N.I. 43-101 Technical Report On The Magino

Transcription

Report to:
Technical Report on the Magino
Property, Wawa, Ontario
Document No. 1295890100-REP-R0001-02
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Report to:
TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE MAGINO
PROPERTY, WAWA, ONTARIO
EFFECTIVE DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2012
Prepared by Patrick Huxtable, MAIG (RPGeo)
Todd McCracken, P.Geo.
Todd Kanhai, P.Eng.
PT/JW/jc
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Report to:
TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE MAGINO
PROPERTY, WAWA, ONTARIO
EFFECTIVE DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2012
Prepared by
“Original document signed by
Patrick Huxtable, MAIG (RPGeo)”
Date
October 4, 2012
Date
October 4, 2012
Date
October 4, 2012
Date
October 4, 2012
Date
October 4, 2012
Patrick Huxtable, MAIG (RPGeo)
Prepared by
Todd McCracken, P.Geo.”
Prepared by
Todd Kanhai, P.Eng.”
Todd Kanhai, P.Eng.
Reviewed by
Jeff Wilson, Ph.D., P.Geo.”
Jeff Wilson, Ph.D., P.Geo.
Authorized by
Jeff Wilson, Ph.D., P.Geo.”
Jeff Wilson, Ph.D., P.Geo.
PT/JW/jc
Suite 900, 330 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario M5H 2S8
Phone: 416-368-9080 Fax: 416-368-1963
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
ISSUE DATE
2012/09/20
2012/09/27
2012/10/04
REV.
NO
00
01
02
Patrick Huxtable
Todd McCracken
Patrick Huxtable
Todd McCracken
Patrick Huxtable
Todd McCracken
Todd Kanhai
PREPARED BY
AND DATE
Jeff Wilson
Jeff Wilson
Jeff Wilson
REVIEWED BY
AND DATE
Jeff Wilson
Jeff Wilson
Jeff Wilson
APPROVED BY
AND DATE
Final to Client.
Draft to Client for review.
Draft to Client for review.
DESCRIPTION OF REVISION
REVISION HISTORY
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND OWNERSHIP ............................................................................1
GEOLOGY AND MINERALIZATION ............................................................................................2
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE .............................................................................................2
RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................5
1.5.1
DRILLING .............................................................................................................5
1.5.2
PREFEASIBILITY STUDY ........................................................................................5
2.0
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 6
3.0
RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS..................................................................................... 7
4.0
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ................................................................... 8
4.1
4.2
4.3
5.0
ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND
PHYSIOGRAPHY.............................................................................................................. 14
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.0
ACCESSIBILITY ....................................................................................................................14
CLIMATE .............................................................................................................................14
LOCAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................14
INFRASTRUCTURE ...............................................................................................................14
PHYSIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................15
HISTORY........................................................................................................................... 17
6.1
6.2
7.0
LOCATION .............................................................................................................................8
STATUS OF THE MINING TITLES .............................................................................................9
ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS .................................................................................................12
1950-1999.........................................................................................................................17
2000-2010 GOLDEN GOOSE ...............................................................................................22
6.2.1
2000 .................................................................................................................22
6.2.2
2001 .................................................................................................................23
6.2.3
2002 .................................................................................................................24
6.2.4
2004 .................................................................................................................24
6.2.5
2006 .................................................................................................................25
6.2.6
2007 .................................................................................................................26
6.2.7
2008 .................................................................................................................27
6.2.8
2009 .................................................................................................................28
6.2.9
2010 .................................................................................................................28
GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION.......................................................... 30
7.1
7.2
THE ARCHEAN SUPERIOR PROVINCE ...................................................................................30
THE WAWA SUBPROVINCE ..................................................................................................30
i
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
THE MICHIPICOTEN GREENSTONE BELT ...............................................................................33
THE GEOLOGY OF THE MAGINO MINE AREA .........................................................................35
GOLD MINERALIZATION .......................................................................................................38
STRUCTURES ASSOCIATED WITH GOLD MINERALIZATION ......................................................40
CURRENT VIEW ON MINERALIZATION CONTROLS AND IDENTIFICATION OF MINERALIZED
MATERIAL ZONES................................................................................................................41
8.0
DEPOSIT TYPES .............................................................................................................. 44
9.0
EXPLORATION................................................................................................................. 48
10.0
DRILLING.......................................................................................................................... 49
10.1.1
10.1.2
10.1.3
10.1.4
10.1.5
10.1.6
10.1.7
10.1.8
10.1.9
11.0
TYPE AND EXTENT .............................................................................................49
DRILL COLLARS .................................................................................................56
DOWN-HOLE SURVEYS .......................................................................................56
GEOLOGICAL LOGGING ......................................................................................56
DRILLHOLE CASING ............................................................................................59
2011/12 DIAMOND DRILLING RESULTS ...............................................................60
CORE RECOVERY ..............................................................................................67
SAMPLING METHOD ...........................................................................................67
DRILL PLAN .......................................................................................................68
SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY............................................... 70
11.1
11.2
11.3
11.4
11.5
SAMPLE PREPARATION........................................................................................................70
LABORATORY FACILITIES .....................................................................................................70
11.2.1
ACTIVATION LABORATORIES LTD. .......................................................................70
11.2.2
ALS CHEMEX ....................................................................................................70
SAMPLE SPLITTING AND REDUCTION ....................................................................................71
11.3.1
ACTIVATION LABORATORIES ...............................................................................71
11.3.2
ALS CHEMEX ....................................................................................................71
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ..................................................................................................71
11.4.1
ACTIVATION LABORATORIES ...............................................................................71
11.4.2
ALS CHEMEX ....................................................................................................72
11.4.3
COARSE REJECT AND PULP STORAGE ................................................................73
PRODIGY QUALITY CONTROL FOR 2011/2012......................................................................73
11.5.1
BLANK ...............................................................................................................73
11.5.2
BLANK CDN-BL-8..............................................................................................74
11.5.3
BLANK CDN-BL-9..............................................................................................75
11.5.4
BLANK CDN-BL-10............................................................................................76
11.5.5
DIABASE (COARSE) BLANK .................................................................................77
11.5.6
LOW GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-P2 ................................................................78
11.5.7
LOW GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-P2A..............................................................79
11.5.8
LOW GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-P3B..............................................................80
11.5.9
LOW GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-P4A..............................................................81
11.5.10 LOW GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-P7E..............................................................82
11.5.11 AVERAGE GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-1G ........................................................83
11.5.12 AVERAGE GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-1H.........................................................84
11.5.13 AVERAGE GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-1J .........................................................85
ii
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
11.5.14
11.5.15
11.5.16
11.5.17
11.5.18
11.5.19
11.5.20
11.5.21
11.5.22
11.5.23
11.5.24
11.5.25
11.5.26
11.5.27
11.5.28
AVERAGE GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-1P5C ....................................................86
AVERAGE GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-1P5D ....................................................87
MODERATE GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-2G......................................................88
MODERATE GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-2J.......................................................89
MODERATE GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-2K ......................................................90
HIGH GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-3G ...............................................................91
HIGH GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-3H ...............................................................92
HIGH GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-3J ................................................................93
HIGH GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-4B................................................................94
HIGH GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-4D ...............................................................95
ULTRA HIGH GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-7B.....................................................96
ULTRA HIGH GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-14A...................................................97
ULTRA HIGH GRADE STANDARD CDN-GS-30B...................................................98
QA/QC OPPORTUNITIES ....................................................................................99
QP OPINION .................................................................................................... 100
12.0
DATA VERIFICATION .................................................................................................... 101
13.0
MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING....................................... 103
13.1
13.3
13.4
13.5
13.6
14.0
LAKEFIELD RESEARCH – OCTOBER 1997 ...........................................................................103
G&T METALLURGICAL SERVICES LTD. – SEPTEMBER 2011 ................................................108
STARKEY & ASSOCIATES INC. – OCTOBER 2011 ................................................................110
G&T METALLURGICAL SERVICES LTD. – 2012....................................................................114
CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................. 114
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES.............................................................................. 115
14.1
14.2
SNOWDEN 2011 RESOURCE ESTIMATE ..............................................................................115
TETRA TECH 2012 RESOURCE ESTIMATE ..........................................................................116
14.2.1
DATABASE ....................................................................................................... 116
14.2.2
SPECIFIC GRAVITY ........................................................................................... 116
14.2.3
EXPLORATORY DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................................117
14.2.4
GEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION .........................................................................121
14.2.5
SPATIAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 125
14.2.6
RESOURCE BLOCK MODEL ...............................................................................127
14.2.7
RESOURCE MODEL DEPLETION ........................................................................127
14.2.8
BLOCK MODEL REGULARISATION......................................................................128
14.2.9
RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION.............................................................................134
14.2.10 MINERAL RESOURCE TABULATION ....................................................................134
14.2.11 VALIDATION ..................................................................................................... 137
14.2.12 MODEL PARAMETER DIFFERENCES...................................................................143
15.0
ADJACENT PROPERTIES ............................................................................................. 144
16.0
OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION .......................................................... 145
17.0
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................... 146
18.0
RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 148
18.1
DRILLING .......................................................................................................................... 148
18.1.1
MAGINO RESOURCE EXPANSION ......................................................................148
iii
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
18.2
18.1.2
MAGINO RESOURCE DELINEATION ....................................................................148
PREFEASIBILITY STUDY ..................................................................................................... 149
19.0
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 150
20.0
CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON....................................................................... 159
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1
Table 4.1
Table 6.1
Table 10.1
Table 10.2
Table 12.1
Table 12.2
Table 13.1
Table 13.2
Table 13.3
Table 13.4
Table 13.5
Table 13.6
Table 13.7
Table 13.8
Table 13.9
Table 13.10
Table 13.11
Table 14.1
Table 14.2
Table 14.3
Table 14.4
Table 14.5
Table 14.6
Table 14.7
Table 14.8
Table 14.9
Table 14.10
Table 14.11
Table 14.12
Table 14.13
Table 14.14
Table 14.15
Table 14.16
Table 14.17
Table 14.18
Table 14.19
Table 18.1
Mineral Resource Estimate for Magino – September 2012.................................. 4
Description of the Mining Title Types in Ontario ................................................... 9
Historical Summary for Magino ........................................................................... 18
2011/2012 Prodigy Drilling .................................................................................. 50
2011/2012 Drilling Significant Intercepts............................................................. 60
Drill Collar Validation ......................................................................................... 102
Drill Core Validation........................................................................................... 102
Lakefield Research (1997) – Head Assays ...................................................... 103
Gravity Separation Test Results ....................................................................... 104
Cyanidation Results .......................................................................................... 104
Heap Leach Results .......................................................................................... 106
Summary of Column Leach Test Results ......................................................... 107
Summary of Bottle Leach Test Results............................................................. 108
Summary of Reagent Consumption.................................................................. 108
Assay Head Grades .......................................................................................... 109
Gold Extraction Test Results............................................................................. 110
Summary of SAGDesign Test Work Results and Calculated Parameters ....... 111
Summary of Calculated Mill Sizes and Grinding Equipment ............................ 112
Drill Data Set ..................................................................................................... 116
Specific Gravity Data......................................................................................... 117
Drillhole Assay Statistics (Length-Weighted).................................................... 117
Grade Capping/Threshold Values..................................................................... 119
Composite Statistics (Length-Weighted)........................................................... 120
Wireframe Statistics .......................................................................................... 123
Variography Parameters ................................................................................... 126
Parent Block Model ........................................................................................... 127
Estimation Criteria ............................................................................................. 130
Search Criteria .................................................................................................. 132
Webb Lake Stock Domain Tonnes and Grade ................................................. 134
Lovell Lake Stock Domain Tonnes and Grade ................................................. 135
South Metavolcanics Domain Tonnes and Grade ............................................ 135
North Meta Volcanics Domain Tonnes and Grade ........................................... 136
Magino Deposit Tonnes and Grade .................................................................. 136
Magino Resource Estimate, September 2012 .................................................. 137
Global Mean Statistics ...................................................................................... 140
Model Parameter Differences ........................................................................... 143
Comparable Grades .......................................................................................... 143
Resource Expansion Drilling ............................................................................. 148
iv
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Table 18.2
Magino Resource Delineation Drilling............................................................... 149
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Figure 5.1
Figure 7.1
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.3
Figure 7.4
Figure 7.5
Figure 7.6
Figure 8.1
Figure 8.2
Figure 8.3
Figure 10.1
Figure 10.2
Figure 10.3
Figure 10.4
Figure 10.5
Figure 10.6
Figure 10.7
Figure 11.1
Figure 11.2
Figure 11.3
Figure 11.4
Figure 11.5
Figure 11.6
Figure 11.7
Figure 11.8
Figure 11.9
Figure 11.10
Figure 11.11
Figure 11.12
Figure 11.13
Figure 11.14
Figure 11.15
Figure 11.16
Figure 11.17
Figure 11.18
Figure 11.19
Figure 11.20
Figure 11.21
Location Map of the Magino Property in Ontario .................................................. 8
Claim Map of the Magino Property ..................................................................... 10
Topography and Accessibility of the Magino Property ....................................... 16
Tectonic Subdivisions of the Superior Province of Northern Ontario ................. 31
Major Geological Elements of the Eastern Wawa Subprovince ......................... 32
Mineral Belts in the Michipicoten-Shebandowan Region of the Wawa
Subprovince......................................................................................................... 33
Geology of the Magino Mine Area ...................................................................... 37
Historical G Zone in the 24+75E Drift ................................................................. 39
Gold Bearing Veins on the Face of the 23+80E Drift.......................................... 40
Schematic Diagram Illustrating the Inferred Crustal Levels of Gold
Deposition............................................................................................................ 44
Schematic Diagram Illustrating the Setting of Greenstone-Hosted Quartz
Carbonate Vein Deposits .................................................................................... 45
Location of the Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone............................................. 47
Diamond Drill Rig ................................................................................................ 49
Core Logging Facility........................................................................................... 57
Core Cutting Facility ............................................................................................ 57
Specific Gravity Station ....................................................................................... 58
Core Storage Facility........................................................................................... 59
Drill Collar Cap .................................................................................................... 60
Plan View of 2011/2012 Drill Collars at the Property.......................................... 69
Blank QA/QC Chart ............................................................................................. 74
CDN-BL-08 QA/QC Chart ................................................................................... 75
CDN-BL-09 QA/QC Chart ................................................................................... 76
CDN-BL-10 QA/QC Chart ................................................................................... 77
Diabase Blank QA/QC Chart............................................................................... 78
CDN-GS-P2 Process Performance Chart........................................................... 79
CDN-GS-P2A Process Performance Chart ........................................................ 80
CDN-GS-P3B Process Performance Chart ........................................................ 81
CDN-GS-P4A Process Performance Chart ........................................................ 82
CDN-GS-P7E Process Performance Chart ........................................................ 83
CDN-GS-1G Process Performance Chart .......................................................... 84
CDN-GS-1H Process Performance Chart........................................................... 85
CDN-GS-1J Process Performance Chart ........................................................... 86
CDN-GS-1P5C Process Performance Chart ...................................................... 87
CDN-GS-1P5D Process Performance Chart ...................................................... 88
CDN-GS-2K Process Performance Chart........................................................... 91
CDN-GS-3H Process Performance Chart........................................................... 93
v
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.22
Figure 11.23
Figure 11.24
Figure 11.25
Figure 11.26
Figure 13.1
Figure 14.1
Figure 14.2
Figure 14.3
Figure 14.4
Figure 14.5
Figure 14.6
Figure 14.7
Figure 14.8
Figure 14.9
CDN-GS-4B Process Performance Chart........................................................... 95
CDN-GS-4D Process Performance Chart........................................................... 96
CDN-GS-7B Process Performance Chart........................................................... 97
CDN-GS-14A Process Performance Chart......................................................... 98
CDN-GS-30B Process Performance Chart......................................................... 99
Test Flowsheet .................................................................................................. 109
Histogram of all Raw Magino Data ................................................................... 118
Log-Probability Plot of all Raw Magino Data .................................................... 118
Histogram of all 5 m Composite Magino Data .................................................. 120
Log-Probability Plot of all 5 m Composite Magino Data ................................... 121
Regularization ................................................................................................... 129
Cross Section .................................................................................................... 138
Plan View of Magino.......................................................................................... 139
Swath Plots for Gold OK versus ID2 Estimates ................................................ 141
Swath Plots for Gold OK versus NN Estimates ................................................ 142
GLOSSARY
UNITS OF MEASURE
above mean sea level ......................................................................................................................
acre..................................................................................................................................................
ampere.............................................................................................................................................
annum (year)....................................................................................................................................
billion................................................................................................................................................
billion tonnes ....................................................................................................................................
billion years ago ...............................................................................................................................
British thermal unit ...........................................................................................................................
centimetre ........................................................................................................................................
cubic centimetre...............................................................................................................................
cubic feet per minute........................................................................................................................
cubic feet per second.......................................................................................................................
cubic foot..........................................................................................................................................
cubic inch.........................................................................................................................................
cubic metre ......................................................................................................................................
cubic yard.........................................................................................................................................
Coefficients of Variation ...................................................................................................................
day ...................................................................................................................................................
days per week..................................................................................................................................
days per year (annum).....................................................................................................................
dead weight tonnes..........................................................................................................................
decibel adjusted ...............................................................................................................................
decibel .............................................................................................................................................
degree..............................................................................................................................................
vi
amsl
ac
A
a
B
Bt
Ga
BTU
cm
3
cm
cfm
3
ft /s
3
ft
3
in
3
m
3
yd
CVs
d
d/wk
d/a
DWT
dBa
dB
°
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
degrees Celsius ...............................................................................................................................
diameter...........................................................................................................................................
dollar (American)..............................................................................................................................
dollar (Canadian) .............................................................................................................................
dry metric ton ...................................................................................................................................
foot...................................................................................................................................................
gallon ...............................................................................................................................................
gallons per minute (US) ...................................................................................................................
Gigajoule..........................................................................................................................................
gigapascal........................................................................................................................................
gigawatt............................................................................................................................................
gram.................................................................................................................................................
grams per litre ..................................................................................................................................
grams per tonne...............................................................................................................................
greater than......................................................................................................................................
2
hectare (10,000 m ) .........................................................................................................................
hertz.................................................................................................................................................
horsepower ......................................................................................................................................
hour..................................................................................................................................................
hours per day ...................................................................................................................................
hours per week ................................................................................................................................
hours per year..................................................................................................................................
inch ..................................................................................................................................................
kilo (thousand) .................................................................................................................................
kilogram ...........................................................................................................................................
kilograms per cubic metre................................................................................................................
kilograms per hour ...........................................................................................................................
kilograms per square metre .............................................................................................................
kilometre ..........................................................................................................................................
kilometres per hour ..........................................................................................................................
kilopascal .........................................................................................................................................
kilotonne...........................................................................................................................................
kilovolt..............................................................................................................................................
kilovolt-ampere.................................................................................................................................
kilovolts ............................................................................................................................................
kilowatt.............................................................................................................................................
kilowatt hour.....................................................................................................................................
kilowatt hours per tonne...................................................................................................................
kilowatt hours per year.....................................................................................................................
less than...........................................................................................................................................
litre ...................................................................................................................................................
litres per minute ...............................................................................................................................
megabytes per second.....................................................................................................................
megapascal......................................................................................................................................
megavolt-ampere .............................................................................................................................
megawatt .........................................................................................................................................
vii
°C
ø
US$
Cdn$
dmt
ft
gal
gpm
GJ
GPa
GW
g
g/L
g/t
>
ha
Hz
hp
h
h/d
h/wk
h/a
in
k
kg
3
kg/m
kg/h
2
kg/m
km
km/h
kPa
kt
kV
kVA
kV
kW
kWh
kWh/t
kWh/a
<
L
L/m
Mb/s
MPa
MVA
MW
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
metre................................................................................................................................................
metres above sea level ...................................................................................................................
metres Baltic sea level .....................................................................................................................
metres per minute ............................................................................................................................
metres per second ...........................................................................................................................
microns ............................................................................................................................................
milligram...........................................................................................................................................
milligrams per litre............................................................................................................................
millilitre.............................................................................................................................................
millimetre..........................................................................................................................................
million...............................................................................................................................................
million bank cubic metres.................................................................................................................
million bank cubic metres per annum...............................................................................................
million tonnes ...................................................................................................................................
minute (plane angle) ........................................................................................................................
minute (time) ....................................................................................................................................
month...............................................................................................................................................
ounce ...............................................................................................................................................
pascal ..............................................................................................................................................
centipoise.........................................................................................................................................
parts per million................................................................................................................................
parts per billion.................................................................................................................................
percent.............................................................................................................................................
pound(s)...........................................................................................................................................
pounds per square inch ...................................................................................................................
revolutions per minute......................................................................................................................
second (plane angle) .......................................................................................................................
second (time) ...................................................................................................................................
short ton (2,000 lb)...........................................................................................................................
short tons per day ............................................................................................................................
short tons per year ...........................................................................................................................
specific gravity .................................................................................................................................
square centimetre ............................................................................................................................
square foot .......................................................................................................................................
square inch ......................................................................................................................................
square kilometre ..............................................................................................................................
square metre....................................................................................................................................
three-dimensional ............................................................................................................................
tonne (1,000 kg) (metric ton)............................................................................................................
tonnes per day .................................................................................................................................
tonnes per hour................................................................................................................................
tonnes per year ................................................................................................................................
tonnes seconds per hour metre cubed.............................................................................................
volt ...................................................................................................................................................
week ................................................................................................................................................
weight/weight ...................................................................................................................................
viii
m
masl
mbsl
m/min
m/s
μm
mg
mg/L
mL
mm
M
3
Mbm
3
Mbm /a
Mt
'
min
mo
oz
Pa
mPas
ppm
ppb
%
lb
psi
rpm
"
s
st
st/d
st/y
SG
2
cm
2
ft
2
in
2
km
2
m
3D
t
t/d
t/h
t/a
3
ts/hm
V
wk
w/w
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
wet metric ton...................................................................................................................................
wmt
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
Accurassay Laboratories Ltd. ...................................................................................................
Activation Laboratories Ltd. ......................................................................................................
ALS Chemex Ltd.......................................................................................................................
atomic absorption spectroscopy ...............................................................................................
atomic absorption .....................................................................................................................
BLM Bharti Engineering Ltd. .....................................................................................................
Bond Work Index ......................................................................................................................
Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum...........................................................
carbon-in-leach .........................................................................................................................
Cavendish Investing Ltd............................................................................................................
certified reference materials......................................................................................................
diamond drillholes.....................................................................................................................
digital global positioning system ...............................................................................................
EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd., a Tetra Tech Company .....................................................
G&T Metallurgical Services Ltd.................................................................................................
global positioning system..........................................................................................................
Golden Goose Resources Incorporated....................................................................................
induced polarization..................................................................................................................
inductively coupled plasma .......................................................................................................
International Electrotechnical Commission ...............................................................................
International Organization for Standardization..........................................................................
inverse distance squared ..........................................................................................................
Kappes Cassiday & Associates ................................................................................................
Kodiak Exploration Limited .......................................................................................................
Laboratory Information Management System ...........................................................................
Lakefield Research Limited.......................................................................................................
Magino Project..........................................................................................................................
Magino Property .......................................................................................................................
McNellen Resources Inc. ..........................................................................................................
Ministry of Environment ............................................................................................................
MPH Resources Corp. ..............................................................................................................
Muscocho Explorations Ltd.......................................................................................................
National Instrument 43-101.......................................................................................................
National Topography System....................................................................................................
nearest neighbour.....................................................................................................................
net smelter return......................................................................................................................
North American Datum .............................................................................................................
ordinary kriging .........................................................................................................................
permit to take water ..................................................................................................................
prefeasibility study ....................................................................................................................
preliminary economic assessment............................................................................................
ix
Accurassay
Actlabs
ALS Chemex
AAS
AA
BLM
BWI
CIM
CIL
Cavendish
CRMs
DDHs
DGPS
EBA
G&T
GPS
Golden Goose
IP
ICP
IEC
ISO
2
ID
KCA
Kodiak
LIMS
Lakefield
the Project
the Property
McNellen Resources
MOE
MPH Resources
Muscocho Explorations
NI 43-101
NTS
NN
NSR
NAD
OK
PTTW
PFS
PEA
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Prodigy Gold Incorporated ........................................................................................................
Qualified Persons .....................................................................................................................
quality assurance/quality control...............................................................................................
Quantitative Kriging Neighborhood Analysis.............................................................................
Reddick Consulting Inc. ............................................................................................................
Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Inc. ...............................................................................
Starkey & Associates Inc. .........................................................................................................
specific gravity ..........................................................................................................................
Tetra Tech Wardrop..................................................................................................................
Toronto Stock Exchange Venture Exchange ............................................................................
Universal Transverse Mercator.................................................................................................
x
Prodigy
QPs
QA/QC
QKNA
Reddick
Snowden
Starkey
SG
Tetra Tech
TSXV
UTM
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
1.0
SUMMARY
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Prodigy Gold Incorporated (Prodigy) is a Canadian-registered resource Issuer that
was formed in 2011 though the unification of Kodiak Exploration (Kodiak) and Golden
Goose Resources Incorporated (Golden Goose).
Prodigy retained Tetra Tech Wardrop (Tetra Tech) to estimate a new mineral
resource for the Magino Project (the Project), and disclose it in a technical report
prepared in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101). The Project is
located approximately 40 km northeast of the town of Wawa, Ontario, Canada. This
report replaces the preliminary economic assessment (PEA) produced in February
2012 by Tetra Tech. As the new resource estimate is significantly different from the
existing one, Tetra Tech does not consider the mine plan and process disclosure
utilized in the February 2012 PEA to be current. As such, the current technical report
does not describe the PEA in depth.
1.2
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
AND
OWNERSHIP
Prodigy has a 100% interest in the Magino Property (the Property), which comprises
seven patented mining claims (mining and surface rights), four leased mining claims,
and 66 unpatented mining claims with a combined area of 5,131.180 acres
(2,076.515 ha).
Prodigy also has an option agreement with MPH Resources Corp. (MPH Resources)
to earn up to a 100% interest in the 128 ha Gould Gold property, located adjacent to
the Property.
The Property is approximately 40 km northeast of the town of Wawa, Ontario,
Canada, in Finan Township, which falls within the Sault Ste. Marie mining district of
Ontario. The Project is approximately 14 km southeast of the town of Dubreuilville;
the Project consists of an underground mine that was active between 1986 and
1992, and processed 768,678 t at a recovered grade of 0.137 tr oz/t gold to produce
105,543 tr oz of gold. Since the closure of the underground mine, Golden Goose, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Prodigy, conducted several studies that evaluated the
feasibility of re-commencing underground operations and/or commencing open pit
operations.
Prodigy Gold Incorporated
Technical Report on the Magino Property, Wawa, Ontario
1
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
1.3
GEOLOGY
AND
MINERALIZATION
The Property is located within the Michipicoten greenstone belt of the Archean
Superior Province. The Michipicoten greenstone belt is a structurally and
stratigraphically complex assemblage of volcanic, sedimentary and intrusive rocks
that were metamorphosed to greenschist and amphibolite facies. Several suites of
plutonic rocks ranging in composition from gabbro to monzogranite and syenite occur
in and around the Michipicoten greenstone belt. The Property is situated in the
Goudreau-Lochalsh gold district of the Wawa gold camp. Supracrustal rocks in the
Goudreau-Lochalsh district consist of Cycle 2 felsic to intermediate pyroclastic
metavolcanics capped by pyrite-bearing ironstone. To the north are pillowed,
massive and schistose, mafic to intermediate metavolcanics and minor intercalations
of Cycle 3 mafic pyroclastic rock. Several medium- to coarse-grained quartz dioritic
to dioritic sills and/or dikes intrude all meta-volcanic rocks.
Gold mineralization at the former Magino Mine is dominantly hosted by the Webb
Lake Stock, which intrudes Cycle 3 mafic volcanic rocks. The Webb Lake Stock is a
felsic intrusion interpreted as a trondhjemite, but continues to be called a granodiorite
in mine terminology. The long axis of the Webb Lake Stock is parallel to the regional
supracrustal rock stratigraphy. The Webb Lake Stock is east northeast-striking and
has a steep northerly dip. The granodiorite (trondhjemite) contains 5 to 10% veins of
carbonate, quartz, tourmaline and pyrite in various orientations.
Prodigy is currently focusing its evaluation on zones of low-grade, gold-bearing
quartz-sericite-pyrite mineralization that include narrow higher-grade gold-bearing
veins, the target of former underground mining. Prodigy commenced a surface
drilling program in early 2011 to in-fill and replace earlier sample data. This drilling
continued into 2012 and the database used for the current study update (this report)
includes this recent drilling information.
1.4
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE
The region of interest covers 1,350 m of the 075° trending Webb Lake granodiorite
stock and the alteration zones that aggregate up to 300 m width, and dip steeply to
depths of up to 600 m and remains open. At Magino the Webb Lake Stock is
exposed at the surface and is locally covered by up to a maximum of 30 m thickness
of fluvio-glacial material. The felsic and mafic volcanic country rock surrounding the
stock does contain examples of low-grade mineralization encountered by drilling,
however the main focus remains the broad low-grade alteration zones within the
stock. A late-stage diabase dyke transects the Webb Lake Stock.
The database provided to Tetra Tech by Prodigy on the March 27, 2012, and an
update on the June 8, 2012 contains 1,210 surface and underground diamond
drillholes (DDHs) (for a total of 219,739 m). Seven hundred and nineteen holes for
170,357 m were drilled from surface and 491 holes for 49,382 m were drilled from
the underground workings, only the underground holes with lengths greater than
2
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
50 m were included after Snowden identified a significant assay bias with the less
than 50 m holes (Ross 2011).
Since the estimate completed in November 2011 by Snowden Mining Industry
Consultants Inc. (Snowden), Prodigy has completed a total of 242 surface DDHs for
a total of 67,848 m, with an average length of 280 m all of which were NQ or NQ2
diameter and 12 of which were drilled as geotechnical holes.
A Vulcan™ block model with cell dimensions of 10 m (X) x 10 m (Y) x 5 m (Z) was
coded to reflect the surface topography, base of overburden, Webb Lake granodiorite
contacts, Lovell Lake granodiorite contacts, Intermediate metavolcanics,
mineralization domain solids, and the late stage diabase dyke. The cell dimensions
are based on the average 40 m spaced current drill pattern at the Property. A 3D
wireframe model of the underground development and stopes was used to code a
variable in the model “mined” to ensure that the reported mineral resource estimates
are depleted for the prior mining activities. The Prodigy Geologists have interpreted
some eight structural domains for the Webb Lake Stock, and three mineralized
domains for the Lovell Lake Stock and 14 mineralization domains for the north and
south metavolcanics, based on identified zones of mineralization in the drill cores.
Gold grades were estimated from 5 m length-weighted uncut composites into the
interpreted mineralized blocks by ordinary kriging (OK), using parameters
established from analysis of domain variography. The impact of the high gold grades
was controlled using a combination of “sample per hole”, maximum distance
extrapolation restrictions for grades above 28 g/t gold for the Webb Lake Stock, and
4.5 g/t gold for the Lovell Lake Stock, 7 g/t gold for the south metavolcanics and 6 g/t
for the north metavolcanics. Minimum/maximum numbers of composites used for the
estimations were set to 2/32 for the first pass searches and minimums were reduced
to 1 for the second pass searches for all domains respectively. A maximum of three
composites was allowed to be selected per hole for each estimate. The
discretizations were set to 4 m x 4 m x 4 m, for all domains and estimations. All of
these parameters were based on extensive Quantitative Kriging Neighborhood
Analysis (QKNA) of the model and composite dataset.
Density factors of 2.72 were applied to the Webb Lake and Lovell Lake granodiorite
stocks, based on 3,707 SG determinations of this rock type from the core specimens
by Prodigy. A density factor of 2.86 was applied to the south and north
metavolcanics mineralized domains based on 816 SG determinations of this rock
type from the core specimens also by Prodigy.
Tetra Tech applied an Indicated Resource category to any blocks that were
estimated in the first estimation passes, and an Inferred Resource category to any
blocks that were estimated in the second estimation passes. Tetra Tech notes that
Prodigy has an ongoing drilling program to in-fill the existing pattern. Validation of
assay files against the certificates was carried out on 172 of the holes drilled by
Prodigy between September 2011 and June 2012, which equates to 71% of the
holes drilled in this period and 14% of the database provided as a whole. For all the
3
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
1,193 assay records checked that were greater than 2 g/t there was a 100% match
between the database records and the certificates. Data verification was also
completed on collar coordinates, end-of-hole depths, down-hole survey
measurements, from and to intervals, measurements of assay sampling intervals,
and gold grades for about 35% of the database provided, and no major issues were
found.
In August 2012, Tetra Tech carried out rigorous validation of the pre-1999 surface
drillholes and underground drillholes (greater than 50 m), to enable them to be
included in this resource estimate. A minimum of 10% of these drillholes were
checked for collar co-ordinates, end-of-hole depths, down-hole survey
and gold grades. Error rates were generally within acceptable parameters.
The ordinary kriged estimates were validated by comparing them with inverse
distance squared (ID2) and nearest neighbour (NN) estimates, and they generally
compared well.
Mineral resource estimates for the Property are reported in categories of Indicated
and Inferred, in accordance with the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and
Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves
(CIM code) as follows:
Table 1.1
Mineral Resource Estimate for Magino – September 2012
Class
Domain
Indicated
Webb Lake Stock
Lovell Lake Stock
South Metavolcanics
North Metavolcanics
Total
Inferred
Au
(g/t)
Au
(oz)
207,268,820
0.87
5,797,550
1,880,830
0.80
48,380
12,514,080
0.85
341,990
1,816,060
0.92
53,720
223,479,790
0.87
6,250,990
Webb Lake Stock
7,803,620
0.77
193,190
Lovell Lake Stock
123,370
0.52
2,060
5,757,820
0.85
157,350
124,600
0.56
2,240
13,809,410
0.80
355,190
South Metavolcanics
North Metavolcanics
Total
Note:
Tonnes
(t)
OK method at 0.35 g/t cut-off and does not include already mined material.
In the above mineral resource table there may be inconsistencies due to rounding.
Estimates are rounded since the figures are not precise calculations.
4
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
1.5
RECOMMENDATIONS
1.5.1
DRILLING
Tetra Tech recommends additional drilling on the Property to investigate the downdip extension of the current resource for the Magino mineralization, improve the
understanding of the known resource, and upgrade the resource category.
The proposed budget for the drilling is budget at approximately $3.25 million.
1.5.2
P R EF E A SI BI L I T Y S T U D Y
Tetra Tech recommends conducting a prefeasibility study to evaluate the potential
economic viability of the Property, based on the February 2012 PEA and this new
resource estimate. It should incorporate the following items:
•
new mine plan, re-evaluating open-pit and underground methods, different
throughput, set-backs, production schedules
•
consider potential carbon-in-pulp and heap leach options
•
detailed estimation of current capital costs and operating costs
•
proceed with economic analysis, based on the above.
The proposed budget for the prefeasibility study is approximately $2.5 million.
5
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
2.0
INTRODUCTION
Prodigy is a Canadian-registered resource Issuer that was formed in 2011 from
though the unification of Kodiak and Golden Goose.
Prodigy has retained Tetra Tech to estimate a new mineral resource for the Project,
and disclose it in a technical report prepared in accordance with NI 43-101. This
report replaces the PEA produced in February 2012 by Tetra Tech. As the new
resource estimate is significantly different from the existing one, Tetra Tech does not
consider the mine plan and process disclosure in the PEA to be current. As such,
the current technical report does not describe the PEA in depth.
Data necessary for the execution of the resource estimation was obtained by Tetra
Tech from Prodigy in mostly digital format. This included all drilling data modern and
historical, and previous technical reports from Prodigy and its predecessors. These
and other sources of information are documented in Section 19.0.
The primary author of this report is Mr. Patrick Huxtable, MAIG (RPGeo) who is a
Professional Geologist with approximately 18 years of experience in exploration and
operations, including several years working in shear-hosted lode gold deposits.
Mr. Huxtable has not performed a current site visit to the Property.
Mr. Todd McCracken, P.Geo., is the author of the data verification section.
Mr. McCracken is a Professional Geologist with 20 years of experience in exploration
and operations, including several years working in shear-hosted lode gold deposits.
Mr. McCracken visited the Property between May 8 and 9, 2012, inclusive.
Mr. Todd Kanhai, P.Eng., is the author of the mineral processing and metallurgical
testing section. Mr. Kanhai is a Metallurgical Engineer with 12 years of mining and
mineral processing experience on various types of studies, from PEAs through to
feasibility and due diligences studies. Mr. Kanhai visited the Property on November
2, 2011.
6
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
3.0
RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS
Tetra Tech relied entirely on Prodigy for legal and environmental aspects of the
Property. Property title is described in Section 4.2 of this report, while environmental
aspects are disclosed in Section 4.3 of this report.
7
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
4.0
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND
LOCATION
4.1
LOCATION
The Property is approximately 40 km northeast of the town of Wawa, Ontario, on the
National Topography System (NTS) map sheet 42C/08 (see Figure 4.1). The
Property is located in Finan Township, which falls within the Sault Ste. Marie mining
district of Ontario. The Magino Mine is approximately 14 km southeast of the town of
Dubreuilville. The approximate Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates
for the geographic centre of the Property are 685900E, 5351800N (Zone 16, North
American Datum (NAD) 83). The approximate position of the Magino Mine is
689000E, 5351000N.
Figure 4.1
Location Map of the Magino Property in Ontario
8
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
4.2
STATUS
OF THE
MINING TITLES
Mr. Randy Sedore acts as the Land Manager for Prodigy with regards to the
exploration and mining lands that form the Property (Figure 4.2). He confirmed on
December 15, 2011 that the issuer’s wholly-owned (i.e., 100% Registered
ownership) land holdings forming the Property comprise seven patented mining
claims (mining and surface rights), four leased mining claims, and 66 unpatented
mining claims with a combined area of 5,131,180 ac (2,076.515 ha).
The four leased mining claims are contiguous and consist of seven mining titles
(SSM 581948 to 581953 and SSM 722481) (Table 4.1). Golden Goose owns the
mining and surface rights on these leased mining claims, except mining title SSM
722481 for which Golden Goose owns only the mining rights.
The mineralized area hosting the underground workings is located just north of Webb
Lake near the southeastern corner of the Property (see Figure 4.2).
Table 4.1
Description of the Mining Title Types in Ontario
Mining Titles
Unpatented Mining Claims
Associated Rights
Exploration for mineral substances
Right to subsurface only
Work required for renewal of right
Leased Mining Claims
20-year period
No obligation or work required
Payment of annual fee
Surface rights limited to mining activities
Patented Mining Claims
For life
No obligation or work required
Payment of annual fee
Surface rights limited to mining activities
Source: Turcotte et al. (2009)
9
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Claim Map of the Magino Property
Figure 4.2
10
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
On November 1, 1985, an agreement was reached between Cavendish Investing
Ltd. (Cavendish) and Muscocho Explorations Ltd. (Muscocho Explorations). At the
time, Cavendish and McNellen Resources Inc. (McNellen Resources), formerly Rico
Copper (1966) Inc. each owned a 50% interest in the Property.
The agreement stipulated that Muscocho Explorations would purchase all of
Cavendish’s right, title and interest in and to the joint venture with McNellen, and that
Cavendish would retain a 10% royalty of Muscocho Explorations’ share of net profits
derived from its participation in the joint venture. The agreement further stipulated
that if Muscocho Explorations assigns any or all part of its interest in the joint venture
to another party or parties, it will cause the assignee(s) of such interest to enter into
an agreement with Cavendish under which such assignee(s) will assume all of
Muscocho Explorations’ obligations under the terms of the agreement, including the
payment of said royalty to Cavendish.
Net profits for the purposes of the above paragraph shall mean the monies received
by Muscocho Explorations from its interest in the joint venture after Cavendish has
paid Muscocho Explorations for all its costs incidental to the joint venture incurred
before and after the closing date of the agreement.
In 1996, three companies – Muscocho Explorations, McNellen Resources, and
Flanagan McAdam Resources Inc. – combined to form Golden Goose, which
emerged with a 100% interest in the Property. Golden Goose thus became an
assignee of Muscocho Explorations’ obligation to pay Cavendish a 10% royalty for its
share of the net profits, after reimbursement of all costs incurred by Muscocho
Explorations since November 1985. Prodigy cannot reasonably estimate the
likelihood of a royalty being paid, nor the amount.
On August 31, 2010, Kodiak and Golden Goose announced a definitive merger
agreement and plan of arrangement dated August 30, 2010, whereby Kodiak would
acquire all of the issued and outstanding shares of Golden Goose. The arrangement
effectively combined the assets of both companies on a consolidated basis, with
Golden Goose becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kodiak.
On January 4, 2011, Prodigy announced that it was the named unification of Kodiak
and Golden Goose.
On February 9, 2011, Prodigy announced that it had signed an option agreement
with MPH Resources allowing Prodigy to earn up to a 100% interest in the 128 ha
Gould Gold Property, adjacent to the Property. The option property is identified as
numbers 4218037 and 4218038 in Figure 4.2.
Prodigy has advised that the terms of the option agreement, subject to the Toronto
Stock Exchange Venture Exchange (TSXV) approval, are as follows:
•
Prodigy will pay MPH Resources $10,000 and issue to MPH Resources
50,000 common shares of Prodigy following acceptance by the TSXV of this
transaction.
11
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
4.3
•
Prodigy can earn a 60% interest in the Property within two years of TSXV
approval by paying MPH Resources an additional $35,000, issuing MPH
Resources an additional 150,000 shares and incurring expenditures of
$250,000.
•
Prodigy can earn a 100% interest in the Property within three years of TSXV
approval by paying MPH Resources an additional $25,000 ($70,000 in
aggregate), issuing MPH Resources an additional 200,000 Shares (400,000
shares in aggregate), incurring additional expenditures of $500,000
($750,000 in aggregate) and granting MPH Resources a net smelter return
(NSR) royalty of 1%, which may be repurchased for $1,000,000
•
The Property is subject to an additional 2% NSR royalty held by prior
owners, half of which may be acquired for $1,000,000.
ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
Golden Goose retained AMEC Earth & Environmental (AMEC), a division of AMEC
Americas Limited, to carry out a dam safety inspection of the tailings dams at the
Magino Mine (Yong et al. 2008). The inspection was conducted in accordance with
guidelines applicable to structures in Ontario, and also took into account the site’s
closure plan requirements and the recommendations provided in AMEC’s previous
dam safety inspection report (AMEC 2002). With the exception of some
requirements for erosion protection maintenance, all three dams appeared to be in
stable condition with no visible signs of distress or instability. The conditions of the
dams are not expected to change because the tailings are no longer being
discharged to the primary pond.
Since 1992, the site has been kept on a care and maintenance basis (temporary
suspension) during which time the issuer pursued financing opportunities that could
potentially lead to the resumption of mining operations. Personnel remained on-site
to provide security and ensure compliance with the Certificate of Approval (#4-011588-896) and other environmental requirements. In 1996, the mine was authorized to
reduce sampling frequency as long as the mine was not operational. Once the mine
reactivates, the frequencies specified in the Certificate of Approval must be reimplemented.
The annual toxicity sample for the Rainbow Trout 96-hour LC50 bioassay toxicity test
was collected from the secondary polishing pond in June 2009.
Water was no longer being pumped from the mine, so the mine water settling pond
was dry and sampling the pond was not required.
A detailed mine site characterization was completed for the Magino Mine as part of
the mine closure plan. The original plan, “Magino Mine Closure Plan – Muscocho
Explorations Limited”, was prepared in October 1992 by Environmental Applications
Group Limited (Young and Simms 1992). It was revised in 1993 by HBT AGRA
Limited (Young and Simms 1993). The mine site characterization is part of the
12
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
February 2003 amendment “Closure Plan – Amendment No.1, Golden Goose
Resources Inc., Magino Mine Site” (Dyck and Bleiker 2003). The changes in the
amendment are in accordance with the requirements laid out in Part VII of the
Ontario Mining Act and have been formatted as per Ontario Regulation 240/00 and
the associated Mine Rehabilitation Code of Ontario. In 2010 AMEC conducted a
hydrogeological study for Golden Goose (McBride and Duckworth 2010).
On September 29, 2011, Prodigy announced that it had signed an agreement with
EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd., a Tetra Tech Company (EBA) to provide
environmental baseline studies at Magino.
In addition, the following will be required if mining operations resume:
•
A Certificate of Authorization for Air is required under the Environmental
Protection Act, Regulation 346.
•
A permit to take water (PTTW) is required for dewatering of the mine.
•
A PTTW is required from Webb Lake.
•
A Waste Generator Registration from the Ontario Ministry of Environment
(MOE) is required for waste generated on-site such as oils, solvents, etc.
•
The Magino Mine is currently in temporary suspension and will remain as
such until Prodigy resubmits a closure plan for the new open pit. The
closure of the old mine workings will be integrated into the new open pit and
the Property will emerge as an operating mine under a 2013 closure plan,
Amendment #1.
•
A First Nations consultation must be held with any First Nations potentially
affected by the Project. Such consultations would address a requirement in
Ontario's mining regulations, as well as various requirements for other
approvals. The Project lies within the Finan and Jacobson townships. The
Michipicoten and Missanabie Creek First Nations will have to be apprised
and the consultation process initiated. The Métis Nation of Ontario should
also be consulted. Prodigy informed the author that negotiations with all
relevant parties are being held and are progressing well.
13
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
5.0
ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL
RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND
PHYSIOGRAPHY
5.1
ACCESSIBILITY
The Magino Mine is located in Finan Township, approximately 40 km northeast of
Wawa, Ontario. The Magino Mine can be accessed via a 14 km, all-weather gravel
road (Chemin Goudreau) west of Dubreuilville (Figure 5.1), which is located on
Highway 519, 30 km east of the junction of Highway 17 and Highway 519. This
junction is approximately 40 km north of Wawa on Highway 17.
5.2
CLIMATE
The mean annual temperature for the area is slightly above the freezing point at 1°C.
The average July temperature is 20°C and the average January temperature is
-15°C. The average annual precipitation is 650 mm with rainfall highest in
September, averaging 90 mm. Snow typically falls from October to May, but the
peak is from November to March when the monthly average reaches 30 mm.
5.3
LOCAL RESOURCES
The area is well serviced by mining and milling industries. The town of Dubreuilville,
population 900, is the closest service community. The Island Gold Mine (operated by
Richmont) is 1.5 km east of the Magino Mine, and the Eagle River Mine (Wesdome
Gold Mines) is 80 km to the west. The Hemlo operations (Barrick Gold Corp.) are
located approximately 150 km to the northwest. General labour and experienced
workers are readily available in Wawa, Sault Ste. Marie and Thunder Bay.
5.4
INFRASTRUCTURE
The Magino Mine is also connected to the rail sidings of Lochalsh (14 km to the east,
Canadian Pacific Railway) and Goudreau (7 km to the west, Algoma Central
Railway) by means of a gravel road. A 44 kV power line extends from Goudreau to
Lochalsh and currently services the Magino Mine. Most of the former surface
buildings have been dismantled, and only the electrical and carpenter shops remain
in service. The underground workings were under operation until 1993, when
flooded occurring, and was sealed to prevent entry.
14
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
5.5
PHYSIOGRAPHY
The Magino Mine is located in the geological Wawa Subprovince of the Canadian
Shield. The topography of the area is characterized by low ridges and hills (up to
50 m of relief), flanked by generally flat areas of glacial outwash, swamps and
numerous lakes and bogs.
15
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
16
Topography and Accessibility of the Magino Property
Figure 5.1
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
6.0
HISTORY
The following account of the history of the Magino deposit is derived largely from the
Snowden 2011 (Ross 2011) technical report, with some minor modifications
included. A fuller description of the details of the history can be found in the
Snowden 2011 technical report (Ross 2011).
6.1
1950-1999
The area around the towns of Goudreau and Lochalsh has been prospected for
many years. The discovery of iron mineralized material around the turn of the 20th
century in the Michipicoten area southwest of Wawa led to a search for similar
deposits along the iron ranges further north. In places, the iron formations near
Goudreau were found to contain pyrite in sufficient quantity to form the basis of a
mining industry of considerable importance at one time. Between 1916 and 1919,
about 250,000 t of pyrite were produced, but a lack of markets for sulphuric acid at
the close of World War I led to the abandonment of the mines and the dismantling of
the acid plants that had been erected two miles east of Goudreau.
Gold was discovered in 1918 near Goudreau, and prospecting and mining have
continued since then, being particularly active from the mid-1920s to the beginning of
World War II. Available records show that gold production from the Goudreau area
was somewhat sporadic.
Various companies owned, operated and explored the Property between 1917 and
1981 and a summary of their activities can be found in Table 6.1.
The Property remained idle until 1981 when Rico Copper (1966) Ltd. (later renamed
McNellen Resources) conducted a diamond drilling program to evaluate the depth
continuity of the A-Zone and B-Zone, and the lateral continuity of the E-Zone. A total
of 6,915 ft (2,107 m) was drilled in 16 holes.
McNellen Resources entered into a joint venture with Cavendish on September 25,
1981. Under the terms of the agreement, Cavendish could earn an undivided 50%
interest in the Property by spending Cdn$900,000 on the Property. Work on the
Property started on October 6, 1981. Surface facilities were installed and dewatering
of the underground workings dewatered. Pumping started on November 26, 1981
and was completed on January 21, 1982.
Muscocho Explorations Ltd. acquired a 50% interest in the Property from Cavendish
in the fall of 1985. From September to December, they carried out a surface drilling
program west of the main mine workings.
17
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
In 1996, Golden Goose obtained the Property through an amalgamation of
Muscocho Explorations, Flanagan McAdams Resources Inc. and McNellen
Resources. In that same year, BLM Bharti Engineering Ltd. (BLM) conducted a
property review that evaluated the potential for both underground and open-pit
mining (BLM 1996).
Table 6.1 summarizes the work history for this period.
Table 6.1
Historical Summary for Magino
Year
Company
1917 to
1924
McCarthy-Webb
Goudreau Mines
Ltd.
Work Description
•
•
•
development of claim group
sinking of two shallow shafts
or pits
335 m of surface diamond
drilling
1925 to
1932
McCarthy-Webb
Goudreau Mines
Ltd.
•
•
test pits and trenching
five surface DDHs
1933 to
1934
Consolidated
Mining and
Smelting
Company
•
•
diamond drilling
construction of mill
Algoma Summit
Gold Mines
•
•
1935 to
1937
Algoma Summit
Gold Mines
•
•
•
1939 to
1942
Magino Gold
Mines
•
•
•
•
1938 to
1939
Results
•
•
inclined shaft sunk at 33°
sublevel at 100 ft (30.5 m);
1st level at 176 ft (53.6 m);
2nd level at 374 ft (114 m)
underground diamond drilling
nd
•
•
inclined shaft sunk to 2 level
at 374 ft (114 m)
underground diamond drilling
drifting
•
detailed underground
exploration program
mine closed
•
•
•
discovery of gold
References
Bourne et al.
1983
-
Bourne et al.
1983
421 t of
mineralized
material milled
144 oz of gold
extracted
Bourne et al.
1983
47,785 t of
mineralized
material milled
2,274 oz of gold
extracted
Bourne et al.
1983
68,421 t of
mineralized
material milled
6,049 oz of gold
extracted
Bourne et al.
1983
discovery of a new
gold zone
309 oz of gold
from clean-up of
mill
Bourne et al.
1983
1972
Mr. C. McNellen
•
surface diamond drilling: 6
DDHs (AS-72-01 to AS-7206) totalling 2,000 ft (610 m)
•
many new
“mineralized
material grade”
intersections
Bourne et al.
1983
1981
Rico Copper
(1966) Ltd
•
DDHs (S-81-1 to S-81-16)
totaling 6,915 ft (2,107 m)
•
many new
“mineralized
material grade”
intersections
Bourne et al.
1983
table continues…
18
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Year
1981 to
1982
Company
McNellen
Resources
Cavendish
Resources Ltd
Work Description
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
Results
References
surfaces facilities installed
underground workings
dewatered and resurveyed
channel sampling
test hole drilling
75 test holes totaling 1,500 ft
(457 m)
DDHs (SS-1 to SS-37A)
totalling 6,798 ft (2,072 m)
underground drilling: 42
DDHs (U1-1 to U1-11; U2-1
to U2-31) totalling 8,581 ft
(2,615 m)
•
many new
“mineralized
material grade”
intersections
Bourne et al.
1983
•
no electromagnetic
conductors
magnetic
anomalies
Mongeau 1982
Parbery and
Mongeau 1982
McNellen
Resources
Cavendish
Resources Ltd
•
•
magnetic and
electromagnetic surveys
geological survey
McNellen
Resources
Cavendish
Resources Ltd
McNellen
Resources Inc.
Cavendish
Prophet
Resources Ltd
June Resources
Inc.
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
•
•
prefeasibility study (PFS)
mineral inventory estimation
•
project not viable
Bourne et al.
1983
•
•
•
PFS
mineral inventory estimation
DDHs (JJ-1 to JJ-24) totaling
5,122 ft (1,561 m)
•
new gold-bearing
zones found
Bourne 1984
Sutherland
1987
•
•
surface diamond drilling
29 DDHs (MAG-85-01 to
MAG-85-29) totaling 16,441 ft
(5,011 m)
•
four mineralized
zones outlined
Sutherland
1987
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
•
DDHs (S-86-01to S-86- 55;
S-86-57 to S-86-65) totaling
12,372 ft (3,771 m)
underground diamond drilling:
12 DDHs (U-86-01 to U-8612) totaling 5,508 ft (1,679 m)
ramp collared
underground development
•
best drift results:
0.298 oz/ton over
8.0 ft horizontal
width along strike
length of 120 ft
(35.50 m)
DDH S-86-014
intersected
0.624 oz/ton over
13.0 ft (21.38 g/t
Au over 3.96 m)
Muscocho
Explorations
1987
Sutherland
1987 DDH logs
•
•
•
•
•
table continues…
19
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Year
1987
Company
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
Work Description
•
•
•
1988
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
•
•
•
•
1989
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
•
•
Results
References
DDHs (S-87-001 to S-87-079;
S-87-201 to S-87-211)
187 DDHs (U-87-001 to U-87118; U-87-120 to U-87-186)
•
DDH S-87-045
intersected
0.708 oz/ton over
14.2 ft (24.29 g/t
Au over 4.33 m)
DDH logs
9 DDHs (S-88-001 to S-88009) totalling 54,359 ft
(16,369 m)
213 DDHs (U-88-001 to U-88064; U-88-072 to U-88-151;
U-88-155 to U-88-166; U-88171 to U-88-207; U-88-219 to
U-88-232; U-88-240 to U-88245) totalling 57,434 ft
(17,506 m)
and mining work
•
DDH S-88-001
intersected
0.371 oz/ton over
31.0 ft (12.73 g/t
Au over 9.45 m)
DDH logs
293 DDHs (U-89-001 to U-89090; U-89-092 to U-89-116;
U-89-118 to U- 89-142; U-89147 to U-89-64; U-89-168 to
U-89-169; U-89-171; U-89173 to U-89-176; U-89-179 to
U-89-188; U-89-190 to U-89192; U-89-194 to U-89- 196;
U-89-198 to U-89-200; U-89204 to U-89-237;
U-89-238 to U-89-248; U-89251 to U-89-315) totalling
53,493 ft (16,305 m)
and mining work
•
DDH U-89-043
intersected
0.257 oz/ton over
6.0 ft (8.81 g/t Au
over 1.83 m)
DDH U-89-061
intersected
0.244 oz/ton over
9.4 ft (8.37 g/t Au
over 2.87 m)
DDH U-89-159
intersected
2.283 oz/ton over
3.4 ft (78.27 g/t Au
over 1.02 m)
DDH U-89-163
intersected
0.30 oz/ton over
24.8 ft (10.29 g/t
Au over 7.56 m)
DDH logs
•
•
•
table continues…
20
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Year
1990
Company
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
Work Description
•
•
1991
1992
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
•
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
•
•
•
•
1988 to
1992
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
•
Results
166 DDHs (U-90-001 to U-90015; U-90-017 to U-90-019;
U-90-021 to U-90-023; U-90025 to U-90-092; U-90-101 to
U-90-127; U-90-129 to U-90178) totalling 15,178 ft
(4,626 m)
and mining work
•
DDH U-90-080
intersected
0.21 oz/ton over
10.3 ft (7.21 g/t Au
over 3.14 m)
DDH logs
13 DDHs (U-91-001 to U-91013) totalling 1,081 ft (329 m)
and mining work
•
DDH U-91-008
intersected
0.243 oz/ton over
9.70 ft (8.32 g/t Au
over 2.96 m)
DDH logs
-
no underground and surface
diamond drilling
and mining work
the 650 ft ramp was driven to
a depth of 685 ft
mining production
•
•
•
•
1995
McNellen
Resources
Muscocho
Explorations
•
References
technical review of the
Magino Mine property
768,678 t
processed
production of
105,543 oz of gold
28 shrinkage
stopes totalling
177,486 t with a
grade of
0.217 oz/ton
(38,572 oz)
34 long-hole
stopes totaling
371,285 t with a
grade of
0.118 oz/ton
(43,938 oz)
three combined
long-hole and
shrinkage stopes
totaling 53,766 t
with a grade of
0.177 oz/ton
(9,534 oz)
-
Muschocho
Explorations
1992
McBride 1991
Nielsen 1995
Perkins 1999
Nielsen 1995
table continues…
21
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Year
Company
Work Description
Results
References
1996
Golden Goose
•
•
acquisition of Magino Mine
evaluation of potential for
both underground and openpit mining
1997
Golden Goose
•
•
check sampling program
geochemical study for surface
exploration
induced polarization (IP)
survey of Webb Lake
granodiorite
10 DDHs (S-97-01 to S-9710) totaling 2,087 m
stripping, mapping and
channel sampling
structural study
creation of a digital database
in Gemcom software
creation of a block model for
resource evaluation
scoping study
•
DDH S-97-05
intersected
18.57 g/t Au over
7.00 m
Nielsen 1997
Perkins 1997
PHA 1997
Hall et al. 1997
Wilson 1997
BLM 1997
Analytical
Solutions Ltd
1997
Reddick 1999
Perkins 1999
Reddick 2000
two bulk samples for
metallurgical test work
•
Average head
grade was 0.88 g/t
for mafic volcanics
and 0.96 g/t for the
granodiorite
Reddick 1999
Perkins 1999
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1998 to
1999
Golden Goose
•
-
BLM 1996
Reddick 1996a
Reddick 1996b
Source: Modified after Ross (2011)
6.2
2000-2010 GOLDEN GOOSE
6.2.1
2000
A D D I T I ON A L S A M PL I N G
In May of 2000, F. W. Nielsen of Golden Goose asked Reddick Consulting Inc.
(Reddick) to carry out a program that would assist their re-evaluation of the Property.
There were two separate components to the work. The first was a review of the
digital DDH database to determine where un-sampled and/or missing core occurred
in the central part of deposit. This was followed by retrieving the archived core for
those intervals and having them assayed to determine background gold levels for unsampled lengths of core.
DRILLING
The second component involved the drilling of 19 large diameter DDHs (HQ
diameter) in the central part of the deposit to:
22
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
•
assist with grade determination in areas subject to underground mining
•
provide new baseline data to aid with grade reconciliation
•
determine if there was variability in assay data as a function of sample size.
Dominik Drilling of Timmins, Ontario, was awarded the drill contract in 2000. Drilling
ran from September 30 to October 18 (Reddick 2001a). A total of 1,231 m was
drilled, producing 1,196 m of recovered core. The core was logged and sampled onsite. Drill collars were located by clearing out and re-chaining the parts of the grid
lines that had been turned off the surveyed baseline established by Golden Goose in
1996. All drill cores from this program core is stored in tagged core boxes at the
mine site. The 2000 drill program was designed to test the central part of the
Property to help reconcile grade estimates in the main mine area where stoping has
removed some of the mineralization. There were two main considerations in
designing the 2000 drill program. Firstly, in order to provide an even spatial
distribution of samples, the holes were laid out in the most regular pattern possible.
Secondly, only large diameter holes (HQ) were drilled and only one quarter of the
core was archived to obtain the most representative samples possible.
SAMPLING
AND
A N A L Y T I C A L Q U A L I T Y A S S U R A N C E /Q U A L I T Y C ON T R OL
In 2000, Golden Goose randomly inserted diabase samples in the shipped samples
as blanks. In addition, Swastika Laboratories reported on their internal blanks, which
they use for their own quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) purposes. To
determine the variation introduced by sub sampling, every 25th sample had a check
assay done on the original pulp and a second pulp was split from the coarse reject
fraction for a third assay. Swastika Laboratories also performed many additional
random checks. Golden Goose did not insert any standards. None of the samples
assayed by Swastika Laboratories were sent for independent verification at another
laboratory (Reddick 2001b).
A total of 1,231 m was drilled. The results of the 2000 drilling program, as well as the
re-sampling program, helped to establish a mean grade of 0.015 oz/ton gold for unsampled core from the central 1,000 ft (305 m) of the deposit. It also provided
information on the existence of a significant percentage of granodiorite in the main
part of the deposit at a grade considered sufficient for a low-grade, large-tonnage
mining operation (0.06 to 0.10 oz/ton).
6.2.2
2001
In 2001, Reddick re-evaluated the variography and interpolation techniques to
produce a revised resource estimate based on the inclusion of data obtained in 2000.
Taking into account past production, the total Measured Resource when applying a
cut-off grade of 0.05 oz/ton was estimated at approximately 5.8 Mt at a grade of
0.09 oz/ton gold. These resources were estimated for an open-pit operation.
23
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
The current author considers the preceding historical estimate to be relevant
and reliable. The estimate uses the “Measured” CIM resource category.
This historic estimate would require a verification program of drillhole
twinning, and re-sampling to upgrade or verify the historical estimate as a
current mineral resource. A QP has not done sufficient work to classify the
historical estimate as a current mineral resource and the issuer is not treating
the historical estimate as current.
6.2.3
2002
DRILLING
In 2002, Golden Goose conducted a 17-hole diamond drilling program (2,743 m)
under the supervision of Reddick. The holes were mostly drilled west of the mine
area and did not identify significant mineralization.
Dominik Drilling of Timmins, Ontario, was awarded the drill contract in 2002. Drilling
ran from May 12 to June 12, 2002 (Reddick 2002). A total of 2,743 m was drilled
with 2,508 m of core recovered. Drill collars were located on the grid established by
Golden Goose in 1996 and 1997. The core was logged and sampled on the site. All
drill cores from this program are stored in tagged core boxes at the mine site. The
2002 drill program tested targets along the gold trend in the mine area; these targets
were in the vicinity of anomalous results obtained during earlier drilling of the Lovell
Lake and North Plug Granodiorite intrusions, and the previously undrilled Southern
Granodiorite. The best mineralization from the 2002 drilling program was in DDHs
near the mine area.
SAMPLING
AND
In 2002, Golden Goose inserted 17 diabase samples in the shipped samples as
blanks. As in 2000, Swastika Laboratories reported their internal blanks. Check
assays were performed on random pulps, as were checks of a second pulp split from
the coarse reject fraction. None of the assayed samples were sent for independent
verification at another laboratory (Reddick 2002).
6.2.4
2004
In 2004, a NI 43-101 technical report by Snowden and Reddick reviewed the 2001
block model resource estimate to determine its suitability for use in scoping studies
involving pit optimization (Burns and Reddick 2004). Reddick concluded that for a
potential open pit mine based on a cut-off grade of 0.04 oz/ton, the 2004 combined
Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource at the Magino Mine was 7.295 Mt grading
0.075 oz/ton gold after subtracting historical production.
24
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
and reliable. The estimate uses the “Measured” and “Indicated” CIM resource
categories.
This historic estimate would require a verification programme of drill hole
6.2.5
2006
DRILLING
In 2006, 18 NQ DDHs were completed for a total of 8,055 m. The holes identified a
very robust system of gold mineralization with numerous intersections greater than
100 g/t gold, and clearly demonstrated the down-dip continuity of the mineralization,
which remained open at depth and along strike. The deepest intersection of the
diamond drill program was 440 m below surface (Hole 06-12), and mineralization
was still open.
The 2006 drill contract was awarded to Bradley Brothers Drilling of Rouyn-Noranda,
Québec. Drilling ran from February 9 to April 11, producing 11 NQ DDHs totaling
4,802 m. Another four holes totaling 1,866 m were drilled from June 9 to July 1.
Three other holes totaling 1,387 m were drilled from November 23 to December 12.
The core was logged and sampled at the mine site. All drill core from this program is
stored in tagged core boxes at the mine site. The 2006 drilling program was
designed to target mineralization below historical workings from a depth of 130 to
400 m below surface and within the range of a future extended decline access.
SAMPLING
AND
In 2006, the Golden Goose QA/QC program consisted of 189 un-mineralized mafic
volcanic samples inserted as blanks to check for cross-contamination. In addition,
177 core duplicates were assayed at ALS Chemex Ltd. (ALS Chemex) in Thunder
Bay to monitor sample variability. Golden Goose did not insert any standards. A
selection of 115 master pulps were sent to a secondary laboratory (Swastika
Laboratories) for check assays (Waldie 2006). For the assay range from 0 to 100 g/t
gold, the correlation coefficient was 0.983.
From 1997 to 2006, Golden Goose did not detect any significant variation between
subsamples.
25
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
ANALYTICAL LABORATORY
In 2006 core samples were sent to the ALS Chemex laboratory at Thunder Bay,
Ontario. The sample preparation process was as follows:
•
sample log-in
•
received sample weighing
•
crush with 90% passing 2 mm
•
crushing – quality control test
•
split sample with riffle splitter
•
pulverize 1,000 g to 85% passing 75 •
pulverizing – quality control test.
Gold analysis conformed to Code Au-AA24 with a 50 g charge for fire assay followed
by atomic absorption (AA) finish. “Mineralized material” grade results were reassayed according to Code Au-AA26.
6.2.6
2007
DRILLING
Golden Goose drilled 14 NQ DDHs on the Property for a total of 9,239 m. The
drilling program was originally designed to outline and extend multiple known gold
zones from 150 to 400 m below surface, below the historical Magino Mine workings.
Bradley Brothers Drilling was awarded the drill contract in 2007. Drilling ran from
January 6 to December 17. Fourteen NQ DDHs were completed totaling 9,836 m.
The core was logged and sampled at the mine site. All drill cores from this program
is stored in tagged core boxes at the mine site. The 14 DDHs identified a gold
system with numerous intersections and clearly demonstrated the continuity of the
mineralization, which remains open at depth and along strike.
SAMPLING
AND
In 2007, samples were assayed at Accurassay Laboratories Ltd. (Accurassay) in
Thunder Bay, Ontario. Golden Goose did not establish a QA/QC protocol for samples
from the 2007 drilling program, nor did the company double-check the results using a
second laboratory. Independent consultants InnovExplo of Val-d'Or, Québec asked
Golden Goose to send assayed samples for independent verification at ALS Chemex
in Thunder Bay, Ontario. In all, 363 pulps from the 2007 program were sent, and
InnovExplo’s analysis of the results from this second laboratory revealed no bias in
the original data obtained from Accurassay.
26
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
6.2.7
2008
R E S OU R C E E S T I M A T E
In 2008, InnovExplo completed a mineral resource estimate for the Magino Mine
below the old mine workings (i.e., below the 650 m level) that was published as a
NI 43-101 technical report (Turcotte and Pelletier 2008). Specifically, InnovExplo’s
mandate was to prepare a resource estimate from a depth of 200 to 600 m. The
resulting resource was classified as Inferred as per CIM standards and guidelines for
reporting mineral resources and reserves. The total estimated Inferred Resources
were 3,755,600 t grading 5.94 g/t gold for a total of 717,227 oz of gold (cut-off at 3 g/t
gold). The highlight of this resource estimate was the addition of a large portion of
Inferred Resources below the old workings of the Magino Mine (i.e., below the 650 m
level). This upgrade was possibly due to the results from the 2006-2007 diamond
drilling program, the most recent drill program at that time. This additional
information increased the number of mineralized zones.
and reliable. The estimate uses the “Inferred” CIM resource category.
E X P L OR A T I ON P OT EN T I A L
InnovExplo also performed an exhaustive compilation of the entire Property to
identify new regional exploration targets for diamond drilling and stripping. It was
concluded that there is potential for gold mineralization in granodiorite, gabbro/diorite
and volcanic rocks throughout the Property. InnovExplo constructed a geological
compilation map showing all historical exploration work on the Property. The
compilation work encompassed all previous geological mapping, trenching, diamond
drilling, surface sampling, geophysical surveying, geochemical surveying, etc., and
all historical mineral occurrences.
S U R F A C E S A M PL I N G
In July 2008, Golden Goose carried out stripping and channel sampling in the vicinity
of the southern contact of the Webb Lake granodiorite stock and adjacent volcanic
rocks (Golden Goose news release dated October 28, 2008). The stripped area lays
over the old mine workings and consists of seven small stripping’s totaling 2,790 m2.
The purpose of the work was to enhance the understanding of structural controls on
gold deposition. A total of 78 channel samples were collected from the stripped
areas. The best results for the stripping and channel sampling program were:
19.85 g/t gold over 0.5 m, and 17.59 g/t gold over 1.0 m.
27
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
6.2.8
2009
G E OC H EM I ST R Y
AND
G E OP H Y SI C A L S U R V EY S
In 2009, Gestion Aline Leclerc Inc. of Val-d’Or, Québec, performed a geochemical
field survey from September 18 to 21, 2009. A total of 661 humus samples were
collected and assayed for gold and 48 other elements. Two grids were established
with lines spaced 100 m apart. Grid locations were established with a hand-held
global positioning system (GPS). One sample was collected every 25 m. That same
autumn, D/C Géophysique of Val d’Or, Québec, carried out a ground magnetic
survey from September 26 to October 10, 2009. A total of 75 km was surveyed on a
grid of 42 lines spaced 50 m apart.
R E S OU R C E E S T I M A T E
InnovExplo reported that the Magino Mine has Measured and Indicated Resources of
2,091,900 t grading 6.74 g/t gold for a total of 453,189 oz. Total Inferred Resources
were reported as 5,828,800 tons grading 6.29 g/t gold for a total of 1,178,124 oz at a
cut-off grade of 3.0 g/t gold, as published in a technical report in compliance with
NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 (Turcotte and Pelletier 2009).
and reliable. The estimate uses the “Measured”, “Indicated” and Inferred” CIM
resource categories.
6.2.9
2010
DRILLING
From November 15, 2009 to March 1, 2010, Golden Goose conducted a 14-hole
diamond drilling program totaling 4,012 m. Most of the holes were drilled in volcanic
rocks south of the mine area and succeeded in identifying some significant gold
mineralization.
Bradley Brothers Drilling was awarded the drill contract in 2009-2010. Drilling ran
from November 15, 2009 to March 30, 2010. Fourteen NQ DDHs were completed
totaling 4,012 m. The core was logged and sampled at the mine site.
All drill core from this program is stored in tagged core boxes at the mine site. The
overall objective of the 2009-2010 drilling program was to discover new mineralized
zones in volcanic rocks on the Property, south of the mine area. The 14 DDHs
28
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
identified some gold intersections and clearly demonstrated the possibility of
increasing the gold resources in the volcanic rocks south of the mine area, which
remain open at depth and along strike.
SAMPLING
AND
A QA/QC control program was active during the Golden Goose 2009-2010 diamond
drilling program on the Property. The objectives of the QA/QC program were to
monitor and document the quality and integrity of the sampling procedure, sample
preparation, and assaying. Using a series of quality control samples, Golden
Goose’s protocol stipulates that the entire sampling, sample preparation and
assaying process be monitored and evaluated for:
•
The integrity of field sampling and sample shipment by monitoring field blank
results and sample shipment procedures.
•
The possible contamination during sample preparation or the assaying
process by monitoring the results of field blank standards submitted as
regular samples, and by monitoring laboratory analytical blank standard
results.
•
The suitability of crushing/splitting/pulverization sizes by measuring the
precision of coarse and pulp duplicate samples.
•
The level of assaying accuracy by using external and internal (laboratory)
certified reference standards and by assaying blind certified reference
standards in each batch of samples.
The laboratory inserted one coarse crush duplicate sample split, selected at random,
into each 10-sample sub-batch. Three certified reference materials (CRMs) with
different grades, all from Rocklabs in New Zealand, were used for QA/QC. One field
blank standard was prepared using “barren” rock from the Project site, or other
potentially “barren” material. One of the three CRMs, or one blank, was included in
each batch of 50 samples shipped by the Golden Goose geologist.
29
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
7.0
GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND
MINERALIZATION
7.1
THE ARCHEAN SUPERIOR PROVINCE
The Archean Superior Craton forms the core of the North American continent and is
surrounded and truncated on all sides by Proterozoic orogens, the collisional zones
along which elements of the Precambrian Canadian Shield were amalgamated
(Hoffman, 1988 and 1989). The Superior Province represents 2 Mkm2 of this craton
that is free of significant post-Archean cover rocks and deformation (Card and
Poulsen 1998). Tectonic stability has prevailed since circa 2.6 Ga in large parts of
the Superior Province (Percival 2007). The rocks of this Province are mainly
Mesoarchean and Neo-archean in age and have been significantly affected by postArchean deformation only along the boundaries marked by Proterozoic orogens,
such as the Trans-Hudson and Grenville orogens, or along major internal fault zones,
such as the Kapuskasing Structural Zone. The rest of the Superior Province has
remained stable since the end of the Archean (Goodwin et al. 1972).
Proterozoic and younger activity is limited to rifting along the margins, emplacement
of numerous mafic dyke swarms (Buchan and Ernst 2004), compressional
reactivation, and large scale rotation at circa 1.9 Ga, and failed rifting at circa 1.1 Ga.
With the exception of the northwest and northeast Superior margins that were
pervasively deformed and metamorphosed at 1.9 to 1.8 Ga, the craton has escaped
ductile deformation. A first order feature of the Superior Province is its linear
subprovinces of distinctive lithological and structural character, accentuated by
subparallel boundary faults (e.g. Card and Ciesielski 1986). Trends in the Superior
Province are generally easterly in the south, westerly to north-westerly in the
northwest, and north-westerly in the northeast (Figure 7.1). The southern Superior
Province (to latitude 52° north) is a major source of mineral wealth. Owing to its
potential for base metals, gold and other commodities, the Superior Province
continues to attract mineral exploration in both established and frontier regions.
7.2
THE WAWA SUBPROVINCE
The Magino property is located in the Wawa Subprovince (Figure 7.2). Most
geologists accept a correlation between the Wawa and Abitibi terrane’s across the
transverse Kapuskasing uplift (Percival 2007). Volcanism appears to have begun
with the 2.89 to 2.88 Ga Hawk assemblages. The 2.745 Ga Wawa assemblage and
the 2.72 Ga Greenwater and Manitouwadge assemblages reflect oceanic settings.
Volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits in the Wawa terrane have similar ages of
2.72 Ga (Corfu and Stott 1986; Williams et al. 1991; Sage et al. 1996a and b). Polat
and Kerrich (1999) reported a variety of oceanic magma types from the Schreiber
belt and interpreted the belt as a tectonic mélange (Polat et al. 1998; Polat and
30
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Kerrich 1999 and 2001). Relatively late-stage volcanism at circa 2.695 Ga (Carfish
assemblage) took place during D1 thrusting. Subsequent calc-alkalic to alkali
magmatism (circa 2.689 Ga; Corfu and Stott 1996) and associated coarse clastic
sedimentation (less than 2.689 Ga) was followed by the emplacement of sanukitoid
plutons (2.685 to 2.68 Ga) and dextral transpressive D2 deformation.
Figure 7.1
Tectonic Subdivisions of the Superior Province of Northern Ontario
Source: Stott et al. 2007
31
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 7.2
Major Geological Elements of the Eastern Wawa Subprovince
Source: Card and Poulsen 1998
Mineralization occurs in two main regions: the Michipicoten-Mishubishu belt in the
Wawa area and the Shebandowan-Schreiber belt to the west (Percival 2007). The
Michipicoten-Mishubishu belt contains mainly iron and gold deposits with some nickel
and copper-vein deposits (Figure 7.3). Iron deposits are in oxide-, sulphide- and
carbonate-facies iron formations that lie stratigraphically above the 2.74 to 2.735 Ga
Wawa assemblages. Gold deposits in this region occur within veins associated with
shear zones in plutonic rocks of variable composition and age.
The Shebandowan-Schreiber belt hosts important deposits of gold, iron and base
metals (volcanic-hosted massive sulphide deposits; e.g. Manitouwadge) (Peterson
and Zaleski 1999; Zaleski et al. 1999), as well as intrusion-hosted nickel deposits.
The most significant is the Hemlo gold camp, a large disseminated deposit (Muir
2003) in a strongly deformed, circa 2.693 to 2.685 Ga volcano-sedimentary
sequence (Davis and Lin 2003). Gold was deposited during D2 sinistral wrench
deformation between 2.680 and 2.677 Ga, likely from fluids derived from granitoid
rocks.
32
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 7.3
Mineral Belts in the Michipicoten-Shebandowan Region of the
Wawa Subprovince
Source: Card and Poulsen 1998
7.3
THE MICHIPICOTEN GREENSTONE BELT
The Magino Mine is located within the Michipicoten greenstone belt (Figure 7.2 and
Figure 7.3). This belt, including the adjacent Gamitagama and Mishubishu
greenstone belts, is one of the key localities with respect to the Superior Province
(Wawa Subprovince) geology, partly because of the importance of its Algoma-type
iron formations, partly because many important concepts of greenstone belt geology
are based there, and partly because it contains a record of volcanism, sedimentation
and plutonism that spans at least 240 Ma of Archean time (Card and Poulsen 1998).
The Michipicoten greenstone belt is a structurally and stratigraphically complex
assemblage of volcanic, sedimentary and intrusive rocks that were metamorphosed
to greenschist and amphibolite facies (Attoh 1981; Williams et al. 1991). To the east
and south, the Michipicoten greenstone belt and satellite Gamitagama greenstone
belt are bounded by plutonic rocks of the Wawa gneiss domain, mainly tonalite
gneiss with abundant granitic intrusions (Card and Poulsen 1998). The northeastern
Wawa Subprovince consists of similar gneissic and plutonic rocks along with the
small Saganash Lake and Kabinakagami Lake greenstone belts. At the eastern
edge of the Michipicoten greenstone belt, a Meso-archean sequence (Cycle 1) of
basalt and komatiite, overlain by calc-alkaline tuff, is intruded by the 2888 Ma Hawk
granite and 2881 Ma felsic sills (Sage 1994; Card and Poulsen 1998). This
sequence is in contact with 2747 Ma tonalite gneiss cut by 2698 Ma intrusions of the
33
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Whitefish Lake batholith. The Meso-archean rocks may represent a basement to the
younger volcanic succession (Jackson and Sutcliffe, 1990). The Meso-archean and
Neo-archean supracrustal rocks form at least three mafic-felsic cycles with
intercalated sediments, notably the thick Helen iron formation that caps the lower
cycle and consists of a lower siderite member, a middle pyritic carbonate member,
and upper chert-carbonate and black-shale members (Goodwin 1962; Sage 1987;
Sage 1994). Cycle 2 is a 2749 to 2746 Ma and 2729 Ma sequence consisting of
tholeiitic basalt and andesite overlain by calc-alkaline dacite and rhyolite (Sage 1994;
Card and Poulsen 1998). The upper volcanic cycle (Cycle 3), which is separated
from the lower cycles by the Doré conglomerate containing tonalite clasts as young
as 2698 Ma, consists of tholeiitic basalt with minor komatiite, capped by 2701 to
2691 Ma calc-alkaline felsic volcanic and clastic sedimentary rocks that include
wacke, arkose, polymictic conglomerate and oligomictic quartz conglomerate (Sage
1994; Card and Poulsen 1998). Detrital zircons from the sedimentary rocks are as
young as 2680 Ma (Corfu and Sage 1992), demonstrating that these sediments, like
similar sequences in the Abitibi greenstone belt, were deposited following major
volcanism. The petrography of the wacke units indicates that they were derived from
bimodal mafic-felsic volcanic sequences (Ayres 1983).
Several suites of plutonic rocks ranging in composition from gabbro to monzogranite
and syenite occur in and around the Michipicoten greenstone belt. Early tonalite,
trondhjemite and granodiorite plutons with ages of 2747 to 2737 Ma, 2729 to
2721 Ma and 2698 to 2693 Ma, respectively – similar to the ages of the main
volcanic cycles – are probably syn volcanic and have characteristics consistent with
derivation from melting of basaltic sources (Card and Poulsen 1998).
The rocks of the Michipicoten and Gamitagama greenstone belts have been
repeatedly deformed and metamorphosed under low-pressure, greenschist to lower
amphibolite facies conditions (Ayres 1969, 1983; Studemeister, 1983; McGill and
Shrady 1986; Arias and Helmstaedt 1990; McGill 1992; Sage 1993 and 1994). Early
structures include major recumbent folds, thrusts and associated cleavages (Card
and Poulsen 1998). Later superimposed upright folds are accompanied by steep
cleavages. The latest structures include northeast-trending shear zones that host
auriferous vein systems (Heather 1989) and northerly-trending sinistral faults.
The Michipicoten-Mishubishu mineral belt is dominated by iron and gold deposits
(Figure 7.3); lesser prospects include nickel sulphide and copper-vein deposits. Iron
formation deposits are widely distributed in this region. Gold deposits also typify the
Michipicoten-Mishubishu mineral belt. Most of these occur in a linear zone extending
west-southwest from Renabie in the east, through the Goudreau-Lochalsh area, to
Mishubishu Lake. Although the gold deposits of this area occur in a terrane with
extensive iron formations, they display a remarkable association with altered shear
zones and plutonic rocks regardless of composition or age (Studemeister, 1985;
Studemeister and Kilias 1987; Heather and Arias 1987 and 1992).
34
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
7.4
THE GEOLOGY
OF THE
MAGINO MINE AREA
The Magino Mine is situated in the Goudreau-Lochalsh gold district of the Wawa gold
camp. The geology of the Goudreau-Lochalsh gold district has been mapped by
Sage and published over a ten-year period (Sage 1983, 1984, 1985, 1987a, 1993,
1993a, 1993b, 1993c and 1993d). Supracrustal rocks in the Goudreau-Lochalsh
district consist of Cycle 2 felsic to intermediate pyroclastic metavolcanics capped by
pyrite-bearing ironstone. To the north are pillowed, massive and schistose, mafic to
intermediate metavolcanics and minor intercalations of Cycle 3 mafic pyroclastic
rock. Several medium- to coarse-grained quartz dioritic to dioritic sills and/or dikes
intrude all metavolcanic rocks.
Gold mineralization at the Magino mine is dominantly hosted by the Webb Lake
Stock (Deevy 1994), which intrudes isoclinally folded Cycle 3 mafic volcanic rocks
(Sage 1993). The Webb Lake Stock is a felsic intrusion interpreted by Sage (1993,
1994) as a trondhjemite, but continues to be called a granodiorite in mine
terminology and by mine geologists.
Subsequently the Lovell Lake Stock of granodiorite (trondhjemite) and the South
Metavolcanics have been found to contain significant gold mineralisation too.
The long axis of the Webb Lake stock is parallel to the regional supracrustal rock
stratigraphy (Sage 1993; 1994). The Webb Lake stock is east-north-east-striking
and has a steep northerly dip (Deevy 1992 and 1994). Its surface expression is at
least 1,800 m long and up to 300 m wide. The aureole rocks of the Webb Lake stock
are predominately mafic volcanic rocks (Deevy 1992 and 1994). The southern
contact is quite linear and regular, consisting mostly of dark green mafic rocks. The
northern contact is quite irregular and there is interfingering of granodiorite
(trondhjemite) and aureole rocks. The granodiorite (trondhjemite) is medium- to
coarse-grained, green-grey, moderately hard, non-magnetic and massive
(Sutherland 1987). It is locally foliated and hydrothermally altered, and has been
affected by greenschist facies metamorphism. The granodiorite (trondhjemite)
contains 5 to 10% veins of carbonate, quartz, tourmaline and pyrite in various
orientations. Approximately 5% of the igneous rock contains healed faults and
fractures, generally filled with chlorite and carbonate. They may correspond to the
late, north trending, 45°-dipping, carbonate-filled faults observed underground
(Sutherland 1987).
Some lithologies occur within the granodiorite. In mine terminology, these are
“felsites”, “mafics” and “intermediates” (Deevy 1992 and 1994). “Grey felsite” is the
oldest of the three and possibly predates gold mineralization. It is predominately a
medium to dark grey aphanitic body about 0.30 to 1.20 m thick that can be traced
from one end of the mine to the other. Grey felsite may not in fact be an intrusive in
its own right, but rather cataclastized granodiorite (trondhjemite) (Deevy 1992). “Pink
felsite” and “brown felsite” postdate gold mineralization. They are both fine grained
rocks of quartz-feldspar porphyry composition. They vary from a few centimeters to
3.5 m wide and can be traced for 100 m or more both laterally and vertically.
35
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
The “mafics” may be either dykes or xenoliths. They are dark green in color,
generally strongly foliated, and are of similar composition to the aureole mafic rocks
(Deevy 1992 and 1994). These mafic rafts or dykes are up to 6 m wide (Bourne et
al. 1987). The “intermediates” are much more limited in extent and have the texture
of a crystal tuff. They are probably true xenoliths within the granodiorite. Both the
mafic and intermediate xenoliths/dykes pre-date gold mineralization (Deevy 1992
and 1994) (see Figure 7.4).
36
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Geology of the Magino Mine Area
Source: Sage 1993d
Figure 7.4
37
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Several diabase dykes up to 12 m wide, of probable Keweenawan age, strike northnorth west and cut all rock types (Bourne et al. 1987). Diamond drilling east of the
diabase dyke marking the eastern limit of underground workings in the “old mine”
indicates that the granodiorite (trondhjemite)-metavolcanic contact has been offset by
approximately 50 ft (15 m), and that the dip of the contact at this location is vertical
instead of 65° to the north as is found west of the dyke. Bourne et al. (1987) believe
the diabase dyke intruded a pre-existing fault zone along which movement was
mainly rotational in nature (sinistral displacement), which would explain both the
apparent horizontal offset and the marked change in dip. The horizontal distance
between mineralized zones across this structure exceeds that shown for the
displacement of the stock’s margins on mine plans (Nielsen 1997). This suggests
that if displacement entirely post-dates mineralization, it must have been oblique, or
alternatively, the zones on either side of the diabase are not related (Nielsen 1997).
The granodiorite (trondhjemite) intrusion is cut by numerous shear zones related to
the Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone and it is on these shear-hosted gold-bearing
quartz veins that the Magino Mine occurs (Sage 1994). The portion of the intrusion
north of the deformation zone hosts the gold mineralization and is more deformed
than the southern portion. The Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone is a major contact
between Cycle 2 to the south and Cycle 3 to the north. In the Magino Mine area, the
Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone consists of a 070°-striking, ductile-brittle zone
sub-parallel to dextral oblique-slip high-strain zones developed within strongly altered
and deformed, felsic to intermediate metavolcanic rocks (Heather and Arias 1992).
7.5
GOLD MINERALIZATION
Gold mineralization at the Magino gold mine occurs primarily within the Webb Lake
and Lovell Lake granodiorite (trondhjemite) stocks. The Webb Lake and Lovell Lake
stocks underwent variable metasomatic alteration during deformation and gold
mineralization (Heather and Arias 1992). Distinct haloes of quartz-sericite-pyrite with
minor iron-carbonate and hematite alteration are observed adjacent to the quartz
vein systems. Alteration of the Webb Lake stock outside the gold-bearing zones is
manifested by a chlorite-albite- quartz-tourmaline-calcite assemblage (Heather and
Arias 1992). Locally present within the stock are lenticular chlorite-schist zones that
represent either strongly foliated mafic metavolcanic xenoliths or a chlorite-altered
felsic intrusion (Heather and Arias 1992). In addition narrow zones of mineralization
have also been identified in the Southern met-volcanics, south of the Webb Lake
stock.
Gold mineralization occurs in several sub-parallel high-strain zones striking 070° to
080° within the Webb Lake and Lovell Lake stocks and within mafic metavolcanic
rocks immediately along the northern margin of the stock (Heather and Arias, 1992).
Deevy (1992 and 1994) distinguished and described two types of mineralized
material shoots, namely “zones” and “veins”. The “zones” are usually 2 to 4.5 m
wide and have a strike length of 25 to 70 m. They consist of foliated, bleached and
silica-flooded granodiorite (trondhjemite). The zones are folded in places, which
produces mineable widths of up to 10.5 m. The “zones” dip at about the same angle
38
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
as the foliation and have a vertical plunge. The vertical continuity of the “zones” is at
a vertical to horizontal ratio of 2.5:1 (Deevy 1994). Weak bleaching and silica
flooding are the distinguishing features of the “zones” (Deevy 1994). Silica flooding
consists of incipient pale gray quartz replacing the foliated granodiorite. Gold content
is directly related to the amount of silica flooding (Deevy 1994).
The “veins” consist of discrete pale grey to pale green to almost white quartz veins
varying in width from a few to 45 cm. They have a strike length of several to 35 m.
Gold values are distributed erratically within the veins, but overall grades are quite
high. The veins are folded in places, with gold concentrated in the fold noses (Deevy
1992 and 1994). Vertical continuity of the “veins” is similar to that of the “zones”, and
the plunge is also vertical.
Native gold occurs in zones of pervasive silicification and in narrow (i.e. less than 1
to 20 cm wide) quartz veins that form complex systems 1 to 3 m wide. Gold occurs
within both quartz veins and foliated and altered wall rocks, but the better gold
grades are in the veins (T. Deevy, Magino mine geologist 2001, pers. comm., as
cited in Heather and Arias 1992). Finely disseminated leaf-like visible gold was
observed in numerous quartz veins in diamond drill cores and in drift backs on the
second level (Koskitalo 1983). The gold tends to form plates or leaves along
fractures in quartz rather than coarse nuggets. The quartz hosting the gold tends to
be fine-grained and dull milky grey (Koskitalo 1983). Up to 10% disseminated pyrite
is also present, most commonly found in alteration haloes around the gold-bearing
quartz veins (Heather and Arias 1992) (see Figure 7.5).
Figure 7.5
Historical G Zone in the 24+75E Drift
39
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
The granodiorite (trondhjemite) is sericitized, carbonatized, silicified and chloritized.
Gold bearing quartz veins have diffuse boundaries. Figure 7.6 shows the
photographed area is 50 cm across (from Sutherland 1987).
Figure 7.6
Note:
7.6
Gold Bearing Veins on the Face of the 23+80E Drift
The vein spacing and sericite alteration selvage along the vein contact. Centre vein is
15 cm wide (from Sutherland 1987).
STRUCTURES ASSOCIATED
WITH
GOLD MINERALIZATION
There is a strong structural control on the gold-bearing quartz vein system within the
Webb Lake Stock. The system consists of several main 070°- to 075°-striking high
strain zones, which in turn consist of subsidiary, parallel 070°- to 075°-striking
mineralized zones (Heather and Aria 1992). The zones are also parallel to the
regional schistosity in this area, which strikes 070°. Individual quartz veins are
localized within narrow, secondary, brittle-ductile shear fractures with the following
documented attitudes and apparent horizontal displacements (Heather and Arias
1992):
•
080° to 090° / 65°N, ductile, dextral (oblique-slip)
•
045° to 055° / 70°N, ductile (?).
A strongly developed foliation defined by elongated feldspar and aligned sericite has
been observed wrapping asymptotically into the narrow shear fractures (Heather and
Arias 1992). These shear-fractures appear to splay off each other, with the 085° set
being dominant. Surface outcrops show no obvious cross-cutting relationships
40
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
between these two sets of shear-fractures, suggesting synchronous development
(Heather and Arias 1992). Underground, however, it was reported by Magino’s mine
geologist T. Deevy, that the 055° set is part of a conjugate set of post-mineralized
material faults (1991 pers. comm. cited in Heather and Arias 1992). Locally, the
veins are better developed within the 085°-striking fracture set than in the 055° set.
Some of the auriferous high-strain zones comprise two or more obliquely-oriented
auriferous vein structures (e.g., the 070° striking high-strain zone containing 085°and 050°-striking veins) (Heather and Arias 1992).
Underground at the Magino Mine, mine geologist T. Deevy noted that raise-mining
on a single quartz vein structure revealed that the vein rolls from a dip of 80 to 60°
and back to 80° over a vertical distance of roughly 15 m. Mr. Deevy also noted that
the best gold grades are found at the intersections between vein-bearing shear
fractures with different orientations (1987 pers. comm. cited in Heather and Arias
1992). The plunge of the Magino mineralization is sub-vertical and parallel to
measured elongation lineation’s defined by stretched feldspar crystals (Heather and
Arias 1992).
The brittle-ductile shear fractures and associated veins are consistently off-set by a
few centimeters along brittle fractures with the following attitudes and apparent
horizontal displacements (Heather and Arias 1992):
•
190° (010°) / 85°W, brittle, sinistral
•
310° (130°) 67°N, brittle, dextral.
North-striking late tourmaline-quartz veins cut both the Webb Lake Stock and
aforementioned gold-bearing quartz vein systems (Heather and Arias 1992). Zones
of intense tourmaline-quartz fracture-filling, flooding and brecciation are locally
present within the Webb Lake Stock. This late tourmaline-quartz mineralization uses
the pre-existing fracture network in the rock. The tourmaline-quartz fracture-fillings
and veins can contain anomalous gold values, especially where they cut an earlier
gold-bearing quartz vein.
7.7
CURRENT VIEW ON MINERALIZATION CONTROLS AND
IDENTIFICATION OF MINERALIZED MATERIAL ZONES
The mineralization of the Magino Mine is associated with varying amounts of
alteration to the Webb Lake and Lake Lovell Stocks. This variation is marked by five
progressive levels of alteration/deformation described below. In general; alteration
levels are marked by increasing amount of foliation, sericite alteration, silicification
(veining, flooding, pervasive silicification) and pyrite mineralization. Carbonatization
is also apparent, but it is poorly understood if variation from calcite to ankerite is
associated with higher gold grades. In areas such as the northeast zone it is also
suggested that the focus, or central and most highly altered portion of the ”zone” is
associated with dolomite alteration, however this needs more study.
41
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Generally four levels of alteration to the Webb Lake and Lovell Lake Stock
granodiorite are recognized, as follows:
•
Granodiorite: Relatively unaltered, coarse grained, equigranular quartz –
plagioclase – chlorite +/- carbonate with typically more than 10% chlorite,
network texture, no planar fabric is observed.
•
Weakly Altered Granodiorite: Weakly developed planar fabric (foliation)
caused by the alignment of sericite/chlorite grains, unit is finer grained than
“Network Granodiorite” however relict texture can still be interpreted. Quartz
+/- carbonate +/- tourmaline veining varies from 1 to 2%; pyrite
mineralization is elevated in places but generally less than 0.5%.
•
Moderately Altered Granodiorite: Well-developed planar fabric (foliation)
caused by alignment of sericite/chlorite grains which make up more than
20% of the rock. This planar sericite/chlorite alignment is referred to as
“Sericite Lace”. Dependent on amount of chlorite this rock has a light green
to light grey – grey colour. The unit is finer grained than weakly altered
granodiorite, with rounded quartz crystals. Quartz +/- carbonate +/tourmaline veining varies from 2 to 5%; pyrite mineralization is elevated in
places but generally 0.5 to 1%.
•
Strongly Altered Granodiorite: Well-developed planar fabric (foliation)
caused by alignment of sericite/chlorite/quartz grains which make up more
than 80% of the rock, the remaining constituent being quartz +/- carbonate
+/- tourmaline veining. Visible gold is most commonly observed in this
alteration, and the presence of visible gold is believed to be dependent on
amount of smoky grey quartz veining/flooding (i.e. silica in the system at that
locality). Gold bearing grey (altered) quartz veins are typically subparallel to
foliation, millimeter-centimeter in scale with some five to ten grey quartz
flooded zones. The rock has a green and more often a light tan – pink
coloration, remnant intrusive texture is completely destroyed. Remnant
quartz phenocrysts are often augen shape and appear isolated in the
sericite matrix.
Visible gold is nearly always observed within silica (most typically small veinlets of
smoky grey quartz). Gold emplacement within the moderate to strong altered zones
is somewhat erratic due to the anastomosing nature of silica (quartz vein/flooding
emplacement). As veins are typically less than 5 cm in thickness and pinch and
swell in nature or are anastomosing, it is not realistic to model continuity amongst the
individual veins. The more broadly altered zones which contain the erratic quartz
units are more continuous in nature and can be modelled more readily.
The logging of the current Prodigy drill program is focused on describing foliation,
sericite alteration, silica (quartz veining), pyrite mineralization and visible gold
mineralization.
It is understood that historic logging and some mapping of the Magino deposit was
focused on identifying several ”types” (or compositional phases) of granodiorite. It is
42
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
because of this interpretation that Prodigy’s geologists believe the past geological
interpretation was forced into a model where the central portion of the stock was
considered a more mafic “phase” and then there were ring-shaped outer phases,
with a more felsic (and more calcic trondhjemite) phase along the contacts.
Prodigy’s interpretation consists of sigmoidal cross-cutting zones which are folded
(drag) in places and offset. To some extent, the historic phases were described
similarly to the varying amounts of alteration/deformation that are now observed,
however the phases were described primarily utilizing compositional differences,
ignoring most alteration/deformation variations, and so the historic geologic logging
data is not as useful for modelling, beyond the use for general lithology (i.e.
granodiorite or metavolcanic).
43
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
8.0
DEPOSIT TYPES
Lode gold deposits (gold from bedrock sources: see Figure 8.1) occur dominantly in
terranes with an abundance of volcanic and clastic sedimentary rocks of low to
medium metamorphic grade (Poulsen 1996). The Magino Mine is an orogenic gold
occurrence related to longitudinal shear zones (greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate
vein deposit). Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits are a subtype of
lode-gold deposits (Poulsen et al. 2000). They correspond to structurally controlled,
complex epigenetic deposits hosted in deformed metamorphosed terranes (Dubé
and Gosselin 2007).
Figure 8.1
Schematic Diagram Illustrating the Inferred Crustal Levels of Gold
Deposition
Source: Dubé et al. 2001; Poulsen et al. 2000
44
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits consist of simple to complex
networks of gold-bearing, laminated quartz-carbonate fault-fill veins in moderately to
steeply dipping, compressional brittle-ductile shear zones and faults with locally
associated shallow-dipping extensional veins and hydrothermal breccias. They are
hosted by greenschist to locally amphibolite-facies metamorphic rocks of dominantly
mafic composition and formed at intermediate depth in the crust (5 to 10 km). They
are distributed along major compressional to transtensional crustal-scale fault zones
in deformed greenstone terranes of all ages, but are more abundant and significant,
in terms of total gold content, in Archean terranes. Greenstone hosted quartzcarbonate veins are thought to represent a major component of the greenstone
deposit clan (Figure 8.1) (Dubé and Gosselin 2007). They can co-exist regionally
with iron-formation-hosted vein and disseminated deposits, as well as with turbiditehosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits (Figure 8.2).
Figure 8.2
Schematic Diagram Illustrating the Setting of Greenstone-Hosted
Quartz Carbonate Vein Deposits
Source: Poulsen et al. 2000
The main gangue minerals are quartz and carbonate, with variable amounts of white
micas, chlorite, scheelite and tourmaline. The sulphide minerals typically constitute
less than 10% of the mineralized material. The main mineralized material minerals
are native gold with pyrite, pyrrhotite and chalcopyrite without significant vertical
zoning (Dubé and Gosselin 2007).
The Magino gold deposit lies within the Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone, a major
contact between Cycle 2 felsic to intermediate pyroclastic metavolcanic rocks to the
south and Cycle 3 massive pillowed mafic metavolcanic rocks to the north (Heather
and Arias 1992). The Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone appears to be spatially
related to a large, regionally mappable intrusive sheet. This rigid meta-intrusive body
deformed in a brittle manner relative to the enclosing mafic metavolcanic rocks, thus
45
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
acting as a competency contrast and thereby focusing the strain and associated
mineralization (Heather and Arias 1992).
In the Magino gold deposit area, the Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone (Figure 8.3)
is characterized as a 1- to 2-km wide, 070°-striking zone of subparallel ductile and
brittle-ductile high-strain zones (Heather and Arias 1992). Gold mineralization occurs
in these high-strain zones.
At the regional scale, there is no readily discernible alteration pattern directly related
to gold mineralization. However, rocks within the Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone
are slightly more altered relative to the rest of the supracrustal rocks in the
Michipicoten Greenstone Belt. This suggests that hydrothermal fluids were
preferentially focused into regional deformation zones (Heather and Arias 1992).
Regionally, two types of gold mineralization have been recognized in the Magino
gold mine area (Heather and Arias 1992): (1) quartz veins hosted by brittle and
brittle-ductile high strain zones; (2) brittle fault-hosted breccia-style mineralization.
46
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Location of the Goudreau Lake Deformation Zone
Source: Modified after Heather and Arias 1992
Figure 8.3
47
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
9.0
EXPLORATION
Prodigy has not conducted surface exploration on the Property, other than drilling,
which is described in Section 10.0. Exploration conducted by previous Issuers is
discussed in Section 6.0.
48
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
10.0 DRILLING
Prodigy commenced in-fill diamond drilling on the project in January 2011 and has
continued to drill into 2012. In September 2011 the current drilling database at the
time was provided to Snowden for an updated resource estimate. Full details of the
Prodigy drilling prior to September 2011 can be found in the Snowden technical
report dated November 2011 (Ross 2011).
Prodigy continued the in-fill drilling program at Magino from September 2011 and
continue to drill into 2012. Assays from this 2011/2012 drilling have been included in
this mineral resource estimate and includes all holes drilled by Prodigy from
September 2011 until June 2012. Assays from drilling after June 2012 have not
been included in this updated resource report. Details of pre-Prodigy drilling can be
found in Section 6.0 of this report.
10.1.1
T Y PE
AND
E XT E N T
From September 2011 until the present time in 2012, Prodigy has continued to drill
the infill-drilling program designed in late 2010, and includes the May 2011
expansion holes. The program was carried out by various rigs from two contractors:
Northstar Drilling and Cobra Drilling, both of Thunder Bay, Ontario (see Figure 10.1).
Figure 10.1
Diamond Drill Rig
49
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Information used in the resource estimate update includes 67,848 m of drilling from
242 Prodigy holes, including 12 geotechnical holes. Core diameters are NQ or NQ2
for all holes.
The drill rigs are conventional wire-line machines operated by experienced drilling
companies. Due to the proximity of underground workings several holes were
commenced as HQ diameter and were reduced to NQ diameter on intersecting the
workings. Details of the Prodigy drillholes are provided in Table 10.1.
Table 10.1
2011/2012 Prodigy Drilling
Hole ID
Easting
Northing
Elevation
(m)
Depth
(m)
Azimuth
(°)
Dip
(°)
Target
MA11-129
688484.15
5351162.85
393.62
389.00
167.4
-51.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-130
688433.93
5351158.07
393.69
401.00
162.2
-50.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-132
688390.13
5351138.95
394.03
356.00
164.8
-50.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-133
688354.33
5351158.69
393.41
386.00
164.3
-49.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-134
689297.41
5351576.61
391.98
350.00
161.6
-50.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-135
688405.63
5351165.05
394.10
374.00
164.8
-49.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-136
689153.92
5351672.79
407.90
461.00
164.0
-47.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-137
688452.37
5351180.51
394.49
398.00
167.2
-50.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-138
689105.44
5351659.14
407.71
455.00
166.4
-52.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-139
688131.43
5350830.31
392.14
173.00
160.8
-52.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-140
688099.98
5350924.73
390.84
470.00
162.4
-49.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-141
689087.48
5351630.97
406.65
453.00
163.8
-50.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-142
687529.4
5351033.28
396.17
221.00
163.2
-49.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-143
689055.51
5351650.47
407.8
398.00
165.2
-49.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-144
687421.27
5351059.18
389.84
188.00
164.5
-53.0
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-145
688692.07
5351240.24
394.27
447.50
167.0
-48.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-146
687482.6
5351101.99
390.00
179.00
162.4
-49.8
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-147
687579.53
5351125.93
397.74
198.30
163.9
-51.4
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-148
687650.14
5351174.01
397.31
197.00
159.9
-48.5
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-149
688662.06
5351261.57
394.17
485.00
171.4
-50.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-150
687723.26
5351271.66
394.55
383.00
164.0
-50.6
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-151
688642.8
5351230.59
394.70
476.00
167.7
-50.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-152
687858.58
5351255.62
393.62
293.00
165.1
-50.6
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-153
687855.05
5351356.64
392.50
335.00
163.5
-48.9
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-154
688517.29
5351225.06
391.72
500.00
164.8
-47.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-155
687985.67
5351429.95
392.99
311.00
169.7
-49.7
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-156
688467.96
5351213
391.95
530.00
165.3
-50.0
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-157
687575.28
5351247.95
391.27
380.00
172.7
-48.6
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-158
687476.64
5351230.39
392.15
383.00
166.2
-50.5
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-159
687387.32
5351181.86
390.59
347.00
164.0
-49.6
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-160
688176.15
5350849.33
393.56
263.00
161.7
-50.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-161
688160.94
5350897.16
390.47
260.00
162.1
-50.3
Webb Lake Stock
table continues…
50
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
Easting
Northing
Elevation
(m)
Depth
(m)
Azimuth
(°)
Dip
(°)
Target
MA11-162
687305.81
5351105.01
389.82
290.00
165.0
-51.6
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-163
688971.98
5351625.08
412.11
308.00
163.6
-49.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-164
689043.3
5351697.28
405.26
455.00
162.9
-50.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-165
687313.85
5350980.52
389.78
131.00
168.8
-46.9
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-166
687105.88
5350875.57
390.64
254.00
162.9
-48.5
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-167
689112.41
5351736.91
409.40
527.00
162.9
-49.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-168
689345.94
5351300.19
396.83
200.00
164.0
-49.2
South Meta Volcanics
MA11-169
687065.58
5351021.69
392.88
251.00
169.6
-48.9
Lovell Lake Stock
MA11-170
689397.5
5351312.97
396.96
149.00
166.1
-48.9
MA11-171
689450.05
5351303.28
396.20
230.00
164.7
-50.1
MA11-172
688026.84
5351799.97
437.57
284.00
163.3
-50.1
Magino
MA11-173
689377.97
5351285.64
398.03
221.00
164.2
-49.6
MA11-174
688035.4
5350884.75
389.98
275.00
165.7
-47.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-175
688280.42
5351963.54
433.21
479.00
89.4
-50.3
Magino
MA11-176
689484.93
5351330.64
395.44
257.00
163.9
-47.4
MA11-177
689189.37
5351735.94
405.82
494.00
166.7
-49.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-178
688009.68
5350978.27
391.78
401.00
160.0
-45.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-179
689514.54
5351347.97
394.72
266.00
158.1
-50.4
MA11-180
687736.92
5350627.25
394.69
239.00
164.1
-50.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-181
688280.78
5351964.91
433.15
437.00
338.7
-50.3
Magino
MA11-182
687808.71
5350669.93
394.21
212.00
157.6
-50.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-183
689112.41
5351736.91
409.40
690.50
166.8
-58.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-184
687888.86
5350848.28
391.29
356.00
161.3
-49.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-185
688067.85
5351833.83
437.14
350.00
92.8
-50.2
Magino
MA11-186
687781.7
5350766.85
390.77
350.00
162.7
-51.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-187
687866.22
5351739.78
435.43
425.00
347.9
-49.6
Magino
MA11-188
687590.49
5350712.88
392.62
350.00
158.4
-49.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-189
687830.4
5351675.54
436.51
350.00
95.5
-50.0
Magino
MA11-190
687464.24
5350705.97
392.20
449.00
160.9
-51.2
Magino
MA11-191
689112.41
5351736.91
409.40
752.00
166.5
-66.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-192
687738.34
5351612.03
428.57
152.00
92.3
-51.0
Magino
MA11-193
687538.84
5351525.88
417.57
305.00
92.7
-50.7
Magino
MA11-194
687538.54
5351525.82
417.57
350.00
164.1
-49.8
Magino
MA11-195
688202.56
5351219.54
393.07
350.00
345.2
-50.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-196
687372.09
5351312.54
411.01
350.00
90.7
-50.5
Magino
MA11-197
687869.4
5350622.94
395.34
215.00
155.5
-50.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-198
688143.33
5351148.34
391.35
668.00
161.4
-48.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-199
688334.01
5351303.83
391.88
350.00
344.7
-48.7
Magino
MA11-200
687158.72
5351190.15
406.68
350.00
97.0
-50.0
LovellLakeStock
MA11-201
687285.78
5351594.5
410.97
350.00
165.7
-50.5
Magino
MA11-202
689112.8
5351735.33
409.51
343.30
346.2
-51.2
Webb Lake Stock
table continues…
51
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
Easting
Northing
Elevation
(m)
Depth
(m)
Azimuth
(°)
Dip
(°)
Target
MA11-203
688264.22
5351001.75
393.67
347.00
160.3
-49.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-204
688488
5351320
395.00
350.00
345.3
-50.2
Magino
MA11-205
688237.93
5351018.97
393.82
350.00
162.9
-49.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-206
687377
5351661
415.00
299.00
96.9
-49.6
Magino
MA11-207
688214.5
5350988.45
393.00
311.00
161.8
-49.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA11-208
688202
5351037
392.00
419.00
164.3
-47.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-209
688732.82
5351566.72
396.29
350.00
342.6
-49.3
Magino
MA12-210
688375.15
5350973.91
390.08
251.00
161.8
-47.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-211
688920.51
5351637.85
409.05
452.00
343.1
-49.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-212
688398.3
5350982.64
390.36
272.00
163.2
-49.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-213
688354.07
5350946.77
390.69
227.00
167.5
-50.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-214
687375.9
5351018.25
389.82
131.00
158.1
-49.0
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-215
687408.85
5351003.18
389.73
125.00
165.4
-50.9
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-216
687433.49
5351009.88
392.24
122.00
166.0
-49.8
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-217
688359.02
5351027.73
390.07
320.00
167.5
-48.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-218
688342.04
5350998.31
390.06
281.00
161.8
-48.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-219
687456.1
5351017.4
393.28
125.00
166.0
-50.6
Lovell Lake Stock
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-220
687448.94
5351039.02
391.69
137.00
163.9
-51.7
MA12-221
688639.33
5351924.47
408.35
359.00
167.7
-49.9
Magino
MA12-222
687400.33
5351027.21
389.80
131.00
165.0
-50.9
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-223
687372.41
5351043.86
389.86
161.00
161.8
-48.3
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-224
688329.34
5351040.45
390.13
308.00
166.8
-49.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-225
687392.44
5351050.42
389.94
161.00
163.3
-50.1
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-226
688526.17
5351767.32
398.58
347.00
164.0
-48.8
Magino
MA12-227
687413.23
5351083.41
389.86
191.00
163.1
-47.8
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-228
688378.44
5351055.56
390.11
329.00
162.1
-50.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-229
687384.52
5351073.83
389.84
221.00
162.1
-46.8
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-230
688312.75
5351013.94
390.11
299.00
163.8
-47.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-231
688475.17
5351753.53
397.77
350.00
339.9
-49.0
Magino
MA12-232
687443.03
5351065.08
389.87
161.00
166.7
-49.5
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-233
688243.3
5351740.33
414.08
254.00
166.9
-50.8
Magino
MA12-234
687406.1
5351105.37
390.36
224.00
164.4
-49.3
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-235
688281.19
5351029.82
390.22
383.00
171.4
-48.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-236
689183.97
5351684.31
407.55
329.00
155.0
-44.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-237
688346.31
5351074.92
390.20
332.00
158.5
-50.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-238
687467.73
5351069.17
391.00
161.00
161.7
-50.1
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-239
687430.15
5351113.12
390.10
230.00
165.1
-48.2
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-240
689191.53
5351722.42
406.76
284.00
159.1
-45.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-241
687376.08
5351097.33
389.91
230.00
165.3
-51.1
Lovell Lake Stock
MA12-242
688298.51
5351061.82
390.08
380.00
171.6
-47.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-243
688963.79
5351598.19
411.05
350.00
173.6
-45.2
Webb Lake Stock
table continues…
52
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
Easting
Northing
Elevation
(m)
Depth
(m)
Azimuth
(°)
Dip
(°)
Target
MA12-244
689247.19
5351309.84
396.90
101.00
162.8
-48.4
MA12-245
689243.17
5351348.4
396.64
140.00
167.3
-49.5
MA12-246
689074.66
5351529.86
390.97
350.00
162.1
-44.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-247
689210.09
5351281.79
398.31
101.00
161.7
-52
MA12-248
689146.62
5351280.21
395.75
200.00
168.8
-52.8
MA12-249
688251.51
5351047.07
390.01
422.00
166.1
-46.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-250
689066.1
5351520.32
390.89
500.00
177.1
-43.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-251
689179.27
5351241.56
398.12
110.00
165.8
-49.7
MA12-252
689085.86
5351196.77
403.82
132.00
139.5
-57.7
MA12-253
689070.61
5351184.03
402.02
92.00
175.4
-55.9
MA12-254
688708.85
5351073.4
397.74
110.00
209.2
-61.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-255
689315.11
5351385.88
394.93
221.00
206.3
-49.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-256
689103.55
5351548.93
392.50
450.00
180.7
-46.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-257
688689.98
5351030.6
396.98
182.00
181.2
-55.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-258
688267.85
5351080.64
390.12
461.00
165.1
-49.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-259
688728.19
5351031.9
396.23
152.00
171.4
-49.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-260
689292.55
5351393.99
394.31
122.00
140.0
-55.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-261
689301.94
5351454.76
396.18
212.00
172.5
-53
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-262
688732.73
5351033.35
395.98
71.00
166.0
-49.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-263
688728.42
5351052.98
395.72
182.00
180.3
-55.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-264
689072.75
5351530.19
390.96
380.00
166.0
-46.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-265
689315.77
5351462.71
396.21
251.00
188.1
-45.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-266
688693.28
5351076.1
398.37
230.00
159.7
-60.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-267
688334.89
5351022.83
390.14
290.00
164.7
-50.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-268
689093.68
5351501.34
390.99
401.00
168.9
-44.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-269
688722.01
5351086.33
397.17
230.00
204.3
-52.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-270
689321.92
5351479.46
395.76
170.00
163.3
-49.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-271
689302
5351495.92
394.33
260.00
184.8
-47.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-272
688333.87
5351124.97
390.05
410.00
166.3
-50.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-273
688760.91
5351120.38
395.23
260.00
109.0
-49.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-274
688958.91
5351576.3
408.45
452.00
176.7
-45.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-275
688801.6
5351164.67
393.91
230.00
170.2
-48.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-276
689386.62
5351463.75
394.97
80.00
166.6
-49.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-277
689368.01
5351501.55
395.02
140.00
166.0
-51.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-278
689297.23
5350692.81
384.45
290.00
149.3
-49.5
Magino
MA12-279
689217.06
5351455.47
394.75
350.00
187.7
-50.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-280
689046
5351437.37
391.82
449.00
180.8
-42.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-281
689193.18
5351351.32
396.88
281.00
163.5
-48.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-282
688365.36
5351105.24
390.32
350.00
166.4
-51.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-283
689334.56
5350541.83
385.81
257.00
95.7
-50.4
Magino
MA12-284
689148.12
5351324.71
397.88
221.00
167.1
-51.6
Webb Lake Stock
table continues…
53
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
Easting
Northing
Elevation
(m)
Depth
(m)
Azimuth
(°)
Dip
(°)
Target
MA12-285
688288.84
5351138.86
390.20
380.00
164.5
-48.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-286
688856.47
5351252.2
396.91
350.00
137.5
-49.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-287
689599.15
5350736.5
385.76
350.00
154.8
-47.6
Magino
MA12-288
689141.6
5351369.54
397.07
356.00
167.4
-50.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-289
688250.58
5351117.8
390.19
521.00
163.3
-48.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-290
689008.76
5351431.36
395.26
509.00
169.1
-43.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-291
688205.81
5351101.5
390.23
407.00
168.6
-47.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-292
688852.77
5351250.05
396.92
206.00
140.6
-56.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-293
689178.52
5351406.08
397.61
512.00
135.2
-53.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-294
688817.64
5351236.54
396.21
320.00
104.0
-49.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-295
689010.36
5351391.36
394.99
449.00
172.2
-42.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-296
688654.74
5350997.61
397.03
77.00
175.0
-55.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-297
689188.64
5351315.68
396.80
350.00
152.6
-55.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-298
688794.75
5351115.85
394.86
269.00
153.1
-59.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-299
689012.19
5351180.68
403.48
200.00
157.6
-65.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-300
689184.04
5351295.76
397.44
242.00
163.0
-47.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-301
688873.76
5351183.8
398.23
251.00
155.9
-49.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-302
688792.77
5351102.77
394.98
290.00
186.2
-54.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-303
688596.4
5350891.43
391.76
110.00
166.3
-57.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-304
689020.99
5351193.56
403.80
83.00
197.0
-50.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-305
689125.45
5351237.66
397.86
251.00
204.3
-46.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-306
688657.41
5350922.25
393.54
50.00
168.9
-47.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-307
688952.36
5351127.34
401.04
131.00
150.0
-65.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-308
689010.96
5351173.71
403.55
161.00
174.2
-49.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-309
688767.34
5351091.11
394.69
69.50
157.2
-55.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-310
688723.57
5350962.23
394.6
110.00
123.1
-46.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-311
688872.64
5351177.63
398.38
251.00
180.8
-49.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-312
689185.19
5351221.09
398.21
152.00
219.2
-59.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-313
688811.17
5351117.07
395.45
221.00
153.6
-48.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-314
688727.25
5350982.6
395.77
74.00
160.0
-50.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-315
689011.66
5351279.55
399.78
272.00
136.7
-44.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-316
689027.98
5351134.29
399.31
36.50
170.0
-50.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-317
689092.99
5351213.43
402.18
35.00
178.3
-68.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-318
688661.15
5350956.48
395.39
110.00
161.6
-49.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-319
688929.48
5351116.86
396.36
149.00
160.0
-53.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-320
688828.71
5351097.58
394.60
221.00
163.0
-56.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-321
689065.64
5351374.33
394.54
131.00
150.8
-53.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-322
688885.11
5351182.6
399.13
230.00
142.0
-55.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-323
688619.35
5350940.59
393.10
140.00
163.7
-61.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-324
688920.17
5351134.94
396.60
173.00
180.8
-54.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-325
688734.36
5351049.97
395.97
230.00
157.1
-58.5
Webb Lake Stock
table continues…
54
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
Easting
Northing
Elevation
(m)
Depth
(m)
Azimuth
(°)
Dip
(°)
Target
MA12-326
689088.28
5351352.41
394.14
380.00
173.4
-50.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-327
688948.73
5351192.46
404.21
260.00
116.6
-48.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-328
688421.92
5350870.52
392.65
80.00
155.1
-43.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-329
688894.49
5351108.89
396.58
155.00
181.1
-53.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-330
688720.93
5351086.75
397.18
341.00
170.2
-61.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-331
688483.74
5350889.66
399.27
131.00
159.3
-47.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-332
688820.22
5351052.39
393.73
200.00
157.1
-61.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-333
689021.57
5351296.4
398.51
251.00
192.4
-64.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-334
688876.42
5351158.84
399.46
37.00
179.6
-45.1
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-335
688457.57
5350872.35
398.32
101.00
161.2
-39.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-336
688688.55
5350996.12
395.38
120.50
162.0
-50.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-337
688876.43
5351158.88
399.49
290.00
106.4
-56.2
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-338
688608.93
5351059.31
398.46
260.00
182.6
-49.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-339
688472.05
5350971.68
392.32
242.00
169.6
-50.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-340
689007.51
5351315.81
396.23
410.00
149.8
-54.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-341
688687.72
5350988.75
395.37
131.00
139.7
-45.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-342
688861
5351225.11
396.31
329.00
149.3
-49.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-343
688606.27
5351053.38
398.13
299.00
197.1
-47.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-344
688502.3
5350988.7
394.85
230.00
163.1
-54.0
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-345
688593.59
5351022.17
397.84
110.00
105.7
-51.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-346
689105.37
5351330.87
394.43
251.00
153.4
-50.8
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-347
688637.03
5351108.59
396.09
431.00
114.9
-47.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-348
688956.43
5351297.69
396.68
88.40
160.4
-45.3
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-349
688449.42
5351013.97
399.33
260.00
158.2
-50.4
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-350
688988.19
5351367.55
394.53
392.00
149.4
-39.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-351
688585.23
5351013.76
398.63
233.00
148.4
-54.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-352
688880.2
5351335.96
391.78
446.00
114.9
-47.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-353
689085.74
5351425.93
391.7
620.00
172.6
-56.7
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-354
688540.43
5351013.11
397.00
209.00
157.9
-52.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-355
688427.77
5351057.08
393.22
350.00
168.9
-49.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-356
688629.81
5351095.22
397.12
103.00
184.0
-56.6
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-358
688924.43
5351458.85
392.48
752.00
178.6
-47.9
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-360
688590.54
5351130.49
393.95
135.50
159.1
-45.5
Webb Lake Stock
MA12-366
688781.73
5351147.18
393.62
329.00
145.8
-63.0
Webb Lake Stock
GT-11-01
688284.83
5350780.4
389.30
161.00
4.9
-65.6
Magino Geotech
GT-11-02
688562.81
5351223.65
395.07
251.00
87.7
-60.3
Magino Geotech
GT-11-03
688858.36
5351508.8
395.12
290.00
198.0
-70.2
Magino Geotech
GT-11-04
689286.08
5351661.03
403.51
227.00
159.2
-64.5
Magino Geotech
GT-11-09
688410.52
5350840.29
389.87
194.80
148.2
-67.5
Magino Geotech
GT-12-05
689376.8
5351277.82
398.03
317.00
278.8
-69.3
Magino Geotech
GT-12-06
689378.68
5351277.63
397.94
50.00
97.6
-60.2
Magino Geotech
table continues…
55
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
10.1.2
Hole ID
Easting
Northing
Elevation
(m)
Depth
(m)
Azimuth
(°)
Dip
(°)
Target
GT-12-07
689270.12
5350948.27
394.13
326.00
299.1
-63.3
Magino Geotech
GT-12-08
689271.68
5350946.99
394.07
47.00
121.5
-64.1
Magino Geotech
GT-12-10
689082.75
5350970.85
386.55
302.00
173.0
-74.3
Magino Geotech
GT-12-11
688707.74
5350910.41
389.13
251.00
43.2
-69.9
Magino Geotech
GT-12-12
688806.37
5350888.8
386.60
50.00
139.0
-57.3
Magino Geotech
D R I L L C OL L AR S
The procedures used by Prodigy for surveying drill collars have been consistent
throughout all of their campaigns. Drillholes are located and set-up so that, as much
as possible, the drillholes are perpendicular to the strike and dip of the mineralized
zones at Magino. Drillhole collar locations are surveyed to 1 cm accuracy using
digital global positioning system (DGPS) instruments.
The azimuths are usually set out using a compass and flagging tape/pickets for the
rig to line up with as foresights and back-sights. The dip is then set by the driller
using a clinometer, and all this is usually confirmed by the geologist or field staff
onsite at the time to ensure quality control is maintained.
All collars are then picked up by again using a DGPS means to 1 cm accuracy.
10.1.3
D O WN - H OL E S U R V E YS
Down-hole surveys were collected for all holes at approximately 3 m intervals using a
reflex multi-shot down-hole surveying tool.
10.1.4
G E OL O GI C AL L O GG I N G
Drill core at Magino is boxed, covered, and sealed at the drill rig and moved to the
Prodigy logging and sample preparation facilities by Prodigy personnel. Then all
cores were logged by qualified Prodigy geologists familiar with the Project.
Logging was conducted on tough-book lap top computers utilizing digital logging
software.
The drill logs recorded major lithological units, alteration, oxidation, some minor
structure, mineralisation, veining, textures and minor lithological units as well and the
sample intervals.
Drill core at Magino is boxed, covered, and sealed at the drill rig and moved to the
Prodigy logging and sample preparation facilities by Prodigy personnel (Figure 10.2
to Figure 10.5)
56
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 10.2
Core Logging Facility
Figure 10.3
Core Cutting Facility
57
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 10.4
Specific Gravity Station
58
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 10.5
10.1.5
Core Storage Facility
D R I L L H OL E C A S I N G
All collar casings are left in the ground with a plug in each stating hole name,
coordinates and orientation, there is often a wooden stake with the above
information next each collar point too, for ease of identification at a later time.
Collars are also plugged to prevent local fauna from becoming trapped in them
(Figure 10.6)
59
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 10.6
10.1.6
Drill Collar Cap
2011/12 D I AM ON D D R I L L I N G R E SU L T S
Drilling continued to establish continuity between past mineralised intercepts on the
mineralisation trends. Table 10.2 provides a summary of mineralization intercepts
from Prodigy’s drilling program for holes drilled between September 2011 and April
2012 inclusively. The results are composited where the minimum down-hole grammeterage was greater than 9 g/m. All sample lengths are quoted as down-the-hole
lengths.
Table 10.2
2011/2012 Drilling Significant Intercepts
Hole ID
From
(m)
To
(m)
Length
(m)
Au
(g/t)
Lode
MA11-129
115.0
121.0
6.0
1.58
11
MA11-129
359.0
365.0
6.0
4.63
22
MA11-130
226.0
227.0
1.0
13.15
11
MA11-130
259.0
263.0
4.0
4.60
12
MA11-130
353.0
355.0
2.0
10.61
12
MA11-132
198.0
199.0
1.0
15.55
11
MA11-132
326.5
328.0
1.5
8.64
3
MA11-134
187.0
207.0
20.0
1.01
16
table continues…
60
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
From
(m)
To
(m)
Length
(m)
Au
(g/t)
Lode
MA11-134
284.0
288.0
4.0
2.39
17
MA11-134
336.0
340.0
4.0
4.70
17
MA11-134
343.0
348.0
5.0
4.75
17
MA11-135
298.0
304.0
6.0
10.65
12
MA11-135
323.0
324.0
1.0
29.80
12
MA11-136
218.0
255.0
37.0
2.10
16
MA11-136
267.0
276.0
9.0
1.68
16
MA11-136
281.0
296.0
15.0
0.93
16
MA11-136
336.0
340.0
4.0
4.74
16
MA11-137
356.0
357.0
1.0
12.15
12
MA11-138
268.0
298.0
30.0
1.38
16
MA11-138
323.0
342.0
19.0
1.08
16
MA11-138
401.0
405.0
4.0
2.38
17
MA11-141
225.0
231.0
6.0
2.28
16
MA11-141
243.0
251.0
8.0
2.72
16
MA11-141
255.0
265.0
10.0
1.98
16
MA11-141
273.0
278.0
5.0
1.95
16
MA11-143
306.0
312.0
6.0
3.96
16
MA11-145
173.0
175.0
2.0
12.49
11
MA11-149
281.0
282.0
1.0
13.10
12
MA11-149
297.0
316.0
19.0
3.38
12
MA11-149
337.0
338.0
1.0
11.75
12
MA11-151
340.0
341.0
1.0
84.20
12
MA11-154
170.0
173.0
3.0
3.74
13
MA11-154
408.0
409.0
1.0
11.10
12
MA11-154
431.0
434.0
3.0
3.39
12
MA11-154
447.0
451.0
4.0
4.14
12
MA11-156
174.0
175.0
1.0
17.55
11
MA11-156
310.0
311.0
1.0
10.60
12
MA11-160
79.0
81.0
2.0
9.78
12
MA11-160
123.0
125.0
2.0
7.93
22
MA11-160
153.0
155.0
2.0
8.46
22
MA11-160
166.5
170.0
3.5
5.56
22
MA11-161
118.0
121.0
3.0
8.35
12
MA11-161
222.0
223.0
1.0
30.60
12
MA11-162
180.0
184.5
4.5
5.37
19
MA11-164
339.0
363.0
24.0
1.98
16
MA11-164
368.0
374.0
6.0
2.28
16
MA11-164
377.0
389.0
12.0
2.59
16
MA11-167
312.0
348.0
36.0
1.86
16
MA11-167
470.0
472.0
2.0
19.49
17
table continues…
61
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
From
(m)
To
(m)
Length
(m)
Au
(g/t)
Lode
MA11-168
84.0
96.0
12.0
1.94
28
MA11-168
146.0
167.0
21.0
1.70
29
MA11-173
136.0
139.0
3.0
10.87
30
MA11-173
142.0
147.0
5.0
2.75
30
MA11-177
228.0
230.0
2.0
16.32
16
MA11-177
259.0
275.0
16.0
1.56
16
MA11-177
290.0
293.0
3.0
3.85
16
MA11-177
298.5
342.0
43.5
3.68
16
MA11-177
401.0
423.0
22.0
1.12
16
MA11-177
453.0
460.0
7.0
1.80
17
MA11-178
256.0
260.0
4.0
2.78
12
MA11-178
393.0
399.0
6.0
1.87
-
MA11-179
11.4
20.0
8.6
2.08
26
MA11-183
362.0
386.0
24.0
1.67
16
MA11-183
431.0
452.0
21.0
1.60
16
MA11-183
483.3
486.0
2.7.0
5.37
16
MA11-188
212.0
214.0
2.0
20.88
-
MA11-191
429.0
438.0
9.0
1.42
16
MA11-191
459.0
465.0
6.0
3.80
16
MA11-191
671.0
672.0
1.0
21.40
17
MA11-198
350.0
371.0
21.0
1.69
12
MA11-203
69.0
70.0
1.0
17.40
11
MA11-203
185.0
187.0
2.0
5.23
12
MA11-203
255.0
256.0
1.0
17.15
12
MA11-205
83.0
94.0
11.0
9.45
32
MA11-205
102.0
103.0
1.0
10.30
32
MA11-205
274.0
276.0
2.0
4.80
12
MA11-205
336.6
343.0
6.4
3.14
22
MA11-207
72.0
73.0
1.0
14.75
11
MA11-207
264.0
268.0
4.0
4.06
12
MA12-210
47.0
50.0
3.0
11.48
11
MA12-212
73.0
74.0
1.0
12.15
11
MA12-212
157.0
160.0
3.0
6.50
12
MA12-212
165.0
166.0
1.0
13.90
12
MA12-212
218.0
221.0
3.0
3.98
22
MA12-213
160.0
162.0
2.0
8.23
12
MA12-213
183.0
184.0
1.0
10.50
22
MA12-218
228.0
229.0
1.0
14.90
12
MA12-218
252.0
257.0
5.0
14.18
22
MA12-224
218.0
219.0
1.0
15.50
12
MA12-225
45.0
56.0
11.0
1.95
19
table continues…
62
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
From
(m)
To
(m)
Length
(m)
Au
(g/t)
Lode
MA12-225
150.0
154.0
4.0
4.73
21
MA12-228
115.0
118.0
3.0
6.40
11
MA12-228
190.0
192.0
2.0
5.68
12
MA12-229
67.0
75.0
8.0
1.26
19
MA12-230
215.0
217.0
2.0
10.25
12
MA12-234
114.0
124.0
10.0
1.20
19
MA12-235
332.0
335.0
3.0
6.48
22
MA12-236
240.0
247.5
7.5
10.45
16
MA12-236
252.0
254.0
2.0
9.92
16
MA12-236
270.0
273.0
3.0
5.06
16
MA12-237
258.0
266.0
8.0
1.64
12
MA12-239
96.0
102.0
6.0
1.99
19
MA12-240
231.0
237.0
6.0
2.44
16
MA12-240
246.0
251.0
5.0
10.48
16
MA12-240
264.5
275.0
10.5
4.47
16
MA12-243
234.0
235.0
1.0
15.10
34
MA12-243
311.0
314.0
3.0
5.96
14
MA12-245
27.0
28.0
1.0
78.90
17
MA12-245
75.0
76.0
1.0
26.90
17
MA12-245
123.0
124.0
1.0
21.40
27
MA12-246
100.0
109.0
9.0
3.28
16
MA12-246
142.0
157.0
15.0
4.25
16
MA12-246
202.0
206.0
4.0
12.25
16
MA12-247
40.0
45.0
5.0
3.14
15
MA12-248
85.0
90.0
5.0
2.18
15
MA12-248
107.0
119.0
12.0
2.35
15
MA12-249
105.0
108.0
3.0
3.30
32
MA12-249
285.0
287.0
2.0
6.19
12
MA12-249
360.4
363.0
2.6
5.93
22
MA12-250
109.0
133.0
24.0
1.11
16
MA12-250
136.0
144.0
8.0
1.95
16
MA12-250
161.0
166.0
5.0
2.23
16
MA12-250
380.0
382.0
2.0
13.26
11
MA12-250
467.0
477.0
10.0
1.98
11
MA12-251
58.0
63.0
5.0
3.05
28
MA12-252
19.0
30.0
11.0
6.11
11
MA12-252
44.0
45.0
1.0
14.40
11
MA12-254
99.0
106.0
7.0
8.19
12
MA12-256
108.0
133.0
25.0
1.66
16
MA12-256
161.0
184.0
23.0
2.38
16
MA12-256
352.0
356.0
4.0
3.02
15
table continues…
63
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
From
(m)
To
(m)
Length
(m)
Au
(g/t)
Lode
MA12-257
26.0
37.0
11.0
17.01
12
MA12-257
47.0
55.0
8.0
1.86
12
MA12-257
67.0
74.0
7.0
1.59
12
MA12-257
109.0
110.0
1.0
11.60
24
MA12-258
321.0
327.0
6.0
2.00
12
MA12-258
350.0
351.0
1.0
18.40
22
MA12-259
13.0
18.0
5.0
2.71
12
MA12-261
167.0
172.0
5.0
4.00
17
MA12-263
30.0
40.0
10.0
1.12
12
MA12-263
68.0
71.4
3.4
6.00
12
MA12-264
104.0
113.0
9.0
2.18
16
MA12-264
120.0
180.0
60.0
2.23
16
MA12-264
342.0
343.0
1.0
17.80
15
MA12-264
350.0
361.0
11.0
1.66
15
MA12-265
49.0
56.0
7.0
2.20
16
MA12-265
152.0
160.0
8.0
3.57
17
MA12-266
79.0
88.0
9.0
1.33
12
MA12-267
214.0
222.0
8.0
1.80
12
MA12-268
93.9
114.0
20.1
1.56
16
MA12-269
32.0
41.0
9.0
1.83
11
MA12-269
91.0
99.0
8.0
1.84
12
MA12-269
123.0
132.0
9.0
1.21
12
MA12-269
170.0
176.0
6.0
2.33
12
MA12-270
27.0
28.0
1.0
13.60
16
MA12-270
61.0
62.0
1.0
19.20
16
MA12-271
175.0
176.0
1.0
132.00
17
MA12-272
307.0
310.0
3.0
3.60
12
MA12-272
350.0
351.0
1.0
34.20
22
MA12-273
22.0
28.0
6.0
3.65
11
MA12-273
138.0
139.0
1.0
17.50
12
MA12-275
129.0
135.0
6.0
2.56
12
MA12-277
103.0
104.0
1.0
14.50
16
MA12-279
80.0
81.0
1.0
18.90
16
MA12-279
176.0
177.0
1.0
19.00
17
MA12-279
220.0
227.0
7.0
1.67
15
MA12-280
109.0
117.0
8.0
6.44
14
MA12-281
126.0
129.0
3.0
16.76
15
MA12-281
217.0
221.0
4.0
11.72
28
MA12-284
55.0
57.0
2.0
7.93
15
MA12-284
162.0
164.0
2.0
16.24
3
MA12-285
312.0
317.0
5.0
2.93
12
table continues…
64
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
From
(m)
To
(m)
Length
(m)
Au
(g/t)
Lode
MA12-286
17.0
29.0
12.0
1.49
13
MA12-288
129.0
132.0
3.0
4.23
15
MA12-290
237.0
238.0
1.0
32.40
11
MA12-290
250.0
255.0
5.0
4.63
11
MA12-290
292.0
336.0
44.0
2.23
11
MA12-290
343.0
351.0
8.0
1.80
11
MA12-290
414.0
417.0
3.0
16.21
12
MA12-290
442.0
446.0
4.0
9.62
12
MA12-292
120.0
129.0
9.0
4.97
11
MA12-292
182.0
200.0
18.0
3.54
11
MA12-293
71.0
72.0
1.0
29.90
17
MA12-293
105.0
108.0
3.0
3.73
17
MA12-293
147.0
150.0
3.0
3.39
17
MA12-293
374.0
377.0
3.0
5.87
28
MA12-294
88.0
94.0
6.0
4.13
13
MA12-294
163.0
172.0
9.0
6.25
11
MA12-294
303.0
306.0
3.0
5.05
11
MA12-295
251.0
261.0
10.0
4.24
11
MA12-297
202.0
204.0
2.0
14.06
28
MA12-298
95.0
96.0
1.0
14.90
12
MA12-298
102.0
104.0
2.0
5.17
12
MA12-298
221.0
229.0
8.0
1.79
24
MA12-299
98.0
106.0
8.0
31.00
12
MA12-301
95.0
96.0
1.0
22.5
12
MA12-302
179.0
183.0
4.0
5.65
24
MA12-305
54.0
57.0
3.0
4.53
11
MA12-305
62.0
69.0
7.0
3.34
11
MA12-308
27.0
29.0
2.0
15.83
11
MA12-308
50.0
53.0
3.0
3.42
12
MA12-311
26.0
31.0
5.0
4.16
11
MA12-311
61.0
66.0
5.0
2.45
11
MA12-312
42.0
53.8
11.8
4.42
-
MA12-313
2.0
3.0
1.0
39.90
11
MA12-313
83.0
86.0
3.0
4.47
12
MA12-315
174.0
175.0
1.0
15.50
11
MA12-317
25.0
35.0
10.0
3.38
11
MA12-320
47.0
54.0
7.0
2.08
12
MA12-322
126.0
127.0
1.0
33.40
12
MA12-323
10.0
21.0
11.0
1.54
12
MA12-323
24.0
34.0
10.0
1.31
12
MA12-324
48.0
56.0
8.0
3.16
12
table continues…
65
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hole ID
From
(m)
To
(m)
Length
(m)
Au
(g/t)
Lode
MA12-325
27.0
33.0
6.0
4.38
12
MA12-326
205.0
210.0
5.0
15.00
11
MA12-326
216.0
224.0
8.0
2.68
11
MA12-327
75.0
79.0
4.0
3.73
11
MA12-327
95.0
101.0
6.0
2.52
11
MA12-327
142.0
143.0
1.0
74.50
12
MA12-330
85.0
87.0
2.0
5.59
12
MA12-330
180.0
182.6
2.6
6.21
-
MA12-330
202.0
204.0
2.0
9.05
-
MA12-332
13.0
14.0
1.0
21.00
12
MA12-332
29.0
38.0
9.0
1.64
12
MA12-333
154.0
168.0
14.0
3.49
11
MA12-334
15.0
32.0
17.0
2.81
11
MA12-335
66.0
67.0
1.0
28.10
22
MA12-336
62.0
63.0
1.0
46.20
12
MA12-337
75.0
77.0
2.0
12.70
11
MA12-338
128.0
149.0
21.0
3.01
12
MA12-339
60.0
61.0
1.0
20.80
12
MA12-339
99.0
127.0
28.0
1.23
12
MA12-340
87.0
89.0
2.0
6.79
13
MA12-340
180.0
209.0
29.0
6.05
11
MA12-340
259.0
260.0
1.0
39.60
11
MA12-341
24.0
26.0
2.0
5.98
12
MA12-343
184.0
202.0
18.0
2.07
12
MA12-343
254.0
255.0
1.0
28.10
22
MA12-344
10.0
21.0
11.0
5.06
11
MA12-347
171.0
175.0
4.0
6.11
12
MA12-347
267.0
269.0
2.0
11.93
-
MA12-347
422.0
425.0
3.0
5.49
25
MA12-349
91.0
94.0
3.0
4.37
11
MA12-350
61.0
65.0
4.0
4.70
13
MA12-351
65.0
66.0
1.0
19.00
12
MA12-351
73.0
74.0
1.0
21.20
12
MA12-352
41.0
51.0
10.0
2.23
14
MA12-352
173.0
194.0
21.0
1.47
13
MA12-352
242.0
251.0
9.0
1.94
11
MA12-352
296.0
300.0
4.0
3.78
11
MA12-352
426.0
430.0
4.0
21.86
11
MA12-353
440.0
441.0
1.0
33.80
12
MA12-353
461.0
462.0
1.0
80.80
12
MA12-355
195.0
213.0
18.0
1.81
12
table continues…
66
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
10.1.7
Hole ID
From
(m)
To
(m)
Length
(m)
Au
(g/t)
Lode
MA12-358
354.0
363.0
9.0
3.05
11
MA12-358
537.0
539.0
2.0
12.35
12
MA12-358
556.0
562.0
6.0
1.87
12
MA12-360
98.0
102.0
4.0
3.98
11
MA12-366
125.0
129.1
4.1
4.33
12
GT-11-01
57.0
60.0
3.0
3.82
23
GT-11-09
87.0
88.0
1.0
13.05
22
GT-11-09
163.0
164.0
1.0
10.55
22
GT-12-05
151.0
152.0
1.0
30.90
26
C O R E R EC OV ER Y
Tetra Tech believes that there are no recovery factors that would materially affect the
sampling. The rock mass is quite typically tight and recovery information indicates
better than 98% core recovery in the granodiorite stocks. Core recoveries only seem
to be affected when old underground workings are encountered.
10.1.8
S AM PL IN G M ET H OD
The following is a description of the sampling method’s employed by Prodigy in
2011/2012:
•
Core that was to be sampled was first logged by the geologist, and a cut line
is drawn on the core, perpendicular to the dominant structural fabric.
•
The core was cut into halves by a Prodigy employee, using a table-fed
circular diamond saw; one-half of the core sent for analysis and the
remaining half was labeled and retained in core boxes for future reference.
Core cutting was supervised by the geologist logging core who ensured that
a sequence of blanks, duplicates and standards was followed.
•
Sampling occurred at 1 m intervals, or less to account for lithological
contacts.
•
Zones of low core recovery were noted, but rare due to the competency of
the rock mass
•
The half core selected for analysis was always taken from one side; without
regard for the presence of visible gold, in order to reduce sampling bias.
•
The sampled half core was placed into clean, new transparent plastic
sample bags with one pre-printed sample tag (since laboratories use an
internal numbering system). The sample bags were rolled and sealed with
staples.
67
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
10.1.9
•
A metal tag was stapled in the core tray along with the meterage
represented by the sample. The sample tag was also printed on the
remaining sample card in the booklets, and once all tags have been used
the booklets are stored in the core logging facility.
•
The sealed sample bags were placed in rice sacks in sequence for shipment
to the laboratory. A copy of the sample submittal form was returned to the
project geologist/project manager after being stamped by the receiving
laboratory. Samples were transported by Prodigy personnel or collected by
the laboratories directly from the project. If a third party transportation
company was used, the number or rice sacks was accounted for and sealed
with a numbered sealing tie. The number of bags was controlled by the
laboratory to ensure they were not tampered with.
•
The 2011/2012 drilling programs were conducted under the supervision of
Prodigy employees. Employees of Prodigy who undertook the samplings
were supervised at all times by company QPs and this is normal industry
practice. Mr. Tom Pollock, P.Geo. was the QP for drilling and sampling
conducted in this period.
•
QA/QC is discussed in more detail in Section 11.0.
DRILL PLAN
Figure 10.7 provides the locations of Prodigy drillholes that were drilled between
September 2011 and June 2012. It also depicts the major lithologies found at the
Property.
68
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Diabase Dyke
Meta-Volcanics
Lovell Lake Stock
69
Plan View of 2011/2012 Drill Collars at the Property
Webb Lake Stock
North
Figure 10.7
500m
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
11.0 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES,
AND SECURITY
11.1
SAMPLE PREPARATION
The sealed sample bags were placed in rice sacks in sequence for shipment to the
laboratory. A copy of the sample submittal form was returned to the project
geologist/project manager after being stamped by the receiving laboratory. Samples
were transported by Prodigy personnel or collected by the laboratories directly from
the project. If a third-party transportation company was used, the number or rice
sacks was accounted for and sealed with a numbered sealing tie. The number of
bags was controlled by the laboratory to ensure they were not tampered with.
11.2
LABORATORY FACILITIES
11.2.1
A C T I V AT I ON L A B OR AT O R I ES L T D .
The Activation Laboratories Ltd. (Actlabs) are located in Thunder Bay, Ontario. The
following is an extract from the company website (www.actlabs.com):
Actlabs’ Quality System is accredited to international quality standards through the
International Organization for Standardization /International Electrotechnical
Commission (ISO/IEC) 17025 (ISO/IEC 17025 includes ISO 9001 and ISO 9002
specifications) with CAN-P-1758 (Forensics), CAN-P-1579 (Mineral Analysis) and
CAN-P-1585 (Environmental) for specific registered tests by the SCC. The
accreditation program includes ongoing audits which verify the QA system and all
applicable registered test methods. We are also accredited by the National
Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) program and Health
Canada.
11.2.2
ALS C H EM EX
ALS Chemex is a division of ALS Laboratory Group, itself owned by the publically
listed company, Campbell Brothers Limited (in Australia).
ALS Chemex has a sample preparation facility located in, Timmins, Ontario.
Prepared samples were shipped from Timmins to the ALS Chemex laboratory in Val
D’Or, Québec. ALS Chemex laboratories are registered to ISO 9001:2008
certification, and analytical facilities have received ISO 17025 accreditations for
specific laboratory procedures.
ALS Chemex commenced processing of Prodigy’s Magino samples on June 21,
2010.
70
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
11.3
SAMPLE SPLITTING
11.3.1
A C T I V AT I ON L A B OR AT O R I ES
AND
REDUCTION
Upon arrival at Actlabs in Thunder Bay, Ontario, rock samples are entered into the
Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS). Samples are then dried, if
necessary, and jaw crushed to approximately eight mesh. A 250 to 500 g subsample
is taken and pulverized to 90% at 150 mesh, and then matted to ensure
homogeneity. Silica sand is used to clean out the pulverizing dishes between each
sample to prevent cross-contamination. The homogenized sample is then sent to the
fire assay laboratory or the wet chemistry laboratory, depending on the analysis
required.
Between September 2011 and April 2012, Actlabs processed some 18,170 drill core
samples from the Property.
11.3.2
ALS C H EM EX
Upon arrival at the Timmins sample preparation facility, rock samples were entered
into the LIMS. The average sample weight of split drill core is 2.2 kg. After drying,
samples are crushed using a terminator jaw crusher such that 70% of material
passes 2 mm. Crushed material is then riffle split and 1 kg is pulverized such that
85% of material passes 75 An extra 1 kg pulp is created for every tenth sample,
for check analysis.
Between September 2011 and April 2012, ALS Chemex laboratories processed
some 29,616 drill core samples from the Property.
11.4
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
11.4.1
A C T I V AT I ON L A B OR AT O R I ES
Gold analysis is by way of fire assay of a 30 or 50 g pulp subsample. All samples
are first subject to procedure 1A2-50 which uses atomic absorption spectroscopy
(AAS). Any sample that returns grades higher than 1 g/t gold is re-assayed with a
gravimetric finish, as per procedure 1A3.
Details below are sourced from Actlabs with some minor edits to correct spelling,
grammar and consistency.
F I R E A S SA Y -G R A V I M E T R I C P R OC ED U R E
F OR
O R E G R A D E S A M PL E S
A sample size of 10 to 50 g can be used but the routine 30 g size is applied for
rock pulps, soils or sediments (exploration samples). The sample is mixed with
fire assay fluxes (borax, soda ash, silica, and litharge); the flux is free in silver.
The mixture is placed in a fire clay crucible, the mixture is preheated at 850°C,
intermediate 950°C and finish 1,060°C, the entire fusion process should last 60
71
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
minutes. The crucibles are then removed from the assay furnace and the
molten slag (lighter material) is carefully poured from the crucible into a mould,
leaving a lead button at the base of the mould. The lead button is then placed in
a preheated cupel which absorbs the lead when cupelled at 950°C to recover
the silver (doré bead) + gold. The cupellation of bead is controlled in the final
point by the volatile of the silver. The silver bead is weighed and silver value
calculated from the weight. Gold is separated from the silver in the doré bead
by parting with nitric acid. The gold (roasting) flake remaining is weighed
gravimetrically on a micro balance for gold. The detection limit for this
procedure is 30 ppb.
G OL D F I R E A S S A Y
WITH
AA F I N I S H
F OR
L OW
TO
M E D I U M G R A D E S A M PL E S
The method involves fire assay collection followed by cupellation, dissolution of
the precious metal prill and a pre-concentration solvent extraction step. The
final determination is by flame AAS, providing a detection limit of 5 ppb.
11.4.2
ALS C H EM EX
Gold analysis is by way of fire assay of a 30 or 50 g pulp subsample. All samples
are first subject to procedure Au-AA23 which uses AAS. Any sample that returns
grades higher than 1 g/t gold is re-assayed with a gravimetric finish, as per
procedure Au-GRA21. Mineralized material grade samples also had an inductively
coupled plasma (ICP) finish as opposed to an AAS finish on occasions, especially for
high grade material.
Details below are sourced from ALS Chemex with some minor edits to correct
spelling, grammar and consistency.
F I R E A S SA Y -G R A V I M E T R I C P R OC ED U R E
F OR
O R E G R A D E S A M PL E S
Gravimetric methods involve the use of balances to weigh the element of
interest, either in its pure elemental form or as a chemical compound. One of
the most common gravimetric determinations is that of gold and silver following
a fire assay fusion cupellation. The precious metal bead that remains following
cupellation is an alloy of silver and gold. Weighing this bead will give the total
weight of silver and gold. If the bead is then treated with dilute nitric acid, it is
possible to remove the silver quantitatively. The residual mass consists of pure
gold which can then be weighed separately, thus allowing the silver to be
determined by difference. The balances used for this purpose are
microbalances capable of weighing to the nearest microgram (one millionth of a
gram). Analysis of bullion for gold, silver and base metal content is another
common procedure. The classical technique for determining gold is the fire
assay fusion followed by cupellation and a gravimetric finish (method codes AuGRA21, Au-GRA22 and Au-GRA24). This is still the preferred procedure for the
analysis of high grade ores. There is no upper quantitative limit applied for
72
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
these procedures but clients should note that the detection limit is significantly
higher than for procedures that use spectroscopic measurement techniques.
F I R E A S SA Y -A T OM I C A B SO R PT I ON P R OC ED U R E S
G R A D E O R E S A M PL E S
F OR
L OW
TO
MEDIUM
The method involves fire assay collection followed by cupellation, dissolution of
the precious metal prill and a pre-concentration solvent extraction step. The
final determination is by flame AAS, providing a detection limit of 5 ppb.
11.4.3
C O AR SE R E JE C T
AN D
PULP STORAGE
Prodigy has the coarse rejects and pulps returned to the property for storage.
Currently this material is stored on pallets outside at the old mine site. The exposure
to the elements has been degrading the shrink wrap and the rice bags. Numerous
samples bags were observed to have broken down and mixed the contents, thus
destroying the integrity of the sample. Every effort should be made to place the
pallets weather proof containers, such as a warehouse or sea containers. Prodigy
has informed Tetra Tech that sea containers are in place and that the pulps are
being transferred to them.
11.5
PRODIGY QUALITY CONTROL
FOR
2011/2012
Prodigy collates and monitors all quality control data through Maxwell Geosciences
Data Shed and QA/QC Reporter software on a batch basis.
Prodigy procedures ensured that there was at least one blank and one
standard/CRM entered in every batch of 20 samples
Results for blank and standard assays are presented below. Prodigy has advised
Tetra Tech that re-assays have been requested for instances where CRM assays fall
outside of the control lines.
11.5.1
B LAN K
Blank is not a certified blank material but has control limit of 50 ppb. Prodigy’s
internal and external testing of this material has satisfied them that it is an acceptable
blank material.
This blank material was inserted at a rate of about 1 in 20 samples. A total of 212
blank samples were inserted during the drilling campaign which represents about
0.31% of the sample database for this period (Figure 11.1).
Only two of the blank material values failed which represents about 1% of all the
blank samples submitted for this period (September 2011 to June 2012). Although
any failure during a QA/QC program should be investigated, the sizes of the failures
were not enough to be of a serious concern for the purposes of this report.
73
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Tetra Tech recommends that:
•
Prodigy continues to use and monitor blank samples and flag any serious
concerns with the laboratory staff, as soon as a failure is observed.
•
if possible, insert blank samples after known mineralized zones.
Figure 11.1
11.5.2
Blank QA/QC Chart
B LAN K CDN-BL-8
The blank CDN-BL-8 is a certified blank material and has a recommended value of
less than 10 ppb, with a failure limit of 30 ppb.
CDN-BL-8 samples were inserted during the drilling campaign which represents
about 0.48% of the sample database for this period (Figure 11.2)
None of the CDN-BL-8 material values failed for samples submitted during this
period (September 2011 to June 2012).
•
•
if possible, -insert blank samples after known mineralized zones.
74
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
•
if possible, replace the CDN-BL-08 with some locally sourced material that
can be sufficiently used as a blank. The purpose of the blank QA/QC
sample is to monitor the preparation laboratory crushing and pulverizing for
cross contamination. A commercial blank is already crushed and pulverized.
Figure 11.2
11.5.3
CDN-BL-08 QA/QC Chart
B LAN K CDN-BL-9
This blank material was inserted at a rate of about 1 in 20 samples. A total of 1,485
Only four of the CDN-BL-9 material values failed which represents about 0.27% of all
the CDN-BL-9 samples submitted for this period (September 2011 to June 2012).
Although any failure during a QA/QC program should be investigated, the sizes of
the failures were not enough to be of a serious concern for the purposes of this
report.
•
75
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
•
if possible, insert blank samples after known mineralized zones
•
Figure 11.3
11.5.4
B LAN K CDN-BL-10
Only one of the CDN-BL-10 material values failed which represents about 0.5% of all
the CDN-BL-10 samples submitted for this period (September 2011 to June 2012).
Although any failure during a QA/QC program should be investigated, the sizes of
the failures were not enough to be of a serious concern for the purposes of this
report.
76
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
•
•
•
Figure 11.4
11.5.5
D I AB AS E (C O AR S E ) B L A N K
Diabase blank is not a certified blank material but has control limit of 50 ppb. This
blank material was inserted at a rate of about 1 in 20 samples. A total of 1,143
diabase blank samples were inserted during the drilling campaign which represents
about 1.68% of the sample database for this period (Figure 11.5).
Sixty-two of the diabase blank material values failed which represents about 5% of all
the blank samples submitted for this period (September 2011 to June 2012). Prodigy
acknowledged issues with the coarse diabase blank material that was used during
this period, and confirmed that it was not a good blank material as it evidently
contains some anomalous grades for gold. However in the light of the good
77
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
performances of the other blanks used for this period, Tetra Tech is willing to accept
the overall database for the purposes of this report.
•
•
Figure 11.5
11.5.6
Diabase Blank QA/QC Chart
L OW G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-P2
This low grade CRM CDN-GS-P2 has an accepted value of 0.214 g/t with a between
lab’s 95th confidence of 0.02 g/t. The mean grade of the QA/QC samples submitted
was 0.214 g/t, equal to the accepted value and within the confidence level set for
between labs. There were no failures within the QA/QC sample suite submitted
(Figure 11.6).
Overall there is some variance in the sample results throughout the campaign, which
is evident in the moving range chart.
78
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.6
11.5.7
CDN-GS-P2 Process Performance Chart
L OW G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-P2A
This low grade CRM CDN-GS-P2A has an accepted value of 0.229 g/t with a
between lab’s 95th confidence of 0.03 g/t. The mean grade of the QA/QC samples
submitted was 0.241 g/t, just slightly higher than the accepted value and well within
the confidence level set for between labs. There was only one failure within the
QA/QC sample suite submitted (sample #D143900). This failure should be
examined further to determine the potential source of the error (Figure 11.7). It
should be noted that it was not a significant failure.
Overall there is a lot of variance in the sample results throughout the campaign,
which is evident in the moving range chart.
79
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.7
11.5.8
CDN-GS-P2A Process Performance Chart
L OW G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-P3B
This low grade CRM CDN-GS-P3B has an accepted value of 0.409 g/t with a
the confidence level set for between labs. There was only three failures within the
QA/QC sample suite submitted (sample #D131800, #D159400, and #D152080).
These failures should be examined further to determine the potential source of the
error (Figure 11.8). It seems likely that samples D131800 and D159400 were
actually a blank material not this CRM.
Overall there is not a lot of variance in the sample results throughout the campaign,
80
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.8
11.5.9
CDN-GS-P3B Process Performance Chart
L OW G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-P4A
This low grade CRM CDN-GS-P4A has an accepted value of 0.438 g/t with a
between lab’s 95th confidence of 0.032g/t. The mean grade of the QA/QC samples
the confidence level set for between labs. There was only two failures within the
QA/QC sample suite submitted (sample #D125630, and #D128010). These failures
should be examined further to determine the potential source of the error (Figure
11.9).
Overall there is quite a lot of variance in the sample results throughout the campaign,
81
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.9
CDN-GS-P4A Process Performance Chart
11.5.10 L OW G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-P7E
This low grade CRM CDN-GS-P7E has an accepted value of 0.766 g/t with a
the confidence level set for between labs. There were six failures within the QA/QC
sample suite submitted (sample #D109928, #D111440, #D112720, #D118990,
#D101650, and #D160250). These failures should be examined further to determine
the potential source of the error (Figure 11.10).
82
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.10
CDN-GS-P7E Process Performance Chart
11.5.11 A VER A G E G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-1G
This average grade CRM CDN-GS-1G has an accepted value of 1.14 g/t with a
the confidence level set for between labs. There was only one failure within the
QA/QC sample suite submitted (sample #D097640). This failure should be
examined further to determine the potential source of the error (Figure 11.11).
83
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.11
CDN-GS-1G Process Performance Chart
11.5.12 A VER A G E G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-1H
This average grade CRM CDN-GS-1H has an accepted value of 0.972 g/t with a
the confidence level set for between labs. There was no failures within the QA/QC
sample suite submitted (Figure 11.12).
84
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.12
CDN-GS-1H Process Performance Chart
11.5.13 A VER A G E G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-1J
This average grade CRM CDN-GS-1J has an accepted value of 0.946 g/t with a
85
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.13
CDN-GS-1J Process Performance Chart
11.5.14 A VER A G E G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-1P5C
the confidence level set for between labs. There were no failures within the QA/QC
86
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.14
CDN-GS-1P5C Process Performance Chart
11.5.15 A VER A G E G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-1P5D
submitted was 1.451 g/t, just slightly lower than the accepted value and well within
the confidence level set for between labs. There were five failures within the QA/QC
sample suite submitted (sample #D109010, #D122940, #D127900, #D128390, and
#D157530). These failures should be examined further to determine the potential
source of the error (Figure 11.15). It seems likely that D127900 was actually a blank
material not a standard CRM.
87
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.15
CDN-GS-1P5D Process Performance Chart
11.5.16 M OD E R AT E G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-2G
This moderate grade CRM CDN-GS-2G has an accepted value of 2.26 g/t with a
the confidence level set for between labs. There were no failures within the QA/QC
88
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.16
11.5.17 M OD E R AT E G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-2J
This moderate grade CRM CDN-GS-2J has an accepted value of 2.36 g/t with a
the confidence level set for between labs. There was one failure within the QA/QC
sample suite submitted (sample #D124540). This failure should be examined further
to determine the potential source of the error (Figure 11.17).
89
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.17
11.5.18 M OD E R AT E G R AD E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-2K
This moderate grade CRM CDN-GS-2K has an accepted value of 1.97 g/t with a
the confidence level set for between labs. There were two failures within the QA/QC
sample suite submitted (sample #D130870 and #D148910). These failures should
be examined further to determine the potential source of the error (Figure 11.18).
90
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.18
CDN-GS-2K Process Performance Chart
11.5.19 H I GH G R A D E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-3G
This high grade CRM CDN-GS-3G has an accepted value of 2.59 g/t with a between
was 2.60 g/t, just slightly higher than the accepted value and well within the
confidence level set for between labs. There was no failures within the QA/QC
Overall there is low variance in the sample results throughout the campaign, which is
evident in the moving range chart.
91
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.19
11.5.20 H I GH G R A D E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-3H
This high grade CRM CDN-GS-3H has an accepted value of 3.04 g/t with a between
was 2.978 g/t, just slightly lower than the accepted value and well within the
confidence level set for between labs. There was nine failures within the QA/QC
#D101910, #D100880, #D128550, #D134090 and #876790). These failures should
be examined further to determine the potential source of the error (Figure 11.20). It
seems likely that sample #D098519 and #876790 were actually blank material and
not standard CRM material. Prodigy informed Tetra Tech that sample #D128550 is
apparently a pass as it was determined by gravimetric means.
Overall there is minor variance in the sample results throughout the campaign, which
92
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.20
CDN-GS-3H Process Performance Chart
11.5.21 H I GH G R A D E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-3J
This high grade CRM CDN-GS-3J has an accepted value of 2.71 g/t with a between
confidence level set for between labs. There was six failures within the QA/QC
#D135610 and #D150340). These failures should be examined further to determine
the potential source of the error (Figure 11.21). It seems likely that sample
#D123180 and #D103500 were actually blank material and not standard CRM
material.
93
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.21
11.5.22 H I GH G R A D E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-4B
This high grade CRM CDN-GS-4B has an accepted value of 3.77 g/t with a between
was 3.801 g/t, just slightly higher than the accepted value and well within the
confidence level set for between labs. There was two failures within the QA/QC
sample suite submitted (sample # 134520 and #D160230). These failures should be
examined further to determine the potential source of the error (Figure 11.22). It
seems likely that sample #D134520 was actually blank material and not standard
CRM material.
94
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.22
CDN-GS-4B Process Performance Chart
11.5.23 H I GH G R A D E S T AN D AR D CDN-GS-4D
This high grade CRM CDN-GS-4D has an accepted value of 3.81 g/t with a between
confidence level set for between labs. There was eight failures within the QA/QC
#D124520, #D123190, #D127510 and #D100760). These failures should be
examined further to determine the potential source of the error (Figure 11.23).
95
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.23
CDN-GS-4D Process Performance Chart
11.5.24 U L T R A H I GH G R A D E S T A N D AR D CDN-GS-7B
This ultra-high grade CRM CDN-GS-7B has an accepted value of 6.42 g/t with a
the confidence level set for between labs. There was one failure within the QA/QC
sample suite submitted (sample #D131460). This failure should be examined further
to determine the potential source of the error (Figure 11.24).
96
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.24
11.5.25 U L T R A H I GH G R A D E S T A N D AR D CDN-GS-14A
This ultra-high grade CRM CDN-GS-14A has an accepted value of 14.90 g/t with a
97
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.25
CDN-GS-14A Process Performance Chart
11.5.26 U L T R A H I GH G R A D E S T A N D AR D CDN-GS-30B
This ultra-high grade CRM CDN-GS-30B has an accepted value of 29.21 g/t with a
98
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 11.26
11.5.27 QA/QC O P P OR T U N I T I ES
There are several opportunities for Prodigy to improve on the QA/QC program
currently in place:
•
Currently three commercial blanks are being used. The commercial blanks
will not test for contamination in the preparation facility as the material is
already crushed and pulverized. Replace commercial blanks with a material
that required crushing and pulverizing and is devoid of gold mineralization.
•
Reduce the number of difference standards being used in the program.
Currently five low grade, five average grade, three moderate grade, five high
grade and three ultra-high grade samples for a total of 21 different standards
are being used. Best to select a minimum of three and a maximum of five
standards that best represent the deposit grade distribution. Typically one
standards at or around the expected cut-off grade, one average grade
standard and one high grade that would represent material in the 90th
percentile.
•
Ensure that the standards being used have a similar rock matrix as the
mineralization being checked. Noticed that at least two of the standards
were generated from material sourced from Nevada Basin and Range
deposits and one standard was sourced from an oxide deposit. The
different rock matrix will be digested differently than the Magino host rock,
which could skew the result.
99
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
•
Prodigy should investigate the possibility of generating their own standard
from the stockpiles located on surface. The rock matrix is identical and can
result in a more cost effective method.
11.5.28 QP O P I N I ON
The author is satisfied that the sample preparation, security and analytical
procedures are adequate for the purposes of this report. Despite some variability
outside the standard limits, Tetra Tech is satisfied that there is no significant bias in
the laboratory analysis.
100
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
12.0 DATA VERIFICATION
Tetra Tech carried out several internal validations of the diamond drillhole data
against the original drill logs and assay certificates. The validation of assay files
against the certificates was carried out on 172 of the holes drilled by Prodigy
between September 2011 and June 2012, which equates to 71% of the holes drilled
in this period and 14% of the database provided as a whole. For all the 1,193 assay
records checked that were greater than 2 g/t there was a 100% match between the
database records and the certificates. Data verification was also completed on collar
coordinates, end-of-hole depths, down-hole survey measurements, from and to
intervals, measurements of assay sampling intervals, and gold grades for about 35%
of the database provided, and no major issues were found.
In August 2012, Tetra Tech carried out rigorous validation of the pre-1999 surface
drillholes and underground drillholes (greater than 50 m), to enable them to be
included in this resource estimate. A minimum of 10% of these drillholes were
checked for collar co-ordinates, end-of-hole depths, down-hole survey
and gold grades. Error rates were generally within acceptable parameters.
When the data tables were imported into Vulcan™ v.8.1.0 which has its own error
checking routines there was some overlapping interval issues in the assay and
lithology tables, but these were corrected at the time of importing the data with fixes
in most cases provided by Prodigy personnel.
Mr. Todd McCracken, P.Geo., Principal Geologist with Tetra Tech visited the
Property, from May 8 to 9, 2012. Mr. McCracken was accompanied by Mr. Michael
Simpson, P.Geo. with Prodigy. Mr. McCracken examined the Project setting,
reviewed numerous drill collar sites, geological logs, and assay certificates and drill
core from the storage facility.
Tetra Tech was able to observe the core handling, logging and sampling procedures
being done by Prodigy and concludes that the procedures meet industry standards.
Tetra Tech confirmed the locations of five surface boreholes collars during the site
visit. Tetra Tech collected the collar locations using a Garmin GPSMAP 60Cx
handheld GPS unit. All collar locations were located within the acceptable error limit
of the GPS unit (Table 12.1).
101
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Table 12.1
Drill Collar Validation
Prodigy
Tetra Tech
Elevation
(m)
Elevation
(m)
Borehole
ID
Northing
MA11-075
5351266
689002
402
5351269
689006
401
MA11-110
5351294
689035
400
5351299
689035
395
MA11-113
5351286
689079
398
5351289
689076
394
GT-12-10
5350971
689082
387
5350972
689088
415
Easting
Northing
Easting
Eleven independent samples of mineralized course rejects were collected for check
assaying representing different styles of mineralization and different zone within the
deposit. The samples were bagged, sealed on-site and transported personally by
Mr. McCracken to Tetra Tech’s Sudbury office. On arrival at the office, the bag was
opened for verification purposes, resealed and personally delivered to the ALS
Chemex preparation facility in Sudbury, Ontario. The pulps are then sent by courier
to the ALS Chemex laboratory facility in Vancouver, British Columbia, which is
accredited to ISO/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 17025, for
independent assaying. The samples were analyzed for gold, using analysis
packages Au-GRAV22 (50 g fire assay, with gravimetric finish) (Table 12.2). The
coarse rejects were used in place of quarter core in order to avoid the potential of
coarse gold skewing the results. In addition samples were selected in a manner to
avoid samples with observed visible gold.
Table 12.2
Drill Core Validation
Prodigy
Tetra Tech
Borehole
ID
Interval
Au
(g/t)
Sample
No.
Au
(g/t)
MA11-141
309-310
0.374
J350900
0.337
MA11-167
504-505
0.217
J350901
0.015
MA11-163
240-241
0.199
J350902
0.164
MA11-163
241-242
0.197
J350903
0.205
MA11-163
242-243
0.110
J350904
0.109
MA11-163
245-246
0.133
J350905
0.128
CDN-BL-10
-
<0.005
J350906
<0.005
MA11-203
319-320
1.050
J350907
0.916
MA11-203
320-321
1.095
J350908
0.577
CDN-GS-2K
-
1.970
J350909
1.980
MA11-230
321-322
1.245
J350910
1.345
Tetra Tech believes the sampling practices of Prodigy meets current industry
standards. Tetra Tech also believes that the sample database provided by Prodigy
and validated by Tetra Tech is suitable to support mineral resource estimation.
102
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
13.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND
METALLURGICAL TESTING
Historical and current metallurgical test work programs have been carried out for the
Property. Below is a list of the reports from these test programs.
•
Lakefield Research Limited (Lakefield); “An Investigation of The Recovery of
Gold from Magino Project Samples – October 1997”
•
Kappes, Cassiday & Associates (KCA); “Magino Project Report of
Metallurgical Tests – January 1999”
•
G&T Metallurgical Services Limited (G&T); “Gravity Concentration/Cyanide
Leaching on Variability Samples from the Magino Deposit – September
2011”
•
Starkey & Associates Inc. (Starkey); “Magino Project SAGDesign
Comminution Analysis and Mill Design – October 2011”.
The Lakefield, KCA, Starkey, and G&T September 2011 test programs were
undertaken prior to the review by Tetra Tech and the following sections summarize
the data presented in each of these test reports. A test program is presently in
progress at G&T and the results will be reported in the forthcoming prefeasibility
study.
13.1
LAKEFIELD RESEARCH – OCTOBER 1997
Lakefield had been asked to complete a metallurgical test program in support of a
prefeasibility study being carried out by BLM for Golden Goose. The study proposed
a 2.6 t/a open pit mine and a leach plant. The Lakefield work tested gravity
separation, cyanidation, and heap leaching. Drill core and bulk samples were
selected by BLM for this test work and were deemed by BLM to be representative of
the future operations. The head assays for the different composites are presented in
Table 13.1.
Table 13.1
Lakefield Research (1997) – Head Assays
Composite
Au*
(g/t)
Au**
(g/t)
Ag
(g/t)
S
(%)
1
1.37
1.15
<0.5
0.29
2
0.96
0.82
<0.5
0.19
Source: Lakefield (1997)
Notes: *Average of pulp and metallic assay
**Average calculated gold head assays (excluding heap leach tests)
103
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
The Bond Work Index (BWI) tests were completed and an average BWI of
12.7 kWh/t was determined. The gravity separation work by Lakefield showed
moderate gold recoveries for the samples tested. Table 13.2 is a tabulation of the
gravity separation results from Lakefield. The tests were carried out on two
composites at similar grind size which were subjected to a laboratory sized Knelson
concentrator. The Knelson concentrate was then cleaned on a Mozley mineral
separator. Composite 1 was believed to be a more representative sample and gave
a gravity recovery of 24% gold, while 55.8% was recovered from the Composite 2
sample.
Table 13.2
Gravity Separation Test Results
Test
No.
Composite
-74 µm
(%)
Product
Weight
(%)
Assay
(g/t Au)
Distribution
(% Au)
G1
1
72
Mozley Conc
Mozley Tail +105 μm
Mozley Tail -105 μm
Knelson Conc
Knelson Tail
Head (calc)
0.016
0.059
0.88
0.95
99.05
100.00
1636
206
29.8
67.6
0.44
1.08
24.0
11.3
24.1
59.4
40.6
100.0
G2
2
54
Mozley Conc
Mozley Tail +105 μm
Mozley Tail -105 μm
Knelson Conc
Knelson Tail
Head (calc)
0.051
0.28
0.63
0.96
99.04
100.00
781
10.5
21.1
58.7
0.16
0.72
55.8
4.1
18.5
78.3
21.7
100.0
The test work also encompassed gold cyanidation. Bottle roll leach tests of 48 hour
duration were used to determine the effect of the fineness of grind on the gold
recovery. The tests were performed at 33% solids. The test results are shown in
Table 13.3.
Table 13.3
Cyanidation Results
Reagent
Consumption
(kg/t)
Extraction
(%, Au)
NaCN
Lime
24 h
48 h
Residue
(g/t Au)
Head
(g/t Au)
Test
No.
Composite
-74 µm
(%)
NaCN
(g/L)
CN1
1
84
1.0
0.30
0.48
85
97.8
0.03
1.34
CN3
1
72
0.5
0.13
0.46
75
92.2
0.08
1.03
CN5
1
60
0.5
0.13
0.50
71
92.6
0.07
0.95
CN2
2
84
1.0
0.37
0.57
83
92.0
0.06
0.75
CN4
2
72
0.5
0.15
0.48
81
95.6
0.04
0.90
CN6
2
59
0.5
0.14
0.51
77
93.4
0.05
0.76
104
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
The residue gold assays are low which illustrates that the cyanide leach was
effective for both sample composites. The average 48-hour cyanidation gold
recovery for Composite 1 is 94.2% and 93.7% for Composite 2. The gold recovery
for Composite 1 is slightly higher as a result of slightly higher head assays for the
Composite 1 samples tested. The correlation between higher grade and higher gold
recovery can be seen by comparing the individual tests. Based on these tests a
reduction in grind size from 60% to 72% passing 74 μm did not measurably change
the gold recovery or residue assay (i.e. the sample is not very sensitive to grind in
this size range).
Heap leach tests were also carried out using column leach and carbon columns. The
test results are presented in Table 13.4. The column leach tests were carried out on
12 mm and 3.4 mm crush sizes. The 3.4 mm crush size material was agglomerated
using 0.5 kg/t CaO, 20 kg/t cement, and cured for four days.
The column leach work was carried out in 100 mm diameter columns at a pH of 11.
The columns recirculated 1 g/L NaCN solution at 10 L/h/m2. Pregnant solution was
passed through a carbon column and the carbon was removed periodically to be
assayed for gold. The column was run for 42 days and the residue was drained,
washed, screened, and assayed.
There was an inconsistency in the effect of crush size on gold recovery. The results
for Composite 1 do not appear to show any significant increased recovery at the
smaller crush size as would be expected. Composite 2 shows an increase in
recovery with the smaller crush size. Overall, in comparison to the bottle roll tests,
the column leach recoveries are significantly lower, as expected, with the maximum
dissolution observed being about 68%. Reagent consumptions are relatively low for
both cyanide and lime for the bottle roll and column leach tests, namely between 1.0
and 1.4 kg/t for cyanide and 0.5 to 0.6 kg/t for lime.
105
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
1
2
1
2
HL1
HL2
HL3
HL4
-6 mesh
-6 mesh
-12 mm
-12 mm
Feed
Size
0.96
0.98
1.31
1.37
NaCN
Composite
0.59
0.59
0.53
0.46
Lime
Reagent Consumption
(kg/t)
Heap Leach Results
Test
No.
Table 13.4
6.5
6.9
10.0
17.3
1d
20.7
19.1
19.0
27.3
3d
106
35.6
29.8
25.5
36.7
7d
52.1
40.2
35.5
45.8
14 d
59.7
45.4
40.5
51.1
21 d
Recovery
(% Au)
63.3
50.3
43.6
55.2
28 d
66.1
52.9
46.1
58.4
35 d
68.1
55.1
47.9
60.7
42 d
0.21
0.38
0.42
0.28
Residue
(g/t Au)
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
0.71
0.88
0.84
0.75
Head
(g/t Au)
13.2
KAPPES, CASSIDAY & ASSOCIATES – JANUARY 1999
The test report from KCA presented the results for tests performed on NQ drill core
selected by Golden Goose from the Magino site which represented the Mafic
Volcanics and the Granodiorite area. These samples were used for column leach
and bottle roll tests. The Mafic Volcanics average gold head grade was 1.08 g/t
compared with 1.32 g/t for the Granodiorite samples.
The column leach results are presented in Table 13.5. The crush sizes chosen for
these column leach tests were minus 22.4 mm and minus 9.5 mm. The results show
that even at the finer 9.5 mm crushed size, the gold recovery from the column leach
is low with an average of 52.8% The results do however reflect that the finer crush
size does increase the gold recovery. KCA recommended that the laboratory column
leach gold recovery values be reduced by 3 to 5% to model field results. By KCA’s
estimation, the Mafic Volcanics would be assumed to have a field recovery of
approximately 45% gold for the 9.5 mm material and 51% gold for the Granodiorite
material at a crush size of 9.5 mm.
Table 13.5
Summary of Column Leach Test Results
KCA
Sample
No.
KCA
Test
No.
Magino
ID
Crush
Size
(mm)
Days
Leach
Calculated
Head
(g/t Au)
Recovery
(g/t Au)
Recovery
(%)
27088 A
27120
Mafic Volcanics
-22.4
63
0.94
0.35
37.2
27088 B
27123
Mafic Volcanics
-9.5
63
1.60
0.79
49.5
27089 B
27126
Granodiorite
-22.4
63
1.72
0.56
32.5
27088 C
27129
Granodiorite
-9.5
63
1.41
0.79
56.0
-
-
Average
-22.4
63
-
-
34.9
-
-
Average
-9.5
63
-
-
52.8
Source: KCA (1999)
The results from the bottle roll tests are presented below in Table 13.6. Samples
crushed to minus 9.5 mm and another sample at a grind size of 0.150 mm (150 μm)
were subjected to the bottle roll tests. The average gold recovery at a grind size of
150 μm was 95%. Both samples appeared to be amenable to the agitated cyanide
leaching modeled by the bottle roll tests. The 9.5 mm material had a very low
recovery which is possibly due to less liberated gold at that particle size and the low
residence time in the cyanide.
Closer analysis of the tails residue and head grades revealed that further size
reduction to a finer grind size would most likely liberate the gold further which should
be easily recovered by agitated cyanide leaching. The gold recovery by agitated
cyanidation is significantly higher than the gold recovery by column leach.
107
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Table 13.6
Summary of Bottle Leach Test Results
KCA
Sample
No.
KCA
Test
No.
Crush
Size
(mm)
Magino
ID
Calculated
Head
(g/t Au)
Average
Tail
(g/t Au)
Metal
Extracted
(% Au)
Days
Leaching
27088
27116 A
Mafic Volcanics
-0.150
0.73
0.05
93.2
2
27088 B
27116 C
Mafic Volcanics
-9.500
0.85
0.54
36.5
4
27089
27116 B
Granodiorite
-0.150
1.57
0.05
96.8
2
27089 C
27185 A
Granodiorite
-9.500
1.61
1.12
30.4
4
-
-
Average
-0.150
-
-
95.0
2
-
-
Average
-9.500
-
-
33.5
4
Source: KCA (1999)
The cyanide and lime consumptions for the bottle roll and column leach test work are
shown in Table 13.7. As seen in the Lakefield work, the average reagent
consumptions for both the bottle roll and column leach test work are low at between
0.3 and 0.6 kg/t for cyanide and 0.5 and 0.7 kg/t for lime.
Table 13.7
KCA
Sample
No.
27088
Summary of Reagent Consumption
Test
Type
KCA
Test
No.
Magino
ID
NaCN
Consumed
(kg/t)
Lime
Consumed
(kg/t)
Bottle
27116 A
Mafic Volcanics
0.49
1.0
27088 B
Bottle
27116 C
Mafic Volcanics
0.12
0.5
27089
Bottle
27116 B
Granodiorite
0.45
0.8
27089 C
Bottle
27185 A
Granodiorite
0.23
0.3
27088 A
Column
27120
Mafic Volcanic
0.60
0.5
27088 B
Column
27123
Mafic Volcanic
0.70
0.5
27089 B
Column
27126
Granodiorite
0.55
0.5
27089 C
Column
27129
Granodiorite
0.54
0.5
-
-
Average Bottle Roll
0.32
0.7
-
-
Average Column Leach
0.60
0.5
Source: KCA (1999)
13.3
G&T METALLURGICAL SERVICES LTD. – SEPTEMBER 2011
G&T completed test work in September 2011 on 20 NQ drill core variability samples
supplied to them by Prodigy. The test work conducted included gravity concentration
and bottle roll leach tests. Gravity concentration tests were conducted using a
laboratory scale Knelson concentrator. The Knelson concentrate was subsequently
hand panned. The pan tailings and the Knelson tailings were combined and
subjected to 48 hour bottle roll tests (cyanidation). The primary grind for all of the
feed for the test work was 80% passing 75 μm with an average gold feed head grade
of 1.0 g/t (ranging from 0.10 to 7.34 g/t). The silver head grades were all below 1 g/t
with the exception of one sample which was 2 g/t. The assayed head grades are
108
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
presented in Table 13.8. Target sodium cyanide concentration for the bottle roll tests
was 250 ppm. The test flowsheet is illustrated below in Figure 13.1.
Figure 13.1
Test Flowsheet
Source: G&T (September 2011)
Table 13.8
Assay Head Grades
Assay (g/t)
Sample
Au
(g/t)
Ag
(g/t)
876501
0.26
0.5
876502
0.07
0.3
876503
4.71
0.5
876504
0.27
0.3
876505
0.68
0.5
876506
0.18
0.4
876507
1.46
0.5
876508
0.19
0.3
876509
1.14
0.7
876510
0.52
0.4
876511
7.34
0.6
876512
0.25
0.2
876513
0.56
0.3
876514
0.90
0.2
876515
1.12
2.0
876516
0.13
0.2
876517
1.30
0.7
876518
0.10
0.5
876519
0.08
0.6
876520
0.13
0.9
The test results from the gravity concentration and the cyanidation are presented in
Table 13.9. The gold head grade values varied considerably. An average 33% of
the gold was concentrated by gravity concentration using the Knelson concentrator
109
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
and panning. The average gravity gold concentrate grade was 115 g/t. The average
overall gold extraction was 92% using gravity separation followed by a 48 h cyanide
leach. The overall average silver recovery was 47%. The average reagent
consumption was very low at 0.02 kg/t of cyanide and 0.67 kg/t for lime.
Table 13.9
Gold Extraction Test Results
Pan
Concentrate
Recovery
Cyanide
Extraction
Overall
Extraction
Feed
Reagent
Consumption
(kg/t)
NaCN
Lime
Test
Sample
Au
(%)
Ag
(%)
Au
(%)
Ag
(%)
Au
(%)
Ag
(%)
Au
(g/t)
1/22
876501
23
4
61
46
70
48
0.26
0.04
0.72
2/23
876502
12
1
58
18
63
19
0.07
<0.01
0.74
3/11
876503
44
3
96
39
98
41
5.20
0.04
0.88
4/24
876504
29
8
94
31
96
37
0.36
0.02
0.68
5/25
876505
20
7
85
63
88
66
0.68
<0.01
0.86
6/26
876506
21
1
88
10
90
11
0.18
0.02
0.46
7/27
876507
27
2
92
56
94
57
1.46
<0.01
0.46
8/28
876508
35
1
91
71
94
71
0.15
0.02
0.56
9/29
876509
22
3
88
35
91
37
1.14
0.02
0.62
10/30
876510
11
1
84
52
86
52
0.52
<0.01
0.76
12/31
876511
34
17
98
97
99
98
5.99
<0.01
0.68
13/32
876512
30
6
94
30
96
34
0.25
<0.01
0.48
14/33
876513
58
13
98
91
99
92
0.56
0.02
0.8
15/34
876514
75
11
94
30
99
38
0.22
<0.01
0.68
16/35
876515
60
30
91
74
96
82
0.81
0.02
0.74
17/36
876516
50
4
80
30
90
33
0.13
0.02
0.84
18/37
876517
44
7
98
56
99
59
1.55
0.02
0.6
19/38
876518
6
1
96
10
97
11
0.10
0.02
0.66
20/39
876519
39
2
95
24
97
25
0.08
0.02
0.66
24/40
876520
20
2
97
22
97
24
0.13
<0.01
0.58
Average
-
33
6
89
44
92
47
0.99
0.02
0.67
13.4
STARKEY & ASSOCIATES INC. – OCTOBER 2011
Four HQ drill core samples were supplied to Starkey in order to complete preliminary
sizing of the comminution circuit. The test results from the work completed by
Process Research Ortech (an accredited SAGDesign testing laboratory) are
summarized below.
Table 13.10 summarizes the results of the “SAGDesign” test work. The design SAG
Power Index (W SAG) was determined to be 11.50 kWh/t (75th percentile mineralized
material hardness – average of two hardest mineralized material samples). The
design BWI was determined to be 15.91 kWh/t (75th percentile mineralized material
110
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
hardness – average of two hardest mineralized material samples). According to
Starkey’s database, the WSAG indicates that the samples were considered hard
mineralized material competency for SAG milling and the BWI was considered
moderate to hard competency for ball mill grinding.
Table 13.10
Summary of SAGDesign Test Work Results and Calculated
Parameters
Project Identification
SAGDesign Test Work Results
Calculated Parameters
Sample
No.
Sample
Description
SG
Solids
3
(g/cm )
Calc WSAG
to 1.7 mm
(kWh/t)
SAG Dis.
Bond BWI
(kWh/t)
Macro/
Micro
Ratio
Calc WBM
to P80
(kWh/t)
Total WT
to P80
(kWh/t)
1
876286
2.64
11.76
16.97
0.69
15.61
27.36
2
876282
2.67
11.15
13.71
0.81
12.61
23.76
3
876283
2.87
10.96
13.73
0.80
12.63
23.59
4
876284
2.86
11.25
14.85
0.76
13.66
24.91
Average
Design Data
2.76
11.28
14.81
0.77
13.63
24.91
2.76
11.50
15.91
0.72
14.63
26.14
Source: Starkey (October 2011)
Table 13.11 presents six case studies which Starkey used to determine the
comminution circuit design. The text in red (i.e. Case 3a) was the selected scenario
for the grinding mill sizing. The mill sizes selected by Starkey were based on a
17,500 t/d throughput. A pebble crusher was also suggested for increasing the
throughput to 20,000 t/d in the future. Starkey advised that the pebble crusher would
not be required for start-up.
The SAG mill size selected was a 10.363 m (34 ft) in diameter and 5.004 m (16.4 ft)
equivalent grinding length. This was calculated to require an 11,600 kW twin pinion
variable speed synchronous motor (5,800 kW per pinion). Two 6.096 m diameter
(20 ft) ball mills which are 8.731 m (27.5 ft) long would also be required, along with
two 5,700 kW single pinion fixed speed motors to drive the ball mills.
The report indicated that the four samples tested were sufficient for a preliminary
sizing of equipment, but a larger representative sample should be used before any
procurement strategies are considered. Hard samples were used in the grinding
studies, to enhance the level of confidence in the comminution analysis.
111
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Quantity
Diam. ID
(ft)
EGL
(ft)
Aspect
Ratio
Drive
(% Crit.)
RPM
Summary of Calculated Mill Sizes and Grinding Equipment
th
Disch. D80
(µm)
Calc. Req.
(kW)
kW
HP
Motor Installed
1
1
SAG Mill
Ball Mill
34.0
24.0
16.9
31.6
2.02
1.32
75
75
9.9
11.9
74
1,700
th
10,715
21,010
10,294
11,900
22,200
10,300
15,958
29,770
13,812
1
2
SAG Mill
Ball Mill
20.0
34.0
26.1
16.9
1.31
2.02
75
75
13.0
9.9
th
74
1,700
21,401
5,343
10,715
22,700
5,400
11,900
30,441
7,241
15,958
1
1
SAG Mill
Ball Mill
24.0
36.0
36.1
16.7
1.50
2.16
75
75
11.9
9.6
74
th
1700
24,011
11,765
12,246
25,400
11,800
13,600
34,061
15,824
18,238
1
2
SAG Mill
Ball Mill
Total Installed Power
0
Crusher
20.0
36.0
29.9
16.7
1.49
2.16
75
75
112
13.0
9.6
74
1700
24,459
6,106
12,246
26,000
6,200
13,600
34,866
8,314
18,238
table continues…
20.0
896.1
20.0
898.1
17.5
784.1
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Case 2b: 20 kt/d SAG mill + 2 ball mills circuit, F80 = 152 mm, T80 = 1,700 µm (base case), 75 percentile mineralized material hardness
0
Crusher
Case 2a: 20 kt/d SAG mill + ball mill circuit, F80 = 152 mm, T80 = 1,700 µm (base case), 75 percentile mineralized material hardness
0
Crusher
17.5
784.1
Feed Rate
(t/h – kt/d)
Case 1b: 17.5 kt/d SAG mill + 2 ball mills circuit, F80 = 152 mm, T80 = 1,700 µm (base case), 75 percentile mineralized material hardness
0
Crusher
Case 1a: 17.5 kt/d SAG mill + ball mill circuit, F80 = 152 mm, T80 = 1,700 µm (base case), 75 percentile mineralized material hardness
Equipment
Table 13.11
Quantity
EGL
(ft)
Aspect
Ratio
Drive
(% Crit.)
th
RPM
Disch. D80
(µm)
Calc. Req.
(kW)
kW
HP
Motor Installed
1
2
SAG Mill
Ball Mill
20.0
34.0
27.5
16.4
1.37
2.07
75
75
13.0
9.9
74
1,000
21,667
5,617
10,432
600
th
23,600
5,700
11,600
805
31,648
7,644
15,556
1
2
SAG Mill
Ball Mill
Source: Starkey (October 2011)
0
Crusher
20.0
34.0
27.5
16.4
1.37
2.07
75
75
113
13.0
9.9
74
2,233
21,666
5,617
10,432
2,300
5,700
11,600
30,843
7,644
15,556
Feed Rate
(t/h – kt/d)
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
17.8
797.4
20.0
896.1
Recommended Design
Case 3b: Calc t/d start-up with 1 SAG mill + 2 ball mills (Case 2a mill sizes), F80 = 152 mm, T80 = 2,233 µm, 75 percentile hardness
1
Crusher
Case 3a: 20 kt/d SABC circuit with 2 ball mills, F80 = 152 mm, T80 = 1,000 µm, 75 percentile mineralized material hardness
Equipment
Diam. ID
(ft)
13.5
G&T METALLURGICAL SERVICES LTD. – 2012
Samples for the current metallurgical test program at G&T were selected by Prodigy
in order to be considered representative of the current open pit scenario. The
metallurgical test program in progress at G&T encompasses the following:
•
comminution tests
•
master composite optimization and variability cyanidation bottle roll leach
tests
•
historical waste rock and historical tailings cyanidation bottle roll leach tests
•
carbon adsorption tests
•
cyanide detoxification
•
acid rock drainage testing of the tailings
•
mineralogical test work
•
twelve column leach tests.
Third party thickener settling tests and vacuum filtration tests are also being carried
out. The metallurgical test program at G&T has not been completed to date and no
results can be presented at this stage. Further details regarding the test program
results will be available in the forthcoming prefeasibility study.
13.6
CONCLUSIONS
Tetra Tech provides the following conclusions:
•
Based on the test results from the three historical leach programs, there
does not appear to be a “preg-robbing” component present in the samples
that were tested.
•
The samples have been taken from the random areas of the deposit
highlighting the Mafic Volcanics and Granodiorite in the selections.
•
The gold extraction by cyanide leaching has centered around 92% gold
recovery for the three historical cyanidation test programs.
114
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
14.0 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES
14.1
SNOWDEN 2011 RESOURCE ESTIMATE
Snowden employed the “vertical cross-section method” supported by OK as the
geostatistical 3D block modelling process to estimate the gold resources within the
Magino deposit (Ross 2011).
The Magino deposit resource estimate was supported by 512 surface DDHs (for a
total of 103,491 m; average length 202 m) and 980 underground DDHs (for a total of
60,345 m, average length 62 m). However due to concerns of sample bias only 484
of the underground DDHs (for a total length of 48,896 m, average length of 100 m)
were used for the estimation process. The geological interpretation was essentially
modelled by Prodigy personnel in Gemcom software on 25 m cross-sections, and
then exported to Vulcan™ for use by Snowden. Wireframes were provided for the
Webb Lake Stock, 17 identified mineralization domains, overburden, internal
synvolcanic felsic and intermediate sills and the late stage diabase dyke. All
wireframes provided were validated by Snowden. No attempt was made at this time
to interpret the Lovell Lake domains or the South meta-volcanic domains. The area
of interest covered 1,350 m parallel to the Goudreau deformation zone. The Webb
Lake Stock granodiorite trends at 075°, where the alteration zones aggregate up to
300 m wide and dip steeply to depths of 600 m. The overburden of fluvio-glacial
material can be up to 30 m thick in parts.
Snowden employed a strategy of 5 m composites, and variography to determine the
optimal estimation parameters. A Vulcan™ block model with cell dimensions of 10 m
(X) 10 m (Y) and 5 m (Z) was coded to reflect the surface topography, base of
overburden, Webb Lake Stock contacts, the late stage diabase dyke, and the 17
domain solids. The model was also depleted for the underground workings too.
Rather than applying a top cut to the outliers a shorter-range search was applied to
any 5 m composites that graded greater than 22 g/t gold. Snowden applied a global
density of 2.72 to all blocks in the model. The spacing of the surface and
underground drilling in combination with a possible whittle pit shell was used to
determine the resource classification. At a cut-off grade of 0.35 g/t gold, Snowden
estimated the Magino resources as follows: Indicated Resources of 67.555 Mt at an
average grade of 1.00 g/t gold and contain 2.18 Moz of gold and Inferred Resources
of 54.242 Mt at an average grade of 0.99 g/t gold and contain 1.72 Moz of gold.
115
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
14.2
TETRA TECH 2012 RESOURCE ESTIMATE
14.2.1
D AT AB A SE
Prodigy maintains all drillhole data in a DATASHED model database. The collars,
survey, lithology, assays, specific gravity (SG), structure and numerous other tables
were exported to CSV format and transferred to Tetra Tech. The original MS Excel®
file was created on March 26, 2011, with updates provided by Prodigy as more assay
results and other data came in, the last updates were received on June 8, 2012.
The Project has been drilled by a total of 1,210 surface and underground DDHs for a
total of 219,734 m. All 1,210 drillholes are within the area of interest and had enough
exploration potential to be included in this resource estimate. All underground holes
less than 50 m were excluded from the database and are not included, as Snowden
demonstrated significant sample bias with these samples (Ross 2011).
All resource estimations were conducted using Vulcan™ v.8.1.0.
Table 14.1 summarizes the number of drillholes used in the resource estimation for
each domain.
Table 14.1
No. of Holes
14.2.2
Drill Data Set
Project
Total
Webb Lake
Stock
Lovell Lake
Stock
South
Metavolcanics
North
Metavolcanics
1,210
1,065
31
267
86
S PEC I F I C G R AV I T Y
A total of 5,358 samples were tested for SG from a total of 369 holes provided in the
database. SGs were determined by Prodigy for most of the lithology’s found at
Magino. Tetra Tech used an SG of 2.72 for the granodiorite stocks and an SG of
2.86 for the mafic metavolcanics, which are the most relevant for the Magino
mineralization for the mineral resource estimate. All the SGs used by Tetra Tech are
summarized in Table 14.2.
The data in the database SG table suggests that SGs were generally determined by
the immersion method.
Tetra Tech recommends that Prodigy continue to collect SG measurements from the
various rock types in order to increase the size of their SG dataset. At a minimum
2% of the Prodigy dataset should have an SG measurement. This would mean that
Prodigy’s current SG dataset should contain a minimum of 3,352 samples.
116
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Table 14.2
Specific Gravity Data
SG in Mineral
Resource
Estimate
Domain
Total
Granodiorite Stocks (WLS/LLS)
3,707
2
2.72
725
1
2.81
Intermediate Metavolcanics
Mafic Metavolcanics
816
0
2.86
Diabase Dyke
103
3
3.01
7
-
2.79
Overburden
14.2.3
Rocktype
Code
E XP L OR AT OR Y D AT A A N AL YS I S
A S SA YS
The four domains which comprise the Webb Lake Stock, Lovell Lake Stock and the
South and North Metavolcanics were sampled by a total of 167,630 assays (Table
14.3). Complete assay information was provided for gold. Figure 14.1 is a histogram
for all raw Magino data, and Figure 14.2 is a log-probability plot for all raw Magino
data.
Table 14.3
Drillhole Assay Statistics (Length-Weighted)
Field
No. of
Samples
Webb Lake Stock
Gold
Lovell Lake Stock
Gold
Zone
Mean
Stand
Deviation
5,365
0.736
15.34
45.1
0.585
1.75
Minimum
Maximum
157,530
0
1,249
0
South Metavolcanics
Gold
7,522
0
166.46
0.572
4.098
North Metavolcanics
Gold
1,329
0
59.4
0.538
2.453
117
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 14.1
Histogram of all Raw Magino Data
Figure 14.2
Log-Probability Plot of all Raw Magino Data
118
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
G R A D E C A P PI N G
Raw assay data was examined to assess the amount of metal that is at risk from
high-grade assays. Histograms and log-probability plots were generated with the
raw data per domain and the disintegration method applied to determine what top cut
should be applied to each domain.
Tetra Tech chose to apply the appropriate capping values determined as a highgrade threshold value per domain with a shortened range, typically half of the
determined variogram’s range, instead of using capped values with the full search
ranges. This seemed to be the most appropriate method considering the amount of
free gold found on the site visit in 10 to 40 cm wide quartz veins, few of which are
likely to be continuous over long distances. Typically, a threshold is applied when a
gold system that contains significant high grade free gold in narrow veins mixed with
low grade disseminated regions such as Magino and Plutonic Gold Mine in Western
Australia, and rather than capping the data, a restricted search is applied to the
higher grade values, so that they have some influence on the estimations, but not
unnecessarily bias the estimations.
Table 14.4 summarizes the threshold values determined per domain. Please note
that this is a table of composited data, and only about 0.1% of samples exceeded the
threshold value, thus demonstrating the minor influence of the high grade samples.
Table 14.4
Grade Capping/Threshold Values
Sample
No.
No. of
Threshold
Samples
Thresh
Grade
Rang
Webb Lake Stock
28,292
28
28.01 to 355.97
28
0.10
Lovell Lake Stock
297
6
4.73 to 7.802
4.5
2.02
South Metavolcanics
1,654
20
8.587 to 44.542
7
1.21
North Metavolcanics
328
5
7.407 to 20.8
6
1.52
Zone
Capping
Value
Capped
(%)
C O M P O SI T E S
Gold assay data was composited at 5 m down-hole intervals honouring the
interpreted geological solids. A 5 m composite length was selected as it corresponds
to the chosen block size in the “z” direction and the likely half of bench size during
mining activities. Table 14.5 summarizes the statistics of the drillholes after capping
and compositing. Figure 14.3 is a histogram for all 5 m composite Magino data, and
Figure 14.4 is a log-probability plot for all 5 m composite Magino data. It is worth
noting that the standard deviations of the composites compared to the raw statistics
are greatly reduced which is not particularly unexpected with 5 m composites
compared to the approximately 1 m composites of the raw data.
119
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Table 14.5
Composite Statistics (Length-Weighted)
Field
No. of
Samples
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Stand
Deviation
Webb Lake Stock
Gold
28,292
0
355.97
0.736
2.962
Lovell Lake Stock
Gold
297
0
7.802
0.585
1.18
South Metavolcanics
Gold
1654
0
44.542
0.572
1.915
North Metavolcanics
Gold
328
0
20.8
0.538
1.827
Zone
Figure 14.3
Histogram of all 5 m Composite Magino Data
120
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 14.4
14.2.4
Log-Probability Plot of all 5 m Composite Magino Data
G E OL O GI C AL I N T ER PR ET AT I ON
Prodigy personnel interpreted all major lithology and mineralization domains on
approximately 25 m sections in Gemcom. Wireframes were provided for the Webb
Lake Stock, Lovell Lake Stock, Intermediate Metavolcanics (north and south), 25
identified mineralization domains, over-burden, internal synvolcanic felsic and
intermediate sills and the late stage diabase dyke. The Webb Lake domain consists
of eight mineralization domains based mostly on grade and perceived structural
orientations, where the southwestern domains were nominally separated from the
northeastern domains which lie to the northeast of the diabase dyke, based mainly
on the variography results. Three mineralization domains were modelled for the
Lovell Lake Stock and ten mineralization zones were modelled for the South
Metavolcanics. In addition, four mineralization domains were modelled for the North
Metavolcanics domain.
Tetra Tech imported these solids into Vulcan™ software and spent much time
validating these solids to ensure no wireframes were overlapping. Mineralization
zones that were to be used as hard boundaries for estimation were also snapped to
drillholes. All solids were subjected to the wireframe validation routines in Vulcan™
software and any problem areas were identified and fixed by Tetra Tech. Table 14.6
tabulates the solids their associated volumes.
The zones of mineralization interpreted for each area were generally contiguous;
however, due to the nature of the mineralization there are portions of the wireframes
that have grades less than 0.2 g/t, yet are still within the mineralizing trend.
121
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
The non-assayed intervals were assigned a value of -9, and these were ignored
during the compositing routine so they would not be used during the estimations.
Tetra Tech believes that non-assayed material should not be assigned a zero value
as this does not reflect the true value of the material.
122
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Zone
688509
688855
689025
689023
689031
689116
WebbLakeStock_SW.00t
WebbLakeStock_NESW.00t
WebbLakeStock_NEW.00t
WebbLakeStock_CE.00t
WebbLakeStock_NE.00t
WebbLakeStock_NES.00t
WebbLakeStock_SE.00t
687442
687352
LovellLakeMin.00t
LovellLakeMin1.00t
LovellLakeMin2.00t
688903
688594
688599
689274
689209
689156
SthMetaVolcs_V71.00t
SthMetaVolcs_VR0.00t
688146
SthMetaVolcs_SWV.00t
South Metavolcanics
687226
687229
LovellLakeStock.00t
Lovell Lake Stock
687973
687900
WebbLakeStock_C.00t
687504
WebbLakeStock.00t
Minimum
X
Wireframe Statistics
Webb Lake Stock
Table 14.6
689536
689429
689546
689113
688913
689040
688612
687545
687536
687575
687696
689260
689532
689546
689433
689073
689121
689153
689157
689456
Maximum
X
5351172
5351214
5351275
5350882
5350925
5350999
5350711
5350915
5350977
5350885
5350863
5351124
5351271
5351364
5351185
5351290
5351077
5350660
5350792
5350138
Minimum
Y
123
5351283
5351288
5351342
5351055
5351025
5351052
5350965
5350998
5351016
5351150
5351124
5351245
5351510
5351626
5351412
5351437
5351394
5351218
5351309
5351680
Maximum
Y
Wireframe Dimensions
-13
-119
14
-308
-87
-178
-118
239
260
204
216
-216
-316
-145
-331
85
-74
-371
-212
-396
Minimum
Z
396
392
391
387
389
315
388
339
367
395
397
196
393
394
394
393
405
397
404
405
Maximum
Z
table continues…
1,536,900.86
736,381.56
728,403.65
4,602,198.54
988,659.31
421,219.71
6,722,216.04
11,688.58
4,644.99
1,382,756.24
3,241,860.62
1,972,859.31
14,091,845.47
15,108,929.52
16,334,929.46
1,486,025.01
13,127,028.48
44,523,095.37
35,125,870.00
245,545,470.57
Volume
3
(m )
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
689376
689033
688555
688808
689044
NthMetaVolcs_NV.00t
NthMetaVolcs_NEVW.00t
NthMetaVolcs_NEV.00t
688165
NthMetaVolcs_NWV.00t
North Metavolcanics
689165
Minimum
X
Zone
689216
689036
689036
688299
689175
689175
689565
Maximum
X
5351436
5351279
5351130
5350938
5351096
5351189
5351120
Minimum
Y
124
5351637
5351457
5351245
5351017
5351168
5351224
5351272
Maximum
Y
Wireframe Dimensions
-53
119
152
176
-111
207
-217
Minimum
Z
390
387
387
381
399
384
398
Maximum
Z
617,978.73
667,202.11
377,372.80
137,871.91
477,136.14
117,874.03
1,599,077.49
Volume
3
(m )
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
14.2.5
S PAT I A L A N AL Y SI S
Using Vulcan™ v.8.1.0 software, variography was completed for gold for all eight
domains, where zones were combined if they fell in the same structural domain.
Down-hole variograms were used to determine the nugget effect and then
correlograms were modelled to determine spatial continuity in the domains. The
nugget effects were typically about 80% of the sill (total variance), which is not
unexpected in this type of deposit, which contains significant free gold in narrow
stock-work veins mixed with lower grade disseminated mineralisation regions. The
anisotropies and search ranges for the domains were typical for this type of deposit.
Table 14.7 summarizes results of the variography.
125
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
57
74
72
92
68
70
67
69
AZ
Gold
North Metavolcanics
Gold
Lovell Lake Stock D3
Gold
Gold
Gold
Gold
South Metavolcanics D2
Gold
Webb Lake Stock NE
South Metavolcanics D1
Gold
VDESC
0
-10
-10
20
-20
25
-5
10
PL
Variography Parameters
Webb Lake Stock SW
Zone
Table 14.7
75
80
-90
54
85
55
85
85
DIP
Major
Major
Major
Major
Major
Major
Major
Major
VAXIS1
Semi
Semi
Semi
Semi
Semi
Semi
Semi
Semi
VAXIS2
126
Minor
Minor
Minor
Minor
Minor
Minor
Minor
Minor
VAXIS3
0.743
0.736
0.736
0.820
0.820
0.820
0.765
0.785
NUGGET
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ST1
75
50
60
45
50
65
75
45
ST1PAR1
50
50
60
45
40
33
75
40
ST1PAR2
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
5
8
5
5
5
12
19
14
ST1PAR3
14.2.6
R E S OU R C E B L OC K M OD E L
Individual block models were established in Vulcan™ v.8.1.0 software for all 25 zones
using one parent model as the origin. The model was not rotated.
Drillhole spacing is variable with the majority of the drilling spaced at about 35 m. A
block size of 10 m x 10 m x 5 m was selected in order to accommodate the
moderately spaced drilling, and the nature of the mostly broad zones of
mineralization.
Sub-celling of the block model on 1 m x 1 m x 1 m spacing allows the parent block to
be split 10, 10 and 5 times respectively in each direction to more accurately fill the
volume of the wireframes, and thus more accurately estimate the tonnes in the
resource.
Table 14.8 summarizes details of the parent block model.
Table 14.8
Parent Block Model
Origin
Cell Size
Block Extents
X Origin
Y Origin
Z Origin
XINC
YINC
ZINC
NX
NY
NZ
Parent
686800
5350130
-400
10
10
5
2800
2190
810
Sub-blocks
686800
5350130
-400
1
1
1
2800
2190
810
The interpolations for gold for the 25 zones were completed using the estimation
methods: NN, ID2, and OK. The estimations were designed for two passes. In each
pass a minimum and maximum number of samples were required, in this case 2 and
32 respectively for the first pass and 1 and 32 for the second passes, as well as a
maximum number of samples, in this case 3 from a borehole in order to satisfy the
estimation criteria. Different search distances were also required to be satisfied
based on the variography data. Any blocks estimated in the first pass were assigned
an Indicated Resource category and any blocks estimated in the second pass were
assigned an Inferred Resource category. Discretizations were set at 4 m x 4 m x 4 m
for all estimations and domains.
QKNA or neighbourhood search parameter optimization, was employed to optimize;
the minimum and maximum number of samples used per block estimate per domain,
as well as the discretization values. Test models were estimated with “slope of
regression” and “kriging variance” values closely monitored in order to determine
which parameters lead to the most accurate estimation. Table 14.9 and Table 14.10
summarizes the interpolation criteria for the 25 zones.
14.2.7
R E S OU R C E M OD EL D EP L ET I ON
Prodigy supplied Tetra Tech with wire-frames of the historical underground mine
workings for Magino. Much time was spent by Tetra Tech validating and separating
127
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
the various wire-frames for the underground workings. A script was then executed to
code the various blocks as either mined (1) or not mined (0) for these workings. The
underground workings contained a total resource at a threshold of 0.35 g/t of about
7.2 Mt at 1.51 g/t for 353 koz. This indicates that the grades in the mined out areas
were higher than the average overall model grades. Tetra Tech did include
composites from mined out areas in the estimation process.
Also of note is the fact that the pre-2000 drilling accounts for just over 50% of the
final sample data and has an average overall grade for all domains of 0.89 g/t, while
the post-2000 drilling has an average overall grade for all domains of about 0.54 g/t
all at a 0 g/t cut-off. However the author is satisfied that this has not overly biased
the estimate to any great extent.
14.2.8
B L O C K M OD EL R E GU L AR IS AT I ON
A regularized block model for the August 2012 Magino resource was created on
August 1, 2012 for the purposes of engineering mine designs for the pre-feasibility
study. All blocks were regularized to dimensions of 10 m (X) 10 m (Y) and 5 m (Z).
Only the sub-blocks on the edges of mineralization envelopes were affected by the
re-blocking algorithms. The new regularized blocks parameters were calculated as
follows:
•
Rock type was calculated on a majority basis – meaning that which- ever
rock type was applied in the sub-blocks as a majority was applied to the reblocked block in the same area.
•
Zone code was also calculated on a majority basis.
•
Grade (au_ok) was calculated on a volume and density weighted basis –
which means that any blocks on the edges of the mineralization domains
would have a diluted grade calculated on the weighting by volume and
density of the original sub-blocks used to calculate the grade of the new reblocked block. It should be noted that a 0 g/t grade was applied to any unestimated blocks in the original sub-blocked model, so no default values of 99.0g/t could bias any re-block grade calculations. Hence only re-blocks on
the edges of the mineralization wire-frames could have been diluted out of
contention for later mining concerns. Figure 14.5 illustrates the Vulcan™
method of re-blocking and is taken from the Vulcan Help documentation.
•
Res-cat code was calculated on a majority basis.
•
Density was calculated on a volume weighted basis, similarly to grade.
•
Ox-state (oxidation state) was calculated on a majority basis.
•
Mined was calculated on a majority basis.
128
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 14.5
Regularization
S4
S3
C4
C3
R
C1
C2
S1
Note:
S2
The regularization methods calculate variables using sub-blocks, regular blocks and
common blocks. Common blocks are generated when a regular block intersects subblocks. In Figure 14.5, R indicates the regular block, S the sub-blocks and C the
common blocks. The number of sub-blocks intersected by a regular block is denoted by
NSB (Number of sub-blocks).
129
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Estimation Criteria
Table 14.9
130
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
table continues…
131
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
ID
NN
l32-35ind
l32-35ind
NN
l22ind
OK
ID
l32-35ind
OK
l22ind
l23-31ind
l22ind
ID
NN
l23-31ind
NN
l21ind
OK
ID
l23-31ind
OK
NN
l20ind
l21ind
ID
l21ind
OK
l20ind
l19ind
l20ind
ID
NN
l19ind
NN
l15-18ind
OK
ID
l19ind
OK
l11-14ind
l15-18ind
ID
NN
l11-14ind
l15-18ind
OK
SMETHOD
l11-14ind
SREFNUM
Search Criteria
North
Metavolcanics
South
Metavolcanics
D2
South
Metavolcanics
D1
Lovell Lake
Stock D3
Lovell Lake
Stock D2
Lovell Lake
Stock D1
Webb Lake
Stock NE
Webb Lake
Stock SW
Zone
Table 14.10
75
75
75
50
50
50
60
60
60
45
45
45
50
50
50
65
65
65
75
75
75
90
90
90
SDIST_MAJ
50
50
50
50
50
50
60
60
60
45
45
45
40
40
40
33
33
33
75
75
75
80
80
80
SDIST2_SMAJ
132
5
5
5
8
8
8
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
12
12
12
19
19
19
14
14
14
SDIST_MINOR
57
57
57
74
74
74
72
72
72
92
92
92
68
68
68
70
70
70
67
67
67
69
69
69
SAZIMUTH
0
0
0
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
20
20
20
-20
-20
-20
25
25
25
-5
-5
-5
10
10
10
SPLUNGE
75
75
75
80
80
80
-90
-90
-90
54
54
54
85
85
85
53
53
53
85
85
85
85
85
85
SDIP
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
MAXHOLES
table continues…
MAXSAMP
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
MINSAMP
OK
ID
NN
l32-35inf
l32-35inf
l22inf
l32-35inf
ID
NN
l22inf
NN
l23-31inf
OK
ID
l22inf
OK
l23-31inf
l21inf
l23-31inf
ID
NN
l21inf
NN
l20inf
OK
ID
l21inf
OK
l19inf
l20inf
ID
NN
l19inf
l20inf
OK
l15-18inf
l19inf
ID
NN
l15-18inf
NN
l11-14inf
OK
ID
l15-18inf
OK
l11-14inf
SMETHOD
l11-14inf
SREFNUM
North
Metavolcanics
South
Metavolcanics
D2
South
Metavolcanics
D1
Lovell Lake
Stock D3
Lovell Lake
Stock D2
Lovell Lake
Stock D1
Webb Lake
Stock NE
Webb Lake
Stock SW
Zone
150
150
150
100
100
100
120
120
120
90
90
90
100
100
100
130
130
130
150
150
150
180
180
180
SDIST_MAJ
100
100
100
100
100
100
120
120
120
90
90
90
80
80
80
66
66
66
150
150
150
160
160
160
SDIST2_SMAJ
133
7
7
7
8
8
8
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
12
12
12
19
19
19
14
14
14
SDIST_MINOR
57
57
57
74
74
74
72
72
72
92
92
92
68
68
68
70
70
70
67
67
67
69
69
69
SAZIMUTH
0
0
0
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
20
20
20
-20
-20
-20
25
25
25
-5
-5
-5
10
10
10
SPLUNGE
75
75
75
80
80
80
-90
-90
-90
54
54
54
85
85
85
53
53
53
85
85
85
85
85
85
SDIP
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
1
32
32
MAXSAMP
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINSAMP
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
MAXHOLES
14.2.9
R E S OU R C E C L AS SI F I C A T I ON
Several factors are considered in the definition of a resource classification:
•
NI 43-101 requirements
•
CIM guidelines
•
authors experience with Archean lode gold deposits
•
spatial continuity based on variography of the assays within the drillholes.
No environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socioeconomic, marketing or other
relevant issues are known to Tetra Tech that may affect the estimate of mineral
resources. Mineral reserves can only be estimated on the basis of an economic
evaluation that is used in a PFS or a feasibility study of a mineral project.
14.2.10 M IN ER AL R ES OU R C E T AB U L AT I ON
The resource reported as of September 2012 has been tabulated in terms of a gold cut-off grade.
The Mineral Resources for the four domains at the Magino deposit are tabulated in Table 14.11 to
Note:
Previously mined material not included. Base case figures are in bold and shaded grey.
Table 14.15 for the Indicated and Inferred Resources respectively. The resources
are tabulated using various cut-off grades for gold up to an upper bound of greater
than 1.3 g/t gold.
Table 14.11
Total Class
Indicated
Inferred
Note:
Webb Lake Stock Domain Tonnes and Grade
OK Cut-off
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
0.2
277,696,690
0.72
6,428,270
0.3
231,298,240
0.81
6,023,490
0.35
207,268,820
0.87
5,797,550
0.4
185,518,430
0.92
5,487,390
0.5
148,310,710
1.04
4,959,030
0.6
118,956,860
1.16
4,436,480
0.7
95,491,200
1.29
3,960,450
1.0
51,157,010
1.69
2,779,600
1.3
29,186,290
2.11
1,979,940
0.2
12,032,320
0.60
232,110
0.3
8,998,570
0.71
205,410
0.35
7,803,620
0.77
193,190
0.4
6,765,080
0.84
182,700
0.5
5,188,180
0.95
158,460
0.6
4,103,980
1.06
139,860
0.7
3,163,310
1.18
120,010
1.0
1,574,300
1.55
78,450
1.3
910,290
1.85
54,140
134
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Table 14.12
Total Class
Indicated
Inferred
Note:
Total Class
Indicated
Note:
OK Cut-off
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
0.2
2,744,900
0.64
56,480
0.3
2,193,970
0.73
51,490
0.35
1,880,830
0.80
48,380
0.4
1,617,680
0.87
45,250
0.5
1,216,920
1.01
39,520
0.6
910,660
1.17
34,260
0.7
725,300
1.30
30,310
1.0
458,810
1.58
23,310
1.3
312,430
1.78
17,880
3,210
0.2
255,720
0.39
0.3
163,180
0.47
2,470
0.35
123,370
0.52
2,060
0.4
91,970
0.57
1,680
0.5
56,540
0.64
1,160
0.6
15,560
0.93
460
0.7
8,100
1.20
310
1.0
5,130
1.45
240
1.3
1,870
1.79
110
Table 14.13
Inferred
Lovell Lake Stock Domain Tonnes and Grade
South Metavolcanics Domain Tonnes and Grade
OK Cut-off
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
0.2
19,090,560
0.65
398,950
0.3
14,430,600
0.78
361,880
0.35
12,514,080
0.85
341,990
0.4
11,171,130
0.91
326,840
0.5
8,877,510
1.03
293,980
0.6
7,127,520
1.14
261,240
0.7
5,754,690
1.26
233,120
1.0
3,025,290
1.65
160,490
1.3
1,701,970
2.05
112,170
0.2
8,440,690
0.66
179,110
0.3
6,514,180
0.78
163,360
0.35
5,757,820
0.85
157,350
0.4
4,954,610
0.92
146,550
0.5
3,715,480
1.08
129,010
0.6
2,852,790
1.24
113,730
0.7
2,238,110
1.40
100,740
1.0
1,209,730
1.91
74,290
1.3
774,010
2.32
57,730
135
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Table 14.14
Total Class
Indicated
Inferred
Note:
Total Class
Indicated
Note:
OK Cut-off
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
0.2
2,659,210
0.71
60,700
0.3
1,983,340
0.87
55,480
0.35
1,816,060
0.92
53,720
0.4
1,590,060
1.00
51,120
0.5
1,275,950
1.14
46,770
0.6
1,139,540
1.21
44,330
0.7
998,950
1.29
41,430
1.0
665,020
1.51
32,280
1.3
325,560
1.88
19,670
4,150
0.2
358,760
0.36
0.3
141,100
0.54
2,450
0.35
124,600
0.56
2,240
0.4
108,090
0.59
2,050
0.5
61,050
0.70
1,370
0.6
33,770
0.82
890
0.7
20,120
0.93
600
1.0
5,610
1.17
210
1.3
1,860
1.34
80
Table 14.15
Inferred
North Meta Volcanics Domain Tonnes and Grade
Magino Deposit Tonnes and Grade
OK Cut-off
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
0.2
302,191,360
0.71
6,898,130
0.3
249,906,150
0.81
6,508,080
0.35
223,479,790
0.87
6,250,990
0.4
199,897,300
0.92
5,912,700
0.5
159,681,100
1.04
5,339,220
0.6
128,134,590
1.16
4,778,760
0.7
102,970,140
1.29
4,270,630
1.0
55,306,140
1.69
3,005,050
1.3
31,526,260
2.10
2,128,540
0.2
21,087,510
0.62
420,350
0.3
15,817,030
0.74
376,310
0.35
13,809,410
0.80
355,190
0.4
11,919,740
0.87
333,410
0.5
9,021,260
1.00
290,040
0.6
7,006,100
1.13
254,530
0.7
5,429,660
1.27
221,700
1.0
2,794,780
1.71
153,650
1.3
1,688,040
2.06
111,800
136
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Based on the results of estimation of similar greenstone gold projects located in the
provinces of Ontario and Quebec, a 0.35 g/t gold cut-off was used to tabulate the
total within the various categories.
Tetra Tech and Prodigy have determined that it is most appropriate to report the
mineral resource unconstrained by a pit-shell, to fully reflect the deep potential typical
of shear-zone-hosted gold deposits. As a result, the mineral resource reported
below is greater than the mineral resource disclosed in Prodigy's press release dated
August 20, 2012. The cut-off applied is based on the following parameters:
•
operating cost of $1.80/t at 50,000 t/d
•
gold price of US$1,388/tr oz
•
US$ to Cdn$ conversion of 1.003
•
gold recovery of 94.5%.
Table 14.16 summarizes the resource estimate at the 0.35 g/t gold cut-off.
Table 14.16
Magino Resource Estimate, September 2012
Tonnes
Au
(g/t)
Au
(oz)
Webb Lake Stock
207,268,820
0.87
5,797,550
Lovell Lake Stock
1,880,830
0.80
48,380
South Metavolcanics
12,514,080
0.85
341,990
North Metavolcanics
1,816,060
0.92
53,720
223,479,790
0.87
6,250,990
7,803,620
0.77
193,190
Class
Domain
Indicated
Total
Inferred
Webb Lake Stock
Lovell Lake Stock
South Metavolcanics
North Metavolcanics
Total
Note:
123,370
0.52
2,060
5,757,820
0.85
157,350
124,600
0.56
2,240
13,809,410
0.80
355,190
OK method at 0.35 g/t cut-off does not include previously mined material.
14.2.11 V ALI D AT I ON
The Magino deposit gold grade models were validated by three methods:
•
Visual comparison of colour-coded block model grades with borehole grades
on section and plan.
•
Comparisons of the global mean block grades for the OK, ID2, NN, and
composites.
•
Swath plots comparing OK grades with ID2 and NN estimates.
137
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
V I S U A L C O M PA R I SO N
The visual comparisons of block model grades with composite/borehole grades for
each of the 60 zones show a reasonable correlation between the values. No
significant discrepancies were apparent from the sections and plans reviewed, yet
grade smoothing is apparent (Figure 14.6 and Figure 14.7).
Figure 14.6
Note:
Cross Section
Oblique section looking northeast at approximately 5,351,250N.
138
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
At 330 mRL.
Plan View of Magino
Note:
Figure 14.7
139
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
G L OB A L C O M PA R S I O N
The global block model statistics for the OK model were compared to the global ID2
and NN model values as well as the composite drillhole data. Table 14.17 shows
this comparison of the global estimates for the three estimation method calculations.
In general, there is agreement between the OK models, the ID2 model and the NN
model. Larger discrepancies are reflected as a result of lower drill density in some
portions of the model. There is a degree of smoothing apparent when compared to
the diamond drilling statistics. Block estimate comparisons were made using all
blocks at a 0 g/t cut-off.
Table 14.17
Global Mean Statistics
DDH
Composite
OK
Tonnes
Webb Lake Stock
0.736
Lovell Lake Stock
0.585
South Metavolcanics
North Metavolcanics
Domain
OK
Grade
ID
Tonnes
ID
Grade
NN
Tonnes
378,945,067
0.613
3,820,209
0.506
0.572
48,662,881
0.538
5,104,421
378,945,067
0.612
378,945,067
0.611
3,820,209
0.511
3,820,209
0.527
0.415
48,662,881
0.421
48,662,881
0.432
0.441
5,104,421
0.461
5,104,421
0.486
S W A T H P L OT S C OM P A R I S O N
Swath plots were generated for gold for northings, eastings and elevations
respectively, at 10 m intervals for eastings, 10 m intervals for northings and 5 m
intervals for elevations. These plots are comparing ID2 with OK estimations, and NN
with OK estimations, as illustrated in Figure 14.8 and Figure 14.9. The swath plots
show that in general the OK, ID2 and NN estimations compare quite favourably.
140
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
NN
Grade
Figure 14.8
2
Swath Plots for Gold OK versus ID Estimates
141
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Figure 14.9
Swath Plots for Gold OK versus NN Estimates
142
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
14.2.12 M OD E L P AR AM ET E R D I F F ER E N C E S
There are several parameters that differentiate the 2012 Tetra Tech model from the
2011 Snowden block model. The primary differences are tabulated in Table 14.18.
Table 14.18
Model Parameter Differences
2012 Tetra Tech Model
2011 Snowden Model
1,210
996
No – threshold applied (28 g/t etal)
No – threshold applied (22 g/t)
5.0 m
5.0 m
US$1,388/oz
Cdn$1,500/oz
25 domains
17 domains
Specific Gravity
Variable per domain(2.72-2.86)
2.72 Globally
Estimation Method
OK with NN and ID validation
Number of Drillholes
Grade Capping
Composite Length
Gold Pricing
Number of Mineralized Zones
2
OK
There has been a substantial amount of new drilling completed since the Snowden
model was created with the intention of increasing the size of the mineral resource.
In addition, the different modelling parameters, would lead to a change in the
resource tonnes being stated.
When similar cut-off grade parameters used in the 2011 Snowden model are applied
against the 2012 Tetra Tech OK model, comparable grades are registered (Table 14.19).
Table 14.19
Comparable Grades
2012 Tetra Tech
OK Model
2011 Snowden
OK Model
Difference
(%)
Change
(%)
Tonnes
Grade
Tonnes
Grade
Tonnes
Grade
Tonnes
Grade
Indicated at
0.35 g/t cut-off
223,479,790
0.87
67,555,000
1.00
155,924,790
-0.13
231
-13
Inferred at
0.35 g/t cut-off
13,809,410
0.80
54,242,000
0.99
-40,432,590
-0.19
-75
-19
This would indicate that: 1) the Snowden model was valid at the time it was created,
and 2) the additional drillholes placed into the deposit, while expanding the resource,
the grades intersected remain consistent with grades reported in earlier drill
programs. Although the grades are variable within drillholes, the grades have a
lower variability within the entire zone. This would lead to the understanding that
there is little potential to identify a higher-grade (greater than 2 g/t) core within the
deposit. However there is the strong potential to define a greater than 1.2 g/t domain
which could be employed for a starter pit scenario in the future.
Going forward, all future resource estimates on the Magino deposit should be
completed by the OK methodology with ID2 and NN methods only being used to
compare global results for validation purposes.
143
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
15.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES
There are no material properties adjacent to the Property that is the subject of the
current technical report.
144
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
16.0 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND
INFORMATION
In 2011, Prodigy Gold retained Tetra Tech (the main contractor), Snowden, Golder
Associates and EBA to complete a NI 43-101 PEA and technical report on the
Project, with a minimum 7.3 Mt/a open pit mine. Prodigy intends to disclose a PFS in
2013. The PFS will incorporate the mineral resource disclosed in the current report,
together with a new mine plan and capital cost and operating cost estimates.
145
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
17.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS
Based on the review of the available information and observations made during the
site visit, Tetra Tech concludes the following, in no particular order of perceived
importance:
•
The Magino deposit is currently held 100% by Prodigy.
•
The mineralization model used for the Property is analogous to orogenic
gold occurrences related to longitudinal shear zones (greenstone-hosted
quartz-carbonate vein deposit). Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein
deposits are a subtype of lode-gold deposits (Poulsen et al. 2000). They
correspond to structurally controlled, complex epigenetic deposits hosted in
deformed metamorphosed terrains (Dubé and Gosselin 2007).
•
Gold mineralization at the Magino Mine occurs primarily within the Webb
Lake and Lovell Lake granodiorite (trondhjemite) stocks. The Webb Lake
and Lovell Lake stocks underwent variable metasomatic alteration during
deformation and gold mineralization (Heather and Arias 1992). Distinct
haloes of quartz-sericite-pyrite with minor iron-carbonate and hematite
alteration are observed adjacent to the quartz vein systems. Alteration of
the Webb Lake stock outside the gold-bearing zones is manifested by a
chlorite-albite- quartz-tourmaline-calcite assemblage (Heather and Arias
1992). Locally present within the stock are lenticular chlorite-schist zones
that represent either strongly foliated mafic metavolcanic xenoliths or a
chlorite-altered felsic intrusion (Heather and Arias 1992). In addition narrow
zones of mineralization have also been identified in the northern and
southern metavolcanics, adjacent to the Webb Lake Stock.
•
Mineralization is currently defined in four domains containing 25 individual
zones of mineralization based on grade and structural orientations.
•
Drilling and sampling procedures, sample preparation and assay protocols
are generally conducted in agreement with best practices.
•
Verification of the drillhole collars, surveys, assays, core and drillhole logs
indicates that the Prodigy data is reliable.
•
Based on the QA/QC program, the data is sufficiently reliable to support the
resource estimate generated for the four domains of the Magino deposit.
•
The mineral models have been constructed in conformance to industry
standard practices.
•
The geological understanding is sufficient to support the resource
estimation.
146
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
•
At a gold cut-off grade of 0.35 g/t gold, the four domains contain an
Indicated Resource of approximately 223 Mt with an average grade of
0.87 g/t gold for about 6.2 Moz gold. The Inferred Resource totals
approximately 13.8 Mt with an average grade of 0.8 g/t gold for about
355 koz gold.
•
The SG values used to determine the tonnages were derived from a
reasonably substantial dataset of samples, and Tetra Tech is comfortable
with the precision of the resource tonnages.
•
The Magino deposit remains open in both strike and dip.
•
The Michipicoten greenstone belt contains other zones with similar geology,
alteration and mineralization to the Magino deposit.
147
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
18.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
18.1
DRILLING
Tetra Tech believes that additional drilling should be carried out to investigate:
18.1.1
•
the down-dip extension of the current resource for the Magino mineralization
•
the known resource in order to improve the understanding of the geometry
and potentially upgrade the resource category of the Webb Lake Stock.
M A G I N O R E S OU R C E E XP AN S I ON
This is designed to test down-dip extension of known mineralization.
The drilling campaign should be designed to target the potential down-dip extensions
of the Webb Lake Stock to a depth of about 700 m vertical. Upon completion of the
drilling campaign, all drill collars should be surveyed and the drill database updated.
Table 18.1 summarizes the anticipated costs.
Table 18.1
Resource Expansion Drilling
Project
Magino
DDH Drilling (10 holes)
Magino
Survey Collars
Indirect Costs
Units
Cost
($)
150/m
7,000
1,050,000
350/day
1
350
Salaries
8,000/month
4
32,000
Fuel
1,500/month
4
6,000
Admin- Camp
2,500/month
Consumables
-
-
52,500
-
-
1,150,850
Total
18.1.2
Rate
($)
Activity
-
4
10,000
M A G I N O R E S OU R C E D E L I N EAT I ON
This is designed improve understanding of the existing mineral resource and
upgrade the resource category.
Drilling will target Webb Lake Stock on an approximately 25 m spaced east-west grid
and an approximately 30 to 40 m down-dip grid to a depth of about 700 m. This will
reduce the current drill spacing from about 40 m x 40 m to about 25 m x 25 m in most
instances.
148
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Upon completion of the drilling campaign, all drill collars should be surveyed and the
drill database updated. Table 18.2 summarizes the anticipated costs.
Table 18.2
Magino Resource Delineation Drilling
Project
Magino
DDH Drilling (20 holes)
Magino
Survey Collars
Indirect Costs
Total
18.2
Rate
($)
Activity
Units
Cost
($)
150/m
13,000
1,950,000
350/day
3
1,050
Salaries
8,000/month
5
40,000
Fuel
1,500/month
5
7,500
Admin - Camp
2,500/month
Consumables
-
-
97,500
-
-
-
2,108,550
5
12,500
PREFEASIBILITY STUDY
Tetra Tech recommends conducting a prefeasibility study to evaluate the potential
economic viability of the Property, based on the February 2012 PEA and this new
resource estimate. It should incorporate the following items:
•
new mine plan, re-evaluating open-pit and underground methods, different
throughput, set-backs, production schedules
•
consider potential carbon-in-pulp and heap leach options
•
detailed estimation of current capital costs and operating costs
•
proceed with economic analysis, based on the above
The proposed budget for the prefeasibility study is approximately $2.5 million.
149
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
19.0 REFERENCES
Arias, Z. G., and Heather, K. B., 1987. Regional structural geology related to gold
mineralization in Goudreau-Lochalsh area, District of Algoma; in Summary of
Field Work and Other Activities 1987, Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous
Paper 137, pages 146-154.
Arias, Z., and Helmstaedt, H., 1990. Structural evolution of the Michipicoten (Wawa)
greenstone belt, Superior Province; in Geoscience research Program, Summary
of Research 1989-1990; Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 150,
pages 107 114.
Attoh, K., 1981. Pre- and Post-Doré sequences in the Wawa volcanic belt, Ontario; in
Current Research, Part B; Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 81-1B, pages 4954.
Ayres, L. D., 1969. Geology of Townships 31 and 30, Ranges 20 and 19; Ontario
department Mines, G.R-69, 100 pages.
Ayres, L. D., 1983. Bimodal volcanism in Archean greenstone belts exemplified
greywacke composition, Lake Superior Park, Ontario; Canadian Journal of Earth
Sciences, v. 20, p. 1168-1194.
BLM Bharti Engineering Limited, 1996. Magino Mine Study (“Revised”), Internal
Report. Golden Goose Resources Inc.
BLM Bharti Engineering Limited, 1997. Preliminary Feasibility Study for a 2.6M tpa
Open Pit Mine and Leach Plant, Magino Gold Project, Dubreuilville, Ontario,
Internal Report, Golden Goose Resources Inc.
Bloom, L., 2009. Memo from ASL to Golden Goose Resources “Preliminary
comments on the Magino project re-assay program”. Internal Report, Golden
Goose Resources Inc. 9 pages.
Bourne, D. A., 1984. An evaluation of the Magino Gold Mine, Goudreau-Lochalsh
area, Ontario. Report presented to Prophet Resources Ltd and June Resources
Inc. Donald A. Bourne, B.Sc., M. Sc., P. Eng. Consulting Geologist. Internal
Report. 28 pages. Prodigy Gold Incorporated 27-2 1195890100-REP-R0001-02
Magino Property Preliminary Economic Assessment and Technical Report,
Ontario, Canada
Bourne, D. A., Botsford, J. N., and Ross, M., 1987. Report on the Magino Gold
Project. Commissioned by Muscocho Explorations Ltd. Report presented to
150
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Muscocho Explorations Ltd and McNellen Resources Inc. Internal Report. 172
pages.
Bourne, D.A., Mongeau, J. R., Seeber, O. A., Wade, J., and Wilson, B. H., 1983. The
Magino Mine Technical and Economic Study. 96 pages. (Assessment File
Research Imaging AFRI file No. 42C08SW0235 on Ministry of Northern
Development and Mines website)
Buchan, K. L., and Ernst, R. E., 2004. Diabase dyke swarms and related units in
Canada and adjacent regions (with accompanying notes): Geological Survey of
Canada, Map 2022A, 1:5,000,000.
Burns, N. R., and Reddick, J., 2004. Technical Report Magino Property, Wawa,
Ontario, Canada. Report presented to Golden Goose Resources Inc. Report
prepared by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants. Report published on SEDAR
website dated 6 April, 2004, 43 pages.
Card, K. D. and Ciesielski, A. 1986. DNAG #1. Subdivisions of the Superior province
of the Canadian Shield. Geoscience Canada 13. p. 5-13.
Card, K. D., and Poulsen, K. H., 1998. Geology and mineral deposits of the Superior
Province of the Canadian Shield; Chapter 2 in Geology of the Precambrian
Superior and Grenville Provinces and Precambrian Fossils in North America,
(coord.)
S. Lucas; Geological Survey of Canada, Geology of Canada, no. 7, pages 12-194.
Corfu, F., and Sage, R. P., 1992. U-Pb constraints for deposition of clastic metasedimentary rocks and late-tectonic plutonism, Michipicoten belt, Superior
Province; Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 29, pages 1640-1651.
Corfu, F., and Stott, G. M., 1986. U-Pb ages for late magmatism and regional
deformation in the Shebandowan belt, Superior Province, Canada. Canadian
Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 35, pages 1075-1082.
Davis, D. W., and Lin, S., 2003. Unravelling the geologic history of the Hemlo
Archean gold deposit, Superior Province, Canada: A U-Pb geochronological
study. Economic Geology, v. 98, pages 51-67.
Deevy, A. J., 1992. Magino, The making of a mine. Muscocho Explorations Ltd.
Internal Report. 28 pages.
Deevy, A. J., 1994. Magino, The making of a Mine. Exploration and Mining Geology,
vol. 3, No. 1 pages 45-51.
Dubé, B. and Gosselin, P., 2007. Greenstone-Hosted Quartz-Carbonate Vein
Deposits. In Goodfellow, W. D., ed. Mineral Deposits of Canada: A Synthesis of
Prodigy Gold Incorporated 27-3 1195890100-REP-R0001-02 Magino Property
151
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Preliminary Economic Assessment and Technical Report, Ontario, Canada Major
Deposit Types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution of Geological Provinces, and
Exploration Methods. Geological Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits
Division, Special Publication No. 5. p. 49-73.
Dubé, B., O’Brien, S., and Dunning, G. R., 2001. Gold deposits in deformed terranes:
examples of epithermal and quartz-carbonate shear-zone-related gold systems in
the Newfoundland Appalachians and their implications for exploration. In North
Atlantic Symposium, St-John’s, NF, Canada. Extended abstracts volume, 27-30
May, 2001. p. 31-35.
Dyck, D. and Bleiker, D. 2003. Closure Plan – Amendment No. 1 – Golden Goose
Resources Inc., Magino Mine Site. Prepared by AMEC Earth & Environmental
Limited (TC630.01). February 2003. 22 pages, appendices and plan.
Dzick, W., 2011. Report on Magino Drillhole Analysis. Comparison of drill sampling
campaigns – Magino Gold Project, Ontario, Canada. Snowden Mining
Consultants. Internal Report. 20 pages.
Goodwin, A. M., 1962. Structure, stratigraphy and iron formation, Michipicoten area,
Algoma District, Ontario, Canada; Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 73,
pages 561-586.
Goodwin, A. M., Ambrose, J. W., Ayers, L. D., Clifford, P. M., Currie, K.
L.,Ermanovics, I. M., Fahrig, W. F., Gibb, R. A., Hall, D. H., Innes, M. J. S., Irvine,
T. N., MacLaren, A. S., Norris, A. W., Pettijohn, F. J., and Ridler, P. H., 1972.
The Superior Province. In: Variations in Tectonic Style in Canada, (eds.) R. A.
Price and R. W. Douglas; Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 11,
pages 528-623.
Hall, D., Williston, C., and Legault, J. M., 1997. Regarding the Induced Polarization
Surveys over the Magino Mine Project, Finan Township, Ontario on behalf of
Golden Goose Resources Inc. Report prepared by Quantec Consulting Inc.
Heather, K. B., 1989. The geological and structural setting of gold mineralization in
the Renabie portion of the Missanabie-Renabie gold district, Wawa gold camp; in
Summary of Field Work and Other Activities 1989, Ontario Geological Survey,
Miscellaneous Paper 146, pages 99-107.
Heather, K. B., and Arias, Z. G., 1987. Geological setting of gold mineralization in
Goudreau-Lochalsh area, District of Algoma; in Summary of Field Work and
Other Activities 1987, Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 137,
pages 155-162.
Heather, K. B., and Arias, Z., 1992. Geological and structural setting of gold
mineralization in the Goudreau-Lochalsh area, Wawa gold camp. Ontario
Geological Survey, Open File Report 5832. 159 pages.
152
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Hoffman, P. F. 1988. United plates of America, the birth of a craton: Early
Proterozoic assembly and growth of Laurentia; Annual Review of Earth and
Planetary Science, v. 16, pages 543-603.
Hoffman, P. F., 1989. Precambrian geology and tectonic history of North America; in
The Geology of North America – An overview, (ed.) A. W. Bally and A. R.
Palmer; Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, Volume
A, pages 447 512.
Jackson, S. L., and Sutcliffe, R. H., 1990. Central Superior Province geology;
evidence for an allochthonous, ensimatic, southern Abitibi greenstone belt;
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 27, pages 582-589.
Kappes, Cassidy & Associates, 1999. Report of Metallurgical Testwork, Magino
Property. Internal Report.
Koskitalo, L. O., 1983. Magino Gold Project, Wawa Area, Ontario. Report presented
to McNellen Resources Inc. James Wade Engineering Ltd. Toronto. Project No.
WE83-068. Internal Report. 67 pages.
Leclerc, A., and Fleury, F., 2009. Propriété Magino, Levé Pédogéochimique
d’humus, Grilles Magino SE et NO. Gestion Aline Leclerc Inc. Internal Report. 32
pages.
McBride, D. E., 1991. Report of the geology, reserves and potential of the Magino
Deposit, Finan township, Ontario. Internal Report. 19 pages.
McBride, T.I. and Duckworth, P., 2010. Hydrogeological Study, Magino Mine Project,
Finan Township, District of Wawa, Ontario. Golden Goose Resources Inc.
Prepared by AMEC Earth & Environmental – Project TC63001 2000. March 17,
2010. 53 pages.
McGill, G. E., 1992. Structure and kinematics of a major tectonic contact belt,
Ontario; Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 29, pages 2118-2132.
McGill, G. E., and Shrady, C. H., 1986. Evidence for a complex Archean
deformational history, southwestern Michipicoten greenstone belt, Ontario;
Journal of Geophysical Reports, v. 91, pages E281-E289.
Mongeau, R., 1982. Geophysical Survey of the A, B, C claim group, Finan Twp.,
Ontario. Magino Joint Venture. Internal Report. 7 pages.
Prodigy Gold Incorporated 27-5 1195890100-REP-R0001-02 Magino Property
Preliminary Economic Assessment and Technical Report, Ontario, Canada
Muscocho Explorations Ltd., 1987. 1986 year-end report, Magino Joint Venture Gold
Project. March 1987. Muscocho Explorations Ltd. and McNellen Resources.
153
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Muir, T. L., 2003. Structural evolution of the Hemlo greenstone belt in the vicinity of
the world-class Hemlo gold deposit. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 40,
pages 395-430.
Nielsen, F. W., 1995. Summary and Review of Past Work and Options for Future
Work, Magino Mine, Wawa Area, Ontario. Report presented to Muscocho
Explorations Ltd. Prepared by R. Bruce Graham and Associates Ltd. Internal
Report. 38 pages.
Nielsen, F. W., 1997. Diamond Drilling Program, Magino Mine, Wawa Area, Ontario,
September 1997. Report presented to Golden Goose Resources Inc. Prepared
by Pearson, Hofman and Associates Ltd. Internal Report. 19 pages.
Parbery, D., and Mongeau, J. 1982. Geological Survey of the A, B, C Claim Group,
Finan TWP, Ontario. Magino Joint Venture. Internal Report. 6 pages.
Percival, J. A., 2007. Geology and Metallogeny of the Superior Province, Canada. In
Goodfellow W. D., ed., Mineral Deposits of Canada: A Synthesis of Major
Deposit Types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution of Geological Provinces, and
Exploration Methods: Geological Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits
Division, Special Publication No.5, p. 903-928.
Pearson, Hofman and Associates Ltd., 1997. Evaluation of In-Situ Resources
(“Revised”), Magino Mine Project, Wawa Area, Ontario, Internal Report, Golden
Goose Resources Inc.
Perkins, M. J., 1997. Report on Magino Gold Mine Property Check Sampling
Program. Report presented to Golden Goose Resources Inc. Report prepared by
Pearson, Hofman and Associates Ltd. Internal Report 16 pages.
Perkins, M. J., 1999. Structural Geology and Gold Magino Mine Project, Wawa Area,
Ontario. Report prepared for Golden Goose Resources Inc. Internal Report 9
pages.
Perkins, M. J., 1999a. Report of Metallurgical Testwork Magino Mine Project, Wawa
Area, Ontario. Report prepared for Golden Goose Resources Inc. Internal Report
12 pages.
Peterson, V. L., and Zaleski, E., 1999. Structural history of the Manitouwadge
greenstone belt and its volcanogenic Cu-Zn massive sulphide deposits, Wawa
Subprovince, south-central Superior Province. Canadian Journal of Earth
Sciences, v. 36, pages 605-625.
Polat, A, and Kerrich, R., 1999. Formation of an Archean tectonic mélange in the
Schreiber-Hemlo greenstone belt, Superior Province, Canada: Implications for
Archean subductionaccretion processes. Tectonics, v. 18, p. 733-755.
154
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Polat, A., and Kerrich, R., 2001. Magnesian andesites, Nb-enriched
basaltsandesites, and adakites from late Archean 2.7 Ga Wawa greenstone
belts, Superior Province, Canada: Implication for late Archean subduction zone
petrogenetic processes. Contribution to Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 141, pages
36-52.
Polat, A., Kerrich, R., and Wyman, D., 1998. The late Archean Schreiber-Hemlo and
White River-Dayohessarah greenstone belts, Superior Province: Collage of
oceanic plateaus, oceanic arcs, and subduction-accretion complexes
Tectonophysics, v. 289, pages 295-326.
Poulsen, K. H., 1996. Lode Gold : in Geology of Canadian Mineral Deposits Types,
(ed.) O. R. Eckstrand, W. D. Sinclair, and R. I. Thorpe; Geological Survey of
Canada, Geology of Canada, no 8, p. 323-328.
Poulsen, K. H., Robert, F., and Dubé, B., 2000. Geological classification of Canadian
gold deposits: Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 540, 106 pages.
Reddick, J. R., 1996a. Geological section of the property report, BLM Bharti
Engineering Limited. Internal Report.
Reddick, J. R., 1996b. Overview, Recommendations, and Budgets for Magino
Property, Consultants report.
Reddick, J. R., 2001a. The 2000 diamond drilling and sampling program, Magino
Mine Property, Wawa Ontario. Report presented to Golden Goose Resources
Inc. Prepared by Reddick Consulting Inc. Internal Report. 18 pages.
Reddick, J. R., 2001b. Block Model Resource Estimates for the Magino Mine
Property, Wawa Ontario (Revised June 2001). Report presented to Golden
Goose Resources Inc. Prepared by Reddick Consulting Inc. Report published on
SEDAR website dated 15 May, 2002. 31 pages.
Reddick, J. R., 2002. The 2002 diamond drilling and sampling program, Magino Mine
Property, Wawa Ontario. Report presented to Golden Goose Resources Inc.
Prepared by Reddick Consulting Inc. Internal Report.
Ross, A.F., 2011. Prodigy Gold Incorporated: Mineral Resource Estimate Update,
Magino Gold Project, Ste. Sault Marie Mining District, Ontario, Project No.
V1111. NI43-101 Technical Report 2nd November 2011. 118 pages.
Ross, A.F., 2011. Mineral Resource Estimate, Magino Gold Project, Sault Ste. Marie
Mining District, Ontario. Report presented to Prodigy Gold Inc. Report prepared
by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Inc. Report published on SEDAR
website dated 28 February 2011. 93 pages.
Ross, A.F., Finch A., Yang D., Yu F., Teh H., 2011. Magino Property Preliminary
Economic Assessment Technical Report. Report presented to Prodigy Gold Inc.
155
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Report prepared by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Inc., CWA Engineers
Inc., Knight Piesold Canada. Report published on SEDAR website dated 29
March 2011.
Sage, R. P., 1984. Goudreau-Lochalsh Area, District of Algoma; in Summary of Field
Work and Other Activities 1984; Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper
119, pages 56-61.
Sage, R. P., 1985. Josephine-Goudreau Area, District of Algoma; in Summary of
Field Work and Other Activities 1985; Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous
Paper 126, pages 90-94.
Sage, R. P., 1987. Preliminary interpretation of the relationship between economic
mineralization and volcanic stratigraphy in the Wawa area; Ontario Geological
Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 100, pages 41-44.
Sage, R. P., 1987a. Geology of the Goudreau-Lochalsh and Kabenung Lake Areas,
District of Algoma; in Summary of Field Work and Other Activities 1987; Ontario
Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 137, pages 134-137.
Sage, R. P., 1990. Precambrian geology Finan Township. Ontario Geological
Survey, Preliminary Map P3168, Scale 1: 15 840.
Sage, R. P., 1993. Geology of Aguonie, Bird, Finan and Jacobson townships, District
of Algoma. Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5588, 286 pages.
Sage, R. P., 1993a. Geology of Abotossaway, Corbiere, LeClaire and Musquash and
part of Dunphy Township. Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5587,
308 pages.
Sage, R. P., 1993b. Precambrian geology Aguonie Township. Ontario Geological
Survey, Open File Map 217, Scale 1: 15 840.
Sage, R. P., 1993c. Precambrian geology Abotossaway Township. Ontario
Geological Survey, Open File Map 223, Scale 1: 15 840.
Sage, R. P., 1993d. Precambrian geology Dunphy Township. Ontario Geological
Survey, Open File Map 224, Scale 1: 15 840.
Sage, R. P., 1994. Geology of the Michipicoten greenstone belt. Ontario Geological
Survey, Open File Report 5888, 592 pages.
Sage, R. P., Lightfoot, P. C., and Doherty, W., 1996a. Bimodal cyclical Archean
basalts and rhyolites from the Michipicoten (Wawa) greenstone belt, Ontario:
Geochemical evidence for magma contributions from asthenospheric mantle and
ancient continental lithosphere near southern margin of the Superior Province.
Precambrian Research, v. 76, page 119-153.
156
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Sage, R. P., Lightfoot, P. C., and Doherty, W., 1996b. Geochemical characteristics of
granitoid rocks from within Archean Michipicoten greenstone belt, Wawa
Subprovince, Superior Province, Canada: Implications for source regions and
tectonic evolution. Precambrian Research, v. 76, page 155-190.
Simpson, M. 2011. Specific Gravity Sampling Program. Internal report prepared for
Prodigy Gold Incorporated. 151 pages.
Stott, G.M., Buse, S and Préfontaine, S., 2007. A possible Meso-archean
Anticlinorium in the Berens River Region and its Tectonic Significance. Summary
of Field Work and Other Activities 2007, Ontario Geological Survey, Open File
Report 6213, pages 38-1 to 38-5.
Studemeister, P. A., 1983. The greenschist facies of an Archean assemblage near
Wawa, Ontario. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 20, pages 1409-1420.
Studemeister, P. A., 1985. Gold-bearing veins around a felsic stock near Wawa,
Ontario: implications for gold exploration; Canadian Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy Bulletin, v. 78, pages 43-47.
Studemeister, P. A., and Kilias, S., 1987. Alteration pattern and fluid inclusions of
gold bearing quartz veins in Archean trondhjemite near Wawa, Ontario, Canada
Economic Geology, v. 82. pages 429-439.
Sutherland, K. S., 1987. Report on the Magino Gold Project. Report commissioned
by Muscocho Explorations Ltd. Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario. Internal
Report. 60 pages.
Turcotte, B., and Pelletier, C., 2008. Technical Report and Mineral Resource
Estimate for the Magino Mine (according to the Regulation 43-101 and Form 43101F1). Report prepared by InnovExplo for Golden Goose Resources Inc. Report
published on SEDAR website dated 3 July, 2008. 85 pages.
Turcotte, B., and Pelletier, C., 2009. Technical Report and Mineral Resource
Estimate for the Magino Mine (according to Regulation 43-101 and 43-101F1).
Report prepared by InnovExplo for Golden Goose Resources Inc. Report
published on SEDAR website dated 29 May, 2009. 116 pages.
Turcotte, B., Pelletier, C., and Poirier S., 2010. Technical Report on the Preliminary
Economic Assessment prepared by InnovExplo for Golden Goose Resources
Inc. Unpublished draft report dated 3 June, 2010. Internal Report, Golden Goose
Resources Inc. 176 pages.
Yong, P., Verma, N. S., and Dyck, D., 2008. Magino Mine tailings containment area
dam safety inspection 2007. Submitted by AMEC Earth & Environmental. 10
pages.
157
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
Young, R. and Simms, D. 1992. Magino Mine Closure Plan – Muscocho Explorations
Limited. October 1992. Prepared by Environmental Applications Group Limited.
60 pages, plans and appendices.
Young, R. and Simms, D. 1993. Magino Mine Closure Plan – Muscocho Explorations
Limited- Revised January 1993. Prepared by HBT AGRA Limited (TC 630). 72
pages, appendices and maps in pocket.
Waldie, C., 2006. Report on the 2006 Diamond Drilling Program, Magino Mine
Property, Wawa, Ontario, Canada. Golden Goose Resources Inc. Internal
Report. 45 pages.
Williams, H. R., Scott, G. M., Heather, K. B., Muir, T. L., and Sage, R. P., 1991.
Wawa Subprovince; in Geology of Ontario, (eds.) P. C. Thurston, H. R. Williams,
R. H., Sutcliffe, and G. M. Scott; Ontario Geological Survey, Special Paper 4,
pt.1, pages 485- 539.
Wilson, B. C., 1997. Structural Geology and Gold on the Magino Mine Property.
Report prepared for Golden Goose Resources Inc. Internal Report. 21 pages.
Zaleski, E., van Breemen, O., and Peterson, V. L., 1999. Geological evolution of the
Manitouwadge greenstone belt and Wawa-Quetico subprovince boundary,
Superior Province, Ontario: Constrained by U-Pb zircon dates of supracrustal
and plutonic rocks. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v.36, pages 945-966.
158
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
20.0 CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON
P A T R I C K H U XT A B L E , MAIG (RPG E O )
I, Patrick Huxtable, MAIG (RPGeo), of Perth, Western Australia, do hereby certify:
•
I am a Senior Resource Geologist with Tetra Tech WEI Inc. with a business
address at Level 5, 220 St Georges Terrace, Perth, WA, 6000.
•
This certificate applies to the technical report entitled “Technical Report on
the Magino Property, Wawa, Ontario, dated October 4, 2012 (the “Technical
Report”).
•
I am a graduate of Curtin University of Technology, (B.Sc., 1992). I am a
member and RPGeo in good standing of the Australian Institute of
Geoscientists (#2876) RPGeo #10,117. My relevant experience includes 18
years of experience in exploration and operations, including several years
working in Archean gold deposits. I am a “Qualified Person” for purposes of
National Instrument 43-101 (the “Instrument”).
•
I have not conducted a personal inspection of the Property that is the subject
of this Technical Report.
•
I am responsible for Sections 1 to 11 and 14 to 20 inclusive of the Technical
Report.
•
I am independent of Prodigy Gold Incorporated as defined by Section 1.5 of
the Instrument.
•
I have no prior involvement with the Property that is the subject of the
Technical Report.
•
I have read the Instrument and the sections of the Technical Report that I
am responsible for has been prepared in compliance with the Instrument.
•
As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information
and belief, the sections of this Technical Report contain all scientific and
technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical
Report not misleading.
Signed and dated this 4th day of October, 2012 at Perth, Western Australia.
“Original document signed and sealed by
Patrick Huxtable, MAIG (RPGeo)”
Patrick Huxtable, MAIG (RPGeo)
Senior Resource Geologist
Tetra Tech WEI Inc.
159
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
T OD D M C C R A C K EN , P.G EO .
I, Todd McCracken, P.Geo., of Sudbury, Ontario, do hereby certify:
•
I am a Principal Geologist with Tetra Tech WEI Inc. with a business address
at 101-957 Cambrian Heights, Sudbury, Ontario, P3C 5M6.
•
This certificate applies to the technical report entitled Technical Report on
Report”).
•
I am a graduate of the University of Waterloo, (B.Sc. Honours, 1992). I am a
member in good standing of the Association of Professional Geoscientists of
Ontario (#0631). My relevant experience includes 20 years of experience in
exploration and operations, including several years working in shear-hosted
gold deposits. I am a “Qualified Person” for purposes of National Instrument
43-101 (the “Instrument”).
•
My most recent personal inspection of the Property was May 8 to 9, 2012 for
two days.
•
I am responsible for Sections 12 and 20 of the Technical Report.
•
the Instrument.
•
Technical Report.
•
am responsible for has been prepared in compliance with the Instrument.
•
and belief, the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for
contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed
to make the technical report not misleading.
Signed and dated this 4th day of October, 2012 at Sudbury, Ontario.
Todd McCracken, P.Geo.”
Principal Geologist
Tetra Tech WEI Inc.
160
1295890100-REP-R0001-02
T OD D K A N H A I , P.E N G .
I, Todd Kanhai, P.Eng., of Sudbury, Ontario, do hereby certify:
•
I am a Metallurgical Engineer with Tetra Tech WEI Inc. with a business
address at #101 – 957 Cambrian Heights, Sudbury, Ontario, P3C 5M6.
•
This certificate applies to the technical report entitled Technical Report on
Report”).
•
I am a graduate of Laurentian University, (M. A. Sc., 2000). I am a member
in good standing of the Professional Engineers of Ontario, License
#90471020. My relevant experience is with previous conceptual, preliminary
economic assessment, prefeasibility, and feasibility studies while working
with Tetra Tech WEI. I am a “Qualified Person” for purposes of National
Instrument 43-101 (the “Instrument”).
•
My most recent personal inspection of the Property was November 2, 2011
for one day.
•
I am responsible for Section 13.0 and 20.0 of the Technical Report.
•
the Instrument.
•
Technical Report.
•
am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with the Instrument.
•
and belief, the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for
contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading.
Signed and dated this 4th day of October, 2012 at Sudbury, Ontario
Todd Kanhai, P.Eng.”
Todd Kanhai, P.Eng.
Metallurgical Engineer
Tetra Tech WEI Inc.
161
1295890100-REP-R0001-02

N.I. 43-101 Technical Report On The Magino

Transcription

Similar documents

Loyalist Township - County of Lennox and Addington

Fitger`s Lake View Office

Captain Geech

Red Hill Lakefront Retreat - CaliforniaOutdoorProperties.com

51 North Ryan Flier

Just Listed

Presented by:

Lake Titicaca

Brant Lake Getaway

Camp Location and Sessional Dates