175c8ce6-ec77-477c-aa57-c75c9b7dfc91.pdf
ASX Announcement
20th April 2016
Eagles Nest Exploration update in Western Australia
HIGHLIGHTS
-
Encouraging assay results warrant further exploratory drilling
-
Gold to a maximum of 0.87g/t returned in first round drill results on targeted lodes
-
Follow-up drilling to target strike and down-plunge extension to southern orebody
-
Lack of HG assay results does not detract from areas strong HG potential
Maximus Resources Limited ("MXR" or "the Company") is pleased to advise that it has completed an exploration drilling program of the northern portion of the Eagles Nest tenement, M15/1475, with interesting and encouraging results.
This northern drilling program was not designed to follow up previously reported wide zones of gold mineralisation intersected in the southern half of the Eagles Nest tenement as reported to the ASX on 28th January 2016 ("Spargoville Drilling Delivers High Grade Gold Results").
The 14 hole exploration drilling program was completed in March for a total of 900 metres and was designed to test for the bedrock source of the historical Golden Eagle Nugget and several smaller nuggets, recorded down the Eagles Gully. The source of this coarse gold is considered to be associated with one of the several "blues lodes" (graphite schist units) within the target area.
The distribution of the anomalous gold trends to the north, confirmed in this drilling program are consistent with the overall NS striking gold mineralisation systems at Eagles Nest. The mineralised system, which is much stronger to the south, returned an intersection of 24m @ 3.1g/t (ASX: 28 January 2016)
The results received to date from this northern area are anomalous in gold , and confirm some of the key indications for gold mineralisation in the wider area, although no intersections of >1g/t gold were returned from this drilling program (See table 2). This result does not diminish the areas potential for hosting a HG ore source, similar to the HG Wattle Dam orebody also associated with a "Blue lode" further to the north. This is demonstrated by the number and size of nuggets found on this tenement over the past 100 years. Nuggets continue to be found by prospectors in this area to this day
Exploration drilling at Wattle Dam in several progressive drilling campaigns by previous explorers was ultimately completed down to drill densities of 10m x 10m, before contiguous and consistent ore blocks
were routinely recorded which ultimately provided the confidence to undertake a trial mining program.
In addition, early exploration drilling at Wattle Dam confirmed the presence of the preserved high grade colluvium nugget blanket which provided the confidence to continue with the infill drilling programs to a density of 10 metres x 10 metres. Unfortunately, this colluvium nugget blanket at Eagles Nest has been removed by decades of historic mining, thereby removing one of the key drilling vectors, to bedrock mineralisation. The current drilling density at Eagles Gully is approximately on a 35 to 40 metre by 10 metre pattern. Further infill drilling is required to fully investigate the northern area of the Eagles Nest tenement (see figure 1)
Department of Mines & Petroleum records indicate in excess of 2,000 Ozs of gold was produced from Eagles Gully, with a note from the Mines Inspector of the time that he believe double this amount was recovered but never reported.
The company will now advance its initial internal resource calculation of the southern area of the Eagles Nest project, before conducting further drilling.
Figure 1: Eagles Nest recent drill collar locations (red circles) and previous MXR drilling to the south (yellow squares)
For further information contact
Kevin Malaxos on 08 7324 3172 Duncan Gordon, Adelaide Equity Partners [email protected] on 08 8232 8800 or 0404 006 444
[email protected]
Further information relating to Maximus Resources Limited and its diversified exploration projects will be found on Maximus' website: www.maximusresources.com
The information in this report that relates to Exploration Targets, Exploration Results, Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves is based on information compiled by Mr Stephen Hogan who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, and who has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation, the type of deposit under consideration, and the activities being undertaking, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (the JORC Code). This report is issued in the form and context in which it appears with the written consent of the Competent Person.
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1 report template
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code explanation
|
Commentary
|
|
Sampling techniques
|
Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.
|
The sampling has been carried out using Reverse Circulation (RC) Drilling. Fourteen holes were drilled in this reported programme. All drill holes had samples collected on the drilling rig via a mounted cone splitter at intervals of every one metre.
|
|
Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.
|
Sampling was carried out under Maximus' protocols and QAQC procedures as per industry best practice. See further details below.
|
|
Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.
|
RC holes were drilled with a 4.75 inch face-sampling bit, 1m samples collected through a cyclone and splitter, to form a 2-3kg sample. For mineralised samples the entire 1m sample was sent to the laboratory for analysis. All samples were fully pulverised at the lab to-75um, to produce a 50g charge for Fire Assay with ICP-OES finish.
|
|
Drilling techniques
|
Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of Diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).
|
An RC drilling rig, owned and operated by Kennedy Drilling, was used to collect the samples. The face- sampling RC bit has a diameter of
4.75 inches (12.1 cm).
|
|
Drill sample recovery
|
Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.
|
All samples were dry with no significant ground water encountered during drilling and no water egress into holes recorded. Samples recoveries were estimated for each metre of sample based upon a expected volume of sample recovered. All recovery estimates are noted in the logs. Samples recoveries were >90%.
|
|
Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.
|
RC face-sample bits and dust suppression were used to minimise sample loss. RC samples are collected through a cyclone and cone splitter, the rejects deposited in a plastic bag, and the lab samples up to 3kg collected, to enable a full sample pulverisation.
|
|
Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.
|
All RC samples were dry with no significant water encountered. No sample bias or material loss was observed to have taken place during drilling activities. There was no discernable change in the sample recoveries between mineralised, and unmineralised samples.
|