open-pit mining.
Reconnaissance in late 2016 was aimed at assessing additional
exploration targets along strike, notably soil geochemical
anomalies to the south.
The target concept at Big Four is an open-pit developed over the
historic workings. Elsewhere in the Bardoc Tectonic Zone
(BTZ), such occurrences were drilled and mined during the various
“gold booms” of the 1990-2000s. With Heron’s historical focus
on the KNP nickel laterite within the BTZ tenure, gold exploration
was minimal.
A proposal was received by Ardea from a local contractor to
complete a trial pit at Big Four under a profit share
arrangement. In view of open ore positions at Big Four, it
was concluded that further exploration was required at Big Four
before a transaction could be considered.
Figure 9 – Big Four workings, facing north, note white quartz
reef in left foreground
Various gold joint ventures were also proposed, but decisions
will await completion of the Ardea IPO.
4. Tenement acquisition
update
Ardea has applied for several new tenements in New South Wales
and Western Australia, subsequent to the Ardea Prospectus
“Technical Assessment Report” and so these projects are not covered
in the Prospectus. The following sections briefly describe
the geology and prospectivity of these new project areas.
4.1. Lachlan Fold Belt, NSW
As part of the Ardea Prospectus preparation, a significant gold
prospect has been generated for the Lewis Ponds project around the
Godolphin Fault, a shallow east-dipping domain boundary structure
separating the Ordovician Macquarie Arc in the west from the
Silurian Hill End Trough in the east. From southeast to
northwest, the structure hosts gold mining centres and targets from
McPhillamys, Springfield, Mt Shorter, Calula and Copper Hill East.
This Godolphin Fault trend is held within Ardea’s tenement
package, a 50km strike of continuous tenure abutting the
McPhillamy’s deposit in the south and the Commonwealth (Silica
Hill) deposit in the north.
4.1.1. Yeoval Porphyry Copper-Gold-Molybdenum-Rhenium Project
(ELA5368, recommended for grant) - Ardea 100%
Yeoval (ELA 5368) is located within the Macquarie Arc, 60km
northeast of the Northparkes copper-gold mine. The tenement
application covers an area of 138km2 and is intensely mineralised
with more than 60 historic copper workings trending in a
north-easterly direction, along a 20km strike. The project
area encompasses the eastern section of the Early Devonian Yeoval
Complex, with the major host being the Devonian-aged Naringla
Granodiorite including gabbro-diorite and quartz
monzo-diorites. The co-magmatic Canowindra Volcanics of the
Cudal Group occur to the east and south. The Ardea
exploration target is a large tonnage porphyry
copper-gold-molybdenum-rhenium system.
This report section contains exploration results and estimates
reported by ASX-listed Augur Resources Limited on 17 September 2012
under the JORC Code 2004[5]. The information has not been
updated to comply with the JORC Code 2012, and it is uncertain
whether following evaluation or further exploration work that the
estimate will be able to be reported in accordance with the JORC
Code 2012.
The known Yeoval deposit comprises two main near-surface zones
of bornite-chalcopyrite mineralisation. Initial drilling in
1972 produced best intercepts of 42.7m at 0.93% Cu and 18m at
0.8g/t Au. Drilling in 2008 by Augur Resources produced best
intercepts of 90m at 0.90% Cu and 0.14g/t Au and 50m at 0.54% Cu
and 0.48g/t Au. Augur Resources[5] reported on 17 September
and 2 December 2008 an Inferred Mineral Resource in compliance with
JORC 2004 guidelines and based on this, Augur Resources considered
an Exploration Target of approximately 10Mt – 13Mt at grades of
approximately 0.38% Cu and 0.14g/t Au as achievable.[7]
Table 4: Augur Resources Ltd announcement of drill hole
YZ-04, 17 October 2012
Hole
ID |
Grid E
(m) |
Grid N
(m) |
EOH
(m) |
Declin /
azimuth (°) |
From
(m) |
To
(m) |
Width
(m) |
Cu
(%) |
Au
(g/t) |
YZ-04 |
654 137 |
6 377 651 |
385.9 |
-55/102.5 |
182.7 |
266.2 |
19.1 |
0.6 |
0.66 |
This table
represents data from an Augur Resources announcement on 17
September 2012 to the ASX. The background details of the data have
yet to be ascertained and application has been made by Ardea to the
NSW Department regarding release of the relevant comprehensive
data-set to open file. The above information is included to
validate that the Yeoval deposit is significantly copper-gold
endowed and so warrants further investigation. Copies of
Augur’s several Yeoval announcements are available by contacting
Ardea. |
4.1.2. Mt Aubrey Epithermal Gold-Silver Project (ELA5369,
recommended for grant) - Ardea 100%
Mt Aubrey (ELA 5369) is located at the east contact of the
Macquarie Arc Ordovician andesites some 30km northeast of Parkes
and 30km southeast of Peak Hill.
The property was acquired by Ardea as an epithermal gold system
hosted in Upper Silurian to Lower Devonian-aged Dulladerry
Volcanics, a bimodal subaerial suite of quartz eye porphyry with
rhyolitic ash-flow lapilli tuff, pyroclastic and breccia and
amygdaloidal basalt. Gold mineralisation is typically hosted
by 0.5-3m thick chalcedonic epithermal quartz veins and stockworks.
All assays reported in Table 5 below are from open file
reports and are not able to be verified by Ardea.
Although an epithermal-style of gold mineralisation, the Mt
Aubrey mineralisation isn’t refractory, with the published
run-of-mine grade (3.73g/t Au) returning 95.7% recovery in historic
metallurgical test work.
Gold mineralisation at the Mt Aubrey vein system remains open at
depth and along strike, as the historical drilling done by BHP Gold
was only designed to define shallow oxide resources. The
Mount Aubrey deposit was mined by BHP Gold in 1990 and 1991 as
shallow open-pit satellite operations to the Parkes Gold
Mine. It is estimated that up to 120,000 tonnes of ore at
3.3g/t Au was trucked to Parkes for processing. As part of
the operating agreement with the landowner all three of the small
open-pits were back filled.
It is presumed that the shallower of the drill intercepts as
reported above were mined in the BHP open-pits. Historic pit
pick-ups will be sought to quantify the status ore positions
beneath the historic pit floors.
In 2007, Aurelia Metals Limited[8] completed three diamond core
holes beneath the former Mt Aubrey Gold Mine for a total of
916.6m. The holes were designed to test the down dip
extension of high grade epithermal quartz veining mined in the Mt
Aubrey open-pits. Holes MAD002 and MAD003 each intersected
broad zones of epithermal quartz-carbonate vein stockworks
associated with epidote, sericite and bleaching alteration and
minor sulphides.
Table 5 Mt Aubrey historic RC drill
results.
Hole
ID |
Grid E
(m) |
Grid N
(m) |
EOH
(m) |
Declin /
azimuth (°) |
From
(m) |
To
(m) |
Width
(m) |
Au
(g/t) |
MAR016 |
5161 |
10136 |
71 |
-60/018 |
38 |
44 |
6 |
6.65 |
MAR025 |
5201 |
10135 |
56 |
-60/024 |
30 |
32 |
2 |
6.04 |
MAR030 |
5291 |
10066 |
61 |
-60/018 |
45 |
49 |
4 |
2.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
59 |
7 |
1.33 |
MAR034 |
5743 |
10111 |
61 |
-60/355 |
49 |
55 |
6 |
6.21 |
MAR038 |
5774 |
10142 |
56 |
-60/355 |
6 |
11 |
5 |
3.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
25 |
9 |
1.26 |
MAR046 |
5161 |
10116 |
121 |
-60/018 |
64 |
73 |
9 |
4.12 |
MAR051 |
4881 |
10249 |
76 |
-60/018 |
26 |
29 |
3 |
7.99 |
MAR065 |
5201 |
10145 |
25 |
-60/018 |
14 |
17 |
3 |
7.68 |
MAR066 |
5739 |
10152 |
51 |
-69/175 |
4 |
11 |
7 |
3.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
27 |
3 |
1.85 |
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
40 |
8 |
1.85 |
MAR070 |
5140 |
10160 |
69 |
-60/017 |
15 |
27 |
7 |
17.78 |
MAR072 |
5180 |
10151 |
33 |
-60/019 |
6 |
16 |
10 |
8.52 |
MAR077 |
4923 |
10251 |
33 |
-60/018 |
5 |
10 |
5 |
8.10 |
MAR079 |
5694 |
10120 |
55 |
-60/355 |
6 |
14 |
8 |
2.87 |
MAR083 |
5821 |
10157 |
51 |
-60/019 |
23 |
24 |
1 |
6.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
37 |
48 |
11 |
2.95 |
MAR084 |
5821 |
10172 |
51 |
-60/018 |
17 |
20 |
3 |
4.57 |
MAR085 |
5862 |
10179 |
75 |
-60/018 |
12 |
16 |
5 |
3.97 |
MAR086 |
5861 |
10160 |
75 |
-60/020 |
18 |
27 |
9 |
2.45 |
MAR089 |
5662 |
10173 |
60 |
-60/018 |
18 |
21 |
3 |
5.66 |
It is yet
to be determined through historic pit surveys which of these
intercepts have been extracted in previous mining operations.
Anecdotal reporting suggests very shallow open-pits, being some
20-30m deep as determined by stripping ratios. Their
inclusion in this Report is solely to demonstrate that the Mt
Aubrey system is gold-endowed and warrants further evaluation. |
At the Mt Aubrey South prospect drill hole
MAD004 intersected a broad zone hosting abundant mineralised
crustiform textured quartz-carbonate-pyrite veining with a gold
intersection of 88m at 0.22g/t Au from 2m. The gold
mineralisation in MAD004 represents an un-mined new gold-bearing
structure to the south of the main Mt Aubrey vein system.
The Blue Hills prospect is an area of
outcropping, gold bearing veins and minor workings 2km along strike
to the northwest of Mount Aubrey. Rock chip samples of up to
13.4g/t Au have been recorded and two costeans returned results of
2m at 1.35g/t Au and 6.5m at 1.40g/t Au. The area between Mt
Aubrey and Blue Hills is mainly covered by modern alluvium but is
also thought to contain quartz veining.
The Emu Swamp prospect is located 3km to the
east of Mt Aubrey and contains outcropping veining with rock chip
gold values to 3.3 g/t Au associated with pyritic
alteration. The 6km Blue Hills – Mt Aubrey – Emu Swamp trend
represents a significant epithermal vein system target.
Mt Aubrey along with the adjoining Yeoval tenure is interpreted
by Ardea as the manifestation of a major NE-trending zoned porphyry
copper-gold-molybdenum-rhenium to epithermal gold-silver intrusive
centre.
4.1.3. Wiseman’s Creek Gold-Copper Project (ELA5378,
recommended for grant) - Ardea 100%
The Black Bullock prospect is located at
Wiseman’s Creek, 35km southeast of Bathurst, NSW. Epithermal
gold mineralisation within the tenure is hosted largely within
Late-Silurian – Early Devonian-aged slates, shales and sediments of
the Kildrummie and Campbell’s Groups, with geology through the
centre of the tenure comprising the andesitic Ordovician-aged
Rockley Volcanics.
Mineralisation has been reported as predominantly associated
with silicified zones with epithermal textures such as open-space
filling in quartz veins, quartz vein breccias, chalcedonic
silicification and colloform banding. The units strike NNW
and dip steeply eastwards.
The Wiseman’s Creek area was held as EL2098 by Windsor
Resources[9] during the 1980s and was part of a JV arrangement,
which saw a total of 80 RC and three diamond holes drilled between
the years 1985 - 1989. In Windsor’s 1988 Annual Operations
report, the major historic gold mine production was noted as being
from Black Bullock Mine, reporting production of some 40,000oz of
silver and 2,098oz of gold from 4,700 tonnes of ore (at an average
grade of 14g/t gold). Three main areas of interest were
identified, some within State Forest and some on freehold
land.
At the gold prices of the day, the deposit was not considered
economic, however gold intercepts at shallow depths were reported
that warrant further investigation. Table 6 above lists only
some of the more significant gold intercepts recorded in the
Windsor Annual Report. An additional 23 RC and 3 diamond
drill holes (not listed in Table 6) contained significant
intercepts at or above 0.5g/t Au. In 2006 Central West
Gold[10] completed an IP survey and drilled follow up RC holes
based on modelling of the earlier historic drilling and which
reportedly contained a best result of 3m at 0.36g/t Au from 9m.
Table 6: Black Bullock prospect historic drill
results
Hole
ID |
Grid E
(m) |
Grid N
(m) |
EOH
(m) |
Declin /
azimuth (°) |
From
(m) |
To
(m) |
Width
(m) |
Au
(g/t) |
PWC-11 |
2100 |
1160 |
93 |
-60/270 |
0 |
16 |
16 |
0.62 |
PWC-14 |
2789 |
2200 |
99 |
-60/270 |
16 |
50 |
34 |
1.00 |
incl. |
|
|
|
|
30 |
44 |
14 |
2.25 |
incl. |
|
|
|
|
36 |
42 |
6 |
3.60 |
incl. |
|
|
|
|
60 |
66 |
6 |
0.64 |
PWC-17 |
2673.5 |
2174 |
87 |
-60/090 |
10 |
30 |
20 |
0.22 |
PWC-18 |
2482 |
2070 |
105 |
-60/270 |
8 |
34 |
26 |
0.20 |
PWC-19 |
2437 |
2170 |
105 |
-60/270 |
6 |
16 |
10 |
0.25 |
Incl. |
|
|
|
|
22 |
28 |
6 |
0.48 |
PWC-21 |
2604 |
1276 |
104 |
-60/270 |
74 |
100 |
26 |
1.56 |
incl. |
|
|
|
|
74 |
86 |
12 |
3.10 |
PWC-25 |
2597 |
1387 |
82 |
-60/175 |
60 |
76 |
16 |
0.48 |
incl. |
|
|
|
|
60 |
62 |
2 |
1.04 |
PWC-28 |
2900 |
2128 |
82 |
-60/090 |
66 |
82 |
16 |
0.3 |
PWC-29 |
1950 |
1990 |
51 |
-60/090 |
6 |
18 |
12 |
0.6 |
PWC-33 |
2650 |
1269 |
45 |
-60/270 |
16 |
28 |
12 |
1.5 |
PWC-34 |
2755 |
2195 |
75 |
-60/270 |
30 |
42 |
12 |
0.7 |
The above table represents historic data from GS1988_277 Windsor
Resources report, recorded as a statutory requirement, for the NSW
government department. The quality of the data has yet to be
ascertained as historic QAQC work was poorly reported, but is
included to establish that the Wiseman’s Creek prospect is
gold-endowed and warrants further investigation.
Duckmaloi Tungsten prospect
From 2012 to 2014 part of the tenement area now held by Ardea
was held by Resmetco Ltd[11] who explored for tungsten within a
prospect known as “Duckmaloi” hosted within skarn style
mineralisation. The prospect itself was estimated in an open
file report to have an Exploration Target[3] of approximately
375,000 tonnes at 0.2% WO3 The potential quantity and
grade is conceptual in nature and there is insufficient information
to estimate a Mineral Resource and it remains uncertain if further
exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource in
this area of drilling.
The existence of this deposit style as well as the nearby
epithermal occurrences does suggest evidence for a larger
mineralizing system and also warrants further investigation.
4.1.4. Status of NSW Applications
The Wisemans Creek, Yeoval and Mt Aubury applications have been
recommended for grant.
4.2. Eastern Goldfields, WA
4.2.1. Bedonia West- Ardea 100%
E63/1827 and E63/1828 covering 358km2 complete Ardea’s coverage
of the Jimberlana Dyke west of the existing Bedonia prospect.
Recent Ardea work has confirmed the anomalous Ni-Cu-PGM soil auger
geochemistry previously identified by Heron is coincident with a
specific intrusive phase of the Jimberlana Dyke lopolith. The
new applications consolidate Ardea’s coverage of the favourable
Proterozoic Dyke lopolith geological setting.
4.2.2. Perrinvale- Ardea 100%
E29/1006 covers 175km2 along the eastern strike continuation of
the “Cathedrals” Proterozoic Dyke complex. The application
was predicated on Ardea’s recognition of lopolith mineralisation
controls at its Bedonia Project, and aims to secure similarly
endowed lopolith geological settings, as well as the northern
strike continuation of the domain boundary Ida Fault hosting the Mt
Ida gold mining centre to the immediate south.
4.2.3. Status of WA Applications
The WA applications at Perrinvale, Bedonia West and Jimberlana
are proceeding towards grant with no objections pending.
5. Corporate update – Ardea
share applications
A copy of the Prospectus and First and Second Supplementary
Prospectus is available at www.ardearesources.com.au. Anyone
considering investing should read the Prospectuses in their
entirety before deciding whether to do so. Applications can
only be made via the application form which is in the
Prospectus.
Please contact Ardea’s Company Secretary, Mr Sam Middlemas, on
+61 8 6500 9200 if a hard-copy of the Prospectus is required.
About Heron Resources Limited:
Heron’s project focus is commissioning the high-grade Woodlawn
Zinc-Copper Project located 250km southwest of Sydney, New South
Wales. In addition, the Company holds a number of other high
quality base metal exploration properties located in the immediate
Woodlawn area of the Lachlan Fold Belt, New South Wales.
With Heron’s focus on Woodlawn and the securing of finance for
commissioning the operation, the spin-off of the non-Woodlawn
assets into Ardea was commenced in August 2016. It is
anticipated that Ardea will commence trading on ASX in February
2017.
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 9 November 2016 (prospectus lodged by Ardea and
Heron);
- Kalgoorlie Nickel Project on 21 October 2013 and 31 July 2014,
27 October 2016, 2016 Heron Annual Report and 6 January 2017;
- Big Four-Goongarrie on 13 March 2012, 26 June 2012 and 24 July
2012.
- KNP Cobalt Zone Study on 6 January 2017
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 exploration target for Lewis Ponds, exploration results for
Lewis Ponds, Gundagai, Mt Zephyr, BTZ and Kalgoorlie East
Tenements, and forward programs contained in this announcement are
based on, and fairly represents, 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 2012 edition of the ‘Australasian Code for
Reporting of Exploration Results’. Mr Buchhorn has reviewed the
Heron announcements the subject of the Second Supplementary
Prospectus and consents to the inclusion of the information in the
form and context in which it appears. Mr Buchhorn states that
the historical exploration results and estimates are an accurate
representation of available data and studies for the Yeoval, Mt
Aubury and Wiseman’s Creek projects and are reflect Mr Buchhorn’s
on-the-ground knowledge of the regional project areas.
The information in this report that relates to KNP Exploration
Results is based on information originally compiled by previous and
current full time employees of Heron Resources Limited. The
Exploration Results and data collection processes have been
reviewed, verified and re-interpreted by Mr Ian Buchhorn who is a
Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and
currently a full-time employee of Heron Resources Limited. Mr
Buchhorn has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the
exploration activities 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’. Mr Buchhorn consents to the inclusion in this
report of the matters based on his information in the form and
context that it appears.
The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources
for the Goongarrie South, Big Four and Aubils Prospects is based on
information originally compiled by Mr James Ridley in 2008 and 2009
when employed as a Senior Resource Geologist with Heron Resources
Limited. The information in this report that relates to
Mineral Resources for the Scotia and Black Range Prospects is based
on information originally compiled by Snowden Mining Industry
Consultants on behalf of Heron in 2004. The Mineral Resource
estimates for all five prospect areas have been reviewed, validated
and re-interpreted by James Ridley who is a Member of the
Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Ridley is
now a full-time employee of Ridley Mineral Resource Consulting Pty
Limited and has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style
of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to
the resource estimation activity that he is undertaking 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’. Mr Ridley consents to the
inclusion in this report of the matters based on his information in
the form and context that it appears. Note that Mineral
Resources that are not Ore Reserves do not have demonstrated
viability.
The exploration and industry benchmarking summaries 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 2012
edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration
Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. 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, 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.
http://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/1577ca1a-d81a-421a-a266-f4c9eed1b352
JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 (Mt Zephyr, Mt Aubury,
Yeoval, Wiseman’s Creek)
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. |
· Mt Zephyr, 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· Mt Zephyr, 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· Mt Zephyr, 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, Mt Zephyr, 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. |
· Mt Zephyr,
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)· Lewis Ponds, Mt Phillamy-style
orogenic base metals-gold possibly overprinting VMS enriched
meta-sedimentary succession.· Mt Aubury-Yeoval, upper
epithermal system with a Silurian-Devonian intrusive system. |
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. |
· Mt Zephyr,
ground magnetics to define syenite intrusives and contacts, gravity
survey to define structures, aircore drill to quantify host
geology, then RC sections for mineralisation continuity (200x40m
initial pattern).· Mt Aubury-Yeoval and Wiseman’s Creek,
systematic multi-element soil auger geochemistry to rank drill
targets.· Perrinvale, Jimberlana, Bedonia West, multi-element
soil auger geochemistry to define ground EM targets, RC drill all
conductors. |
JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 (Lewis Ponds
Exploration Target)
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. |
Refer reporting in Bob
Cotton JORC 2004 and JORC 2012 reporting Refer ASX
announcements as follows:· Ardea Resources Prospectus dated 9
November 2016, pages 9-10, 43-48, 67, 83 (JORC 2012 Resource
Statement), 95-106 (Tenements).· Heron Annual Report 2016
dated 24 August 2016, section 10.6.· Heron Quarterly Report
September 2016 dated 31 October 2016. Both Reverse Circulation
Percussion drilling (RCP) and Diamond core drilling (DD) have
contributed to the Lewis Ponds resource database. RCP totals
2,190 samples representing 2,566 metres of mineralisation drilling,
and DD totals 4,832 samples for 5,048 metres. Total drilling to the
date of the Bob Cotton September 2016 report was 54,516 metres
comprising:· 117 primary diamond holes for 41,776
metres· 32 wedged diamond holes for 7,159 metres· 7
diamond tails to RCP holes for 159 metres· 62 RCP holes for
5,421 metres· 4 Open Holes (Percussion/Rotary drilling) for
276 metres· The last hole drilled was the diamond tail to
TLPRC04010.· The Resource is based on sub-surface samples
obtained by the above drilling. Earliest drilling was successful
testing of geochemical and/or geophysical anomalism adjacent to
historic small mining. This progressed into drilling on grid
sections to test the discovered mineralisation at intervals
appropriate for good confidence in continuity. The earliest was
diamond drilling by Amax commencing 25 October, 1971. The Longyear
44 rig used was top industry standard for the time. ·
Similarly, the first single shot gyro instruments were being used
for downhole surveys. Handheld GPS became practical for sub-5m
accuracy collar positioning in year 2000 (removal of Selective
Availability). The most recent programs after and including 2004
used Trimble GPS for collar positioning. The first hole to have
(Differential) GPS collar positioning was TLPD-55 which commenced 3
Nov1995. About 40 percent of the total metreage drilled was GPS
located. |
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). |
· HQ and NQ core,
recoveries recorded, sampling by half core predominantly, focus for
historic cut selection mainly dependent upon visible base metal
sulphide-bearing drill core.· Two main types of drilling have
been used since the first drill testing at Lewis Ponds in
1971:· Reverse Circulation Percussion (RCP) and Diamond Core
Drilling (DD). Open hole techniques including Tricone, Blade and
Hammer have been used to pre-collar holes through overburden and
barren ground to place casing to facilitate deeper RC and/or
DD.· Prior to 1980, HQ core size was used only to seat the
casing to enable NQ coring to start. Most of these holes at
some stage reduced to BQ core size when rotation became an issue
with NQ. In DD programs subsequent to 1980 HQ core size was used to
refusal then reduction to NQ and possibly BQ. After 1990
triple tube barrels were used to good effect minimising core loss,
and reduction to NQ became the norm with no further use of BQ
coring.· Diamond tails, as distinct from pre-collars, were
used to extend RCP holes in the 2004 programs. These totalled 152 m
in five holes.· No use of oriented core was made until 2004
where drillers marks on core assisted determination of vergence in
folding adjacent to mineralisation |
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. |
· Core recoveries
at Lewis Ponds have not in every case been recorded on a sample by
sample basis, however a good recovery database is provided by
recoveries recorded in the Geological Logs. These logs show that
significant core loss is a comparatively rare event once the hole
enters competent rock, and in most cases is due to local faulting
and/or shearing. Recovery of core has been measured by restoring
the core, fitting individual pieces end to end where possible.
Lengths of the assembled core were measured to compare with the
intervals between drillers’ downhole markers. The ratio between the
measured length and the marker interval length was recorded as core
recovery percent. Percussion chip samples, at least in the more
recent RC drilling, were weighed and the weight recorded. Any
noticeably low weight recorded became a recovery factor in the
sampling record. |
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. |
· Logging of core
and chips has been maintained throughout the Lewis Ponds programs.
In the 1992 - 2004 programs, logs of downhole geology were
generally prepared on paper proformas then entered digitally. In
most cases scans of the hand logs have been made as well as the
digital logs. · The first objective has been to enable the
lithology, alteration and mineralisation, and oxidation records to
appear on screen together with grades for geological interpretive
purposes. This has taken place to the standard required for mineral
resource estimation and subsequent studies. The geological logging
done, together with available photography, is considered to be
adequate for mineral resource studies.· Where needed terms
such as ‘massive’, semi-massive’ ‘stringer’ or ‘disseminated’ have
been used to describe the aspect of the metal sulphides. These
qualitative terms are expected to be reflected in the assay results
for the same intervals. This applies to logging both core and
chips. Visual estimation of sulphide percentages has not been
systematic throughout the drilling. · Core photography has
been carried out over the mineralised intervals in core obtained
between TLPD33 and TLPD72 (Oct 1994 to April 1997) and the
mineralised section of TLPD12. This represents approximately 50% of
the total drilling, thus there is insufficient core photography to
be a proxy for geotechnical logging in the event of a scoping study
for Lewis Ponds.· Minimal geotechnical logging, due to lack
of orientated drill core. |
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. |
· Insufficient
detail in pre-1992 historic reports, reputable international
explorer using standard industry practice of the time.· With
both RCP and DD drill sampling, a replicate sample was taken every
20m for quality control and submitted without special
identification with other samples to the laboratory. It was rare
for replicate sample assays, when compared with the original, to
fall outside normal variability within the sampling/assay process.
On some occasions a triplicate sample was taken for an umpire Au
assay.· The Lewis Ponds sulphides, whether massive, stringer
or disseminated, have not raised problems of representivity with
the RCP and DD sampling employed. · Gold is a significant
element of the Lewis Ponds metal value and could have
representivity issues. Preliminary metallurgical study indicates
that gold is largely refractory within sulphides. “Nugget” gold is
therefore unlikely to be a problem in fresh rock at Lewis Ponds
with attendant representivity issues. This may have to be reviewed
if mineralisation in the oxide zone becomes a drilling target. |
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 pre-1992 historic reports, reputable
international explorer using standard industry practice of the
time· QC Certificates of Analysis are held from the
laboratory in respect of regular internal check assays of
Standards, Blanks and Internal Duplicates from pulps of the
original samples. · Random checks give evidence of
satisfactory procedures. Accuracy and Precision stats could be run
for a marginally higher level of comfort. |
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 pre-1992 reports, reputable
international explorer using standard industry practice of the
time· All significant intersections (TRO, TOA and prior) have
been independently verified by a senior consultant to the extent of
re-logging to become familiar with the detailed assaying
characteristics. This was carried out in two phases and a full
report has been presented describing each phase |
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 pre-1992 historic reports, reputable
international explorer using standard industry practice of the
time· Local grids used, require field validation but minimal
drill hole artefacts remain· Collar positions have been set
in using a Trimble GPS instrument with a sub-5 metre level of
accuracy. Collars of TOA and TRO holes have been picked up using a
DGPS Sub-1 metre instrument since mid-1995. Prior to that, holes
may have been sited relative to a pegged tape and compass grid with
significant inaccuracies. However in 1995 all previous hole collars
appear to have been identified and surveyed by DGPS. No tape and
compass coordinates are used to locate any item of drill data in
the current database. In 2004 limited checks were made of surviving
early hole collars (pre-1995) using DGPS with satisfactory results
when compared with database.· The Lewis Ponds grid was
established in 1992 using a local grid north reference of 315
degrees magnetic. The Grid north orientation of 315 degrees (Mag)
equates to 329 degrees MGA. |
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. |
· Where drilling
density is greatest the Lewis Ponds mineralisation is seen to
consist of simple lenses at all downhole Zinc Equivalent (ZnEq)
cut-offs up to 8 to 9 % ZnEq. · Cross sections are 20 m
apart. On any one cross section three or more drill holes are
sufficient to characterise the lenses. The drill intersections are
usually about 50 to 80m apart down dip. · For the
thickest part of the Main Lenses this criterion applies on six
contiguous cross sections, that is 120m of strike length. From this
base, at the low 1% ZnEq cut-off, one or two intersections per
cross section are sufficient to carry the lens interpretation a
further 40m north and 300m up plunge to the south. At this point
there is a second interval of 100m strike length near surface with
3 intercepts per cross section. At the plus 7% ZnEq cut-off, the
lenses are limited to the 120m interval. It is considered that this
data distribution permits estimation of resources in the Indicated
category.· For the Exploration Target Stringer
interpretations, Lens interpretation has used Grade Composites
based on (a) a 1% ZnEq downhole cut-off, effectively quantifying
stringer and disseminated mineralisation, and (b) a 7% ZnEq
downhole cut-off characterising semi-massive and massive sulphide
mineralisation. |
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. |
· Generally
orthogonal when using “Stringer” interpretations. |
Sample security |
•The measures taken to
ensure sample security. |
· Perhaps the
best security against potential sample tampering for a situation
such as Lewis Ponds has been not to have to store the samples. Site
processing of samples was by Company employees and when complete
samples were less than an hour from the laboratory by company
vehicle. Satisfactory internal security was maintained routinely by
the Laboratory. |
Audits or reviews |
•The results of any
audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. |
· Consultants
completed a total review and audit of the Lewis Ponds database
following the public float of Tri Origin Minerals Limited on 9 Jan
2004. Areas were: Grids and Collars, Downhole surveys, Assays,
Geology. Apart from this Review, previous resource estimates
were studied for factors likely to introduce bias, up or
down.· Ardea is currently assembling available Lewis Ponds
hard copy reports archived at the Woodlawn mine site. |
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. |
· TriAusMin
(Heron) granted Exploration Licence tenure and Ardea EL
applications. · The project is on partly cleared private
land, most of which is owned by Ardea. Access agreements are in
place for the private land surrounding the main deposit area. There
are no national parks, reserves or heritage sites affecting the
project area. At this stage security can only be enhanced by
continued engagement with stakeholders and maintaining profile in
the City of Orange in particular |
•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 Ardea
Prospectus · Amax Exploration Australia Inc entered a Joint
Venture Agreement which Metals Investments Holdings NL and A.I.
Consolidated Gold Pty Ltd held with the owner of the title
,Wentworth Mining Corporation Pty Ltd, over ground which included
the Lewis Ponds deposit. Amax drilled four DD holes totalling 875
meters in 1971-1972 which contributed four intercepts above 7% ZnE
to this Resource estimate. The only drilling done prior to Amax was
by Cominco in 1969. Three holes were abandoned after entering
disused workings at the Spicers Mine location, Lewis Ponds. ·
Subsequent drilling by Aquitaine Australia Minerals Pty Ltd in
1975-1976 was under joint venture agreement with Amax and Shell
Company of Australia. 10 (BOA series) holes were drilled
totalling 2102 metres, which also contributed four
intercepts.· Between 1979 and 1981 a further 7 holes
totalling 2274 metres (SLP series) were drilled by Shell and
Aquitaine under the JV agreement with Amax. This drilling
contributed five intercepts including one twinned in a wedge hole.
· In total, other party exploration contributed 15 percent of
the database which now determines the geometry of potentially ore
grade mineralisation for this Resource estimate.· In
1987-1988, the Homestake subsidiary Sabminco drilled 33 RCP holes
totalling 2300 metres (LPRC series). This drilling
contributed 21 intercepts of the 230 used to interpret the
Resource.· Prior to the acquisition of TriAusMin by Heron in
August 2014, Tri Origin Australia drilled 42,232 metres in 124
holes, followed by Tri Origin Minerals with 3,812 metres in 30
holes. |
Geology |
•Deposit type,
geological setting and style of mineralisation. |
· Refer Ardea
Prospectus.· Lewis Ponds, Mt Phillamy-style orogenic base
metals-gold possibly overprinting VMS enriched meta-sedimentary
succession.. |
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. |
· The database
now carries 211 holes totalling 54516 metres. |
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. |
Massive mineralization
model:· Grade compositing was by averages above cutoff
weighted for sample length. The maximum total inclusion of subgrade
was 5m and the maximum consecutive inclusion of subgrade was 3m.
· Two sets of composites were prepared, one based on downhole
cut-off of 1 percent Zinc Equivalent (% ZnEq) and the other based
on 7% ZnEq (potentially economic). No cutting of high grades took
place at the aggregation stage because grade composites were used
only for the interpretation of the geometry of the mineralisation
on cross section and in plan, prior to wireframing, not for
Resource estimation.Stringer Exploration Target mineralization
model:· There was no limitation on internal waste, since the
objective was to generate mining shapes for a low grade open-pit
bulk mining operation.· The historic Lewis Ponds core assay
data has significant runs of unassayed material which has been
included in intercept runs as nil grade. Review of available
core photography and geological logs confirms a significant
proportion of un-assayed internal waste is sericite-pyrite altered
and thus prospective for “orogenic gold”. |
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 currently
applicable to Stringer systems, require geo-metallurgical
assessment. |
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. |
· Available as
hard copy at Woodlawn mine site, to be digitized. |
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. |
· Balanced
reporting in Bob Cotton JORC 2004 and JORC 2012 reporting |
Site visits |
|
· Site visits
were made by the Competent Person Ian Buchhorn in January 2015 and
November 2016· This was combined with seeing outcrop
characteristics of the quartz eye volcaniclastic sandstone footwall
and volcaniclastic siltstone hangingwall rocks. |
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. |
· Substantive
exploration data reporting in Bob Cotton JORC 2004 and JORC 2012
reporting. |
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. |
· Multi-element
soil auger geochemistry to quantify host geology and lode envelope,
then 100m spaced DDH sections for mineralisation
continuity/GeoMet.· Copper Hill East and Wiseman’s Creek,
systematic multi-element soil auger geochemistry to rank “Lewis
Ponds style” drill targets. |
[1] The breakdown for the full KNP resource categories is as
follows:
Resource
Category |
Quantity
(Mt) |
Co
(%) |
Ni
(%) |
Measured |
9.6 |
0.081 |
1.02 |
Indicated |
244.0 |
0.052 |
0.75 |
KNP Total Measured and
Indicated |
253.6 |
0.052 |
0.76 |
Inferred |
551.7 |
0.046 |
0.68 |
KNP Total
Resources |
805.3 |
0.048 |
0.70 |
[2] The breakdown for the full Lewis Ponds resource categories
is as follows:
Resource
Category |
Quantity(Mt) |
Zn(%) |
Cu(%) |
Pb(%) |
Au(g/t) |
Ag(g/t) |
Indicated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main Zone |
5.82 |
2.1 |
0.1 |
1.1 |
1.5 |
59 |
Tom’s Zone |
0.54 |
5.5 |
0.3 |
3.8 |
1.7 |
172 |
Total
Indicated |
6.35 |
2.4 |
0.2 |
1.4 |
1.5 |
68 |
Inferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main Zone |
0.17 |
1.7 |
0.1 |
0.8 |
0.9 |
47 |
Tom’s Zone |
0.10 |
5.0 |
0.2 |
3.6 |
1.4 |
174 |
Total
Inferred |
0.27 |
3.0 |
0.1 |
1.9 |
1.1 |
96 |
Total Mineral
Resource |
6.62 |
2.4 |
0.2 |
1.4 |
1.5 |
69 |
[3] An Exploration Target is a term used within the JORC2012
Code for an estimate of the exploration potential of a mineral
deposit. As used in this release the stated Exploration
Target is based upon the parameters described in the text, however
the potential quantity and grade is conceptual in nature and there
is insufficient information to estimate a Mineral Resource and it
remains uncertain if further exploration will result in the
estimation of a Mineral Resource in this area of drilling.
[4] Aurora Gold has not consented to the use of the historical
geological report reference in this announcement. The
potential quantity and grade of any mineralisation is conceptual in
nature, there has been insufficient exploration to estimate a
mineral resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will
result in the estimation of a mineral resource.
[5] Augur Resources has not consented to the use of the
historical geological report reference in this announcement.
This section contains exploration results and estimates reported by
Augur Resources Limited on 17 September 2012 under the JORC Code
2004. The information has not been updated to comply with the
JORC Code 2012, and it is uncertain whether following evaluation
and or further exploration work that the estimate will be able to
be reported in accordance with the JORC Code 2012.
[7] The potential quantity and grade is conceptual in nature and
there is insufficient information to estimate a Mineral Resource
and it remains uncertain if further exploration will result in the
estimation of a Mineral Resource in this area of drilling.
[8] Aurelia Metals Limited has not consented to the use of the
historical geological report reference in this announcement
[9] Windsor Resources has not consented to the use of the
historical geological report reference in this announcement.
[10] Central West Gold has not consented to the use of the
historical geological report reference in this announcement.
[11] Resmetco Ltd has not consented to the use of the historical
geological report reference in this announcement.
For further information regarding Ardea, please visit www.ardearesources.com.au or www.heronresources.com.au or contact:
Ardea Resources:
Dr Matt Painter
Managing Director of Ardea Resources Limited
Tel +61 8 6500 9200
Australia:
Mr Wayne Taylor
Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Heron Resources
Tel: +61 2 9119 8111 or +61 8 6500 9200
Email: heron@heronresources.com.au
Canada:
Tel: +1 905 727 8688 (Toronto)