Ragged Range Historic Stream Sediment Samples

RNS Number : 4904B

Thor Mining PLC

08 October 2020

 

THOR MINING PLC

PILBARA GOLDFIELDS RAGGED RANGE PROJECT

HISTORIC STREAM SEDIMENT SAMPLES CORRELATE WITH 13KM GOLD TREND

The directors of Thor Mining Plc ("Thor") (AIM, ASX: THR) are pleased to announce the correlation of anomalous historic stream sediment results to those results  recently collected by Thor over their 100% owned Pilbara Goldfield tenements (E46/1262 and E46/1190) in Western Australia.

The historic stream sediment Bulk Leach Extractable Gold (BLEG) samples collected in the mid-1990's by Great South Mines¹ validates gold results from the two recent  geochemistry programs undertaken by Thor, which  delineated a 13km gold target zone along the faulted greenstone belt (ASX: THR announcement 2 September 2020).

¹ https://geodocs.dmirs.wa.gov.au/Web/documentlist/10/Report_Ref/A50141  

Highlights:

§ Data review identifies anomalous historic stream sediment samples up to 68ppb ( Sample No. 4057 in Table A below ).

§ Historic stream sediment sampling results confirms 13km anomalous gold trend along the eastern thrust faulted mafic/ultramafic contact.

§ Samples delineating the 13km gold target zone are from separate drainage catchments supporting the potential of gold mineralisation along the entire strike length.

§ Widespread anomalous gold also prevalent across adjoining tenement EL46/1355, under application by Thor.

§ Airborne Magnetic survey underway ( Announced 6 October 2020 )

§ Follow up geochemical sampling program including infill stream sediment sampling, mapping and rock chip sampling is scheduled to commence during October.

Mick Billing, Executive Chairman of Thor Mining, commented:

"It is very pleasing to find further evidence of anomalous gold along the 13 kilometre target zone previously identified from this historical work."

"Evidence of anomalous gold within the new licence application area also adds potential value to the total Ragged Range suite of tenements."

"We look forward to the results of the airborne magnetic survey in progress, and the next phase of sampling, scheduled to begin shortly."

A map showing Stream Sediment Gold results from Thor sampling and predecessor Great Southern Mines sampling may be viewed via the link below.

www.thormining.com/sites/thormining/media/maps/gsm-sediment-assays.jpg  

Table A: Ragged Range Historic Stream Sediment Results > 5ppb

SAMPLE MEDIUM	SAMPLE TYPE	Sample No	Easting	Northing	AU ppb
Stream sediment	BLEG	4057	783729	7583169	68
Stream sediment	BLEG	405	780222	7585505	53
Stream sediment	BLEG	4070	781368	7584229	26
Stream sediment	BLEG	1018	779499	7588818	20.5
Stream sediment	BLEG	189	780463	7586497	16.5
Stream sediment	BLEG	200	781068	7590713	16
Stream sediment	BLEG	412	779372	7588160	9
Stream sediment	BLEG	2004	786481	7579483	8.6

Easting/Northing Coordinates in GDA94/MGA Zone 50

The information contained within this announcement is deemed to constitute inside information as stipulated under the Market Abuse Regulations (EU) No. 596/2014. Upon the publication of this announcement, this inside information is now considered to be in the public domain.

Enquiries:

Mick Billing [phone] Thor Mining PLC Executive Chairman Ray Ridge [phone] Thor Mining PLC CFO/Company Secretary Samantha Harrison/Niall McDonald [phone] Grant Thornton UK LLP  Nominated Adviser Nick Emerson [phone] SI Capital Ltd Broker

Competent Persons Report

The information in this report that relates to exploration results is based on information compiled by Richard Bradey, who holds a BSc in applied geology and an MSc in natural resource management and who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Bradey is an employee of Thor Mining PLC. He has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves'. Richard Bradey consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

About Thor Mining PLC

Thor Mining PLC (AIM, ASX: THR) is a resources company quoted on the AIM Market of the London Stock Exchange and on ASX in Australia.

Thor holds 100% of the advanced Molyhil tungsten project in the Northern Territory of Australia, for which an updated feasibility study in August 2018¹ suggested attractive returns.

Adjacent Molyhil, at Bonya, Thor holds a 40% interest in deposits of tungsten, copper, and vanadium, including an Inferred resource for the Bonya copper deposit².

Thor is also acquiring up to a 30% interest in Australian copper development company EnviroCopper Limited, which in turn holds rights to earn up to a 75% interest in the mineral rights and claims over the resource on the portion of the historic Kapunda copper mine in South Australia recoverable by way of in situ recovery⁴. Thor also holds rights to earn a 75% interest in portion of the Moonta Copper project also in South Australia, and is also considered amenable to recovery by way of in situ recovery⁵.

Thor holds 100% of the Pilot Mountain tungsten project in Nevada USA which has a JORC 2012 Indicated and Inferred Resources Estimate³ on 2 of the 4 known deposits. The US Department of the Interior has confirmed that tungsten, the primary resource mineral at Pilot Mountain, has been included in the final list of Critical Minerals 2018.

At the 100% owned Ragged Range Project in the Pilbara region of Western Australia, Thor has exciting early stage results for which gold and nickel drilling is planned.

Thor holds mineral claims in  the US states of Colorado and Utah with historical high grade uranium and vanadium drilling and production results.

Notes

¹ Refer ASX and AIM announcement of 23 August 2018

² Refer ASX and AIM announcement of 26 November 2018

³ Refer AIM announcement of 13 December 2018 and ASX announcement of 14 December 2018

⁴ Refer AIM announcement of 10 February 2016 and ASX announcement of 12 February 2018

⁵ Refer ASX and AIM announcement of 15 August 2019

1  JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1 report template

1.1  Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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 examplesshould not be taken as limiting the broad meaning ofsampling. · Include reference to measures taken to ensuresample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systemsused. · Aspects of the determination of mineralisation thatare Material to the PublicReport. · 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 (egsubmarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailedinformation.	The historic programme comprised stream sediment trap site sampling for geochemical analysis for Au 2.5kg BLEG (-20mesh/850um), and B/AAS for Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Sb, As, Ni, & Mn.  Bulk cyanide Leach with DIBK and graphite furnace finish for Au & Pb to 0.1ppb
Drilling techniques	· Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-holehammer, 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).	Not applicable
Drill sample recovery	· Method of recording and assessing core and chipsample recoveries and resultsassessed. · Measures taken to maximise sample recovery andensure representative nature of thesamples. · Whether a relationship exists between sample recoveryand grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarsematerial.	Not applicable
Logging	· Whether core and chip samples have been geologicallyand geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgicalstudies. · Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature.Core (or costean, channel, etc)photography. · The total length and percentage of therelevant intersectionslogged.	No logging was undertaken
Sub- sampling techniques and sample preparation	· If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half orall coretaken. · If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split,etc and whether sampled wet ordry. For all sample types, the nature, qualityand appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.	Stream Sediment 2.5kg BLEG sample collected in the field for analysis Pre-prepared 2kg BLEG standards were submitted every 30-50 samples for quality control

Criteria		JORC Code explanation		Commentary
		· Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity ofsamples. · Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, includingfor instance results for field duplicate/second-halfsampling. · Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain sizeof the material beingsampled.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests		· The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether thetechnique is considered partial ortotal. · For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation,etc. · Nature of quality control procedures adopted (egstandards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have beenestablished.		The assay method is appropriate for preliminary exploration. All samples were prepared and analysed by independent laboratory Genalysis in Perth, WA. Samples were analysed for the following: 1.  mix and split off 250grams for drying and pulverised to 75microns. 2.  Digestion and analysis for Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Sb, As, Ni, & Mn using B/AAS sample method.  3.  Remaining 2.25 sample was Bulk cyanide Leached with DIBK and graphite furnace finish for Au & Pb to 0.1ppb  Pre-prepared 2kg BLEG standards were submitted every 30-50 samples for quality control
Verification of sampling and assaying		· The verification of significant intersections byeither independent or alternative companypersonnel. · The use of twinnedholes. · Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures,data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. · Discuss any adjustment to assaydata.		Not undertaken
Location of data points		· Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resourceestimation. · Specification of the grid systemused. · Quality and adequacy of topographiccontrol.		Aerial photography at 1:25,000 scale used to plan and locate drainage spots.  All drainage plotted onto 1:25,000 base and subsequently digitised into Micromine database.
Data spacing and distribution		· Data spacing for reporting of ExplorationResults. · Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficientto establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classificationsapplied. · Whether sample compositing has beenapplied.		Not applicable - no resource is being reported
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure		· Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to whichthis is known, considering the deposittype. · If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should beassessed and reported ifmaterial.		Orientational bias is not applicable to stream sediment sampling which are essentially one dimensional.
Sample security		· The measures taken to ensure samplesecurity.		Samples submitted to Intertek Genalysis Perth, WA for analysis
Sample security levels are considered appropriate for a preliminary reconnaissance assessment.
Audits or reviews	· The results of any audits or reviews of samplingtechniques and data.		None undertaken

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	· Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness ornational park and environmentalsettings. · The security of the tenure held at the time of reportingalong with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in thearea.	Exploration results are reported on E46/1190 and E46/1262 in Western Australia held 100% by Thor Mining PLC.
Exploration done by other parties	· Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration byother parties.	Geological mapping and stream sediment sampling by Great Southern Mines.  Open File Report A050141-Surrender Report.
Geology	· Deposit type, geological setting and style ofmineralisation.	Yet to be determined
Drill hole Information	· A summary of all information material to theunderstanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drillholes: o  easting and northing of the drill holecollar o  elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation abovesea level in metres) of the drill holecollar o  dip and azimuth of thehole o  down hole length and interceptiondepth o  holelength. · If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusiondoes not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	No drilling has been undertaken or reported
Data aggregation methods	· In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum gradetruncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should bestated. · Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations shouldbe shown indetail. · The assumptions used for any reporting of metalequivalent values should be clearly stated.	Only field observations have been reported. There has been no data aggregation.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	· These relationships are particularly important inthe reporting of ExplorationResults. · If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to thedrill hole angle is known, its nature should bereported. · If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect(eg 'down hole length, true width notknown').	No drilling has been undertaken or reported
Diagrams	· Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collarlocations and appropriate sectionalviews.	A sample location plan including current 1:100k scale geology has been provided with table of significant Au results
Balanced reporting	· Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Resultsis not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	All results have been reported
Other substantive exploration data	· Other exploration data, if meaningful and material,should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminatingsubstances.	All data have been reported
Further work	· The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step- outdrilling). · Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geologicalinterpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commerciallysensitive.	It is anticipated that further stream sediment geochemistry and geological mapping will be undertaken in addition to airborne geophysical survey to locate the source of any mineralisation.

 

END

 

 

STRMPBATMTAMMLM